Joint Cognitive Systems

158 Joint Cognitive Systems

autom ation in complex and high consequence systems (substitution myth and other

over-simplific ations) lead designers to m iss the need to provide this support and

even to deny that such a role exists (but see Roth et al., 1987, Smith et al., 1997 and

other s tudies of the b rittleness of automata).

Now people, as a cognitive system, also are vulnerable to being trapped in

literal-mindedness, where th ey correctly deploy a routine given their model of the

world, but are in fact facing a different situation (Weick et al., 1999). When

anoma ly response breaks down, it is often a ssociated with an inability to rev ise

plans and assessm ents as new eviden ce arrives and as situations change (pp. 74-75).

An extreme form of