Automation bias is the tendency to favor suggestions from automated systems, so that people miss problems the system failed to flag or follow its advice when it is wrong.
Where it comes from
Human-factors researchers Kathleen Mosier and Linda Skitka named the bias in the 1990s while studying pilots and automated cockpit aids.¹ They distinguished errors of omission (missing what the system didn't flag) from errors of commission (following a wrong recommendation). Raja Parasuraman and Victor Riley described the wider pattern of use and misuse of automation in 1997.² A 2012 systematic review found automation bias in clinical decision support as well.³
Where it goes wrong
The concept is sometimes read as a blanket warning against trusting AI. The research points toward calibration: trusting a system as far as its track record justifies. One lever helps in particular. In experiments by Skitka, Mosier and Mark Burdick, people who knew they would have to justify their decisions made fewer automation-related errors.⁴
Talent Takeaway
For decisions that matter, ask the person who used an AI tool to explain the answer in their own words and name one thing they checked. Knowing the question is coming tends to sharpen attention.
¹ Mosier, K. L., & Skitka, L. J. (1996). Human decision makers and automated decision aids: Made for each other? In R. Parasuraman & M. Mouloua (Eds.), Automation and human performance: Theory and applications (pp. 201–220). Lawrence Erlbaum.
² Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors, 39(2), 230–253.
³ Goddard, K., Roudsari, A., & Wyatt, J. C. (2012). Automation bias: A systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 19(1), 121–127.
⁴ Skitka, L. J., Mosier, K., & Burdick, M. D. (2000). Accountability and automation bias. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 52(4), 701–717.
Further reading: Parasuraman, R., & Manzey, D. H. (2010). Complacency and bias in human use of automation: An attentional integration. Human Factors, 52(3), 381–410.