366 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21077562)
1. Complacency and bias in human use of automation: an attentional integration.
Parasuraman R; Manzey DH
Hum Factors; 2010 Jun; 52(3):381-410. PubMed ID: 21077562
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effects of imperfect automation on decision making in a simulated command and control task.
Rovira E; McGarry K; Parasuraman R
Hum Factors; 2007 Feb; 49(1):76-87. PubMed ID: 17315845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Complacency and Automation Bias in the Use of Imperfect Automation.
Wickens CD; Clegg BA; Vieane AZ; Sebok AL
Hum Factors; 2015 Aug; 57(5):728-39. PubMed ID: 25886768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effects of information source, pedigree, and reliability on operator interaction with decision support systems.
Madhavan P; Wiegmann DA
Hum Factors; 2007 Oct; 49(5):773-85. PubMed ID: 17915596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Using Modeling and Simulation to Predict Operator Performance and Automation-Induced Complacency With Robotic Automation: A Case Study and Empirical Validation.
Wickens CD; Sebok A; Li H; Sarter N; Gacy AM
Hum Factors; 2015 Sep; 57(6):959-75. PubMed ID: 25850111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Human performance consequences of automated decision aids in states of sleep loss.
Reichenbach J; Onnasch L; Manzey D
Hum Factors; 2011 Dec; 53(6):717-28. PubMed ID: 22235532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Designing automation for human use: empirical studies and quantitative models.
Parasuraman R
Ergonomics; 2000 Jul; 43(7):931-51. PubMed ID: 10929828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Automation bias and errors: are crews better than individuals?
Skitka LJ; Mosier KL; Burdick M; Rosenblatt B
Int J Aviat Psychol; 2000; 10(1):85-97. PubMed ID: 11543300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Automation bias: decision making and performance in high-tech cockpits.
Mosier KL; Skitka LJ; Heers S; Burdick M
Int J Aviat Psychol; 1997; 8(1):47-63. PubMed ID: 11540946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Adaptive automation of human-machine system information-processing functions.
Kaber DB; Wright MC; Prinzel LJ; Clamann MP
Hum Factors; 2005; 47(4):730-41. PubMed ID: 16553062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Automation bias: a systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators.
Goddard K; Roudsari A; Wyatt JC
J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2012; 19(1):121-7. PubMed ID: 21685142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Team performance in networked supervisory control of unmanned air vehicles: effects of automation, working memory, and communication content.
McKendrick R; Shaw T; de Visser E; Saqer H; Kidwell B; Parasuraman R
Hum Factors; 2014 May; 56(3):463-75. PubMed ID: 24930169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Experience of automation failures in training: effects on trust, automation bias, complacency and performance.
Sauer J; Chavaillaz A; Wastell D
Ergonomics; 2016 Jun; 59(6):767-80. PubMed ID: 26374396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of a brain-based adaptive system and a manual adaptable system for invoking automation.
Bailey NR; Scerbo MW; Freeman FG; Mikulka PJ; Scott LA
Hum Factors; 2006; 48(4):693-709. PubMed ID: 17240718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Automation bias: empirical results assessing influencing factors.
Goddard K; Roudsari A; Wyatt JC
Int J Med Inform; 2014 May; 83(5):368-75. PubMed ID: 24581700
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Factors affecting performance on a target monitoring task employing an automatic tracker.
McFadden SM; Vimalachandran A; Blackmore E
Ergonomics; 2004 Feb; 47(3):257-80. PubMed ID: 14668161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation.
Parasuraman R; Sheridan TB; Wickens CD
IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum; 2000 May; 30(3):286-97. PubMed ID: 11760769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Influencing Trust for Human-Automation Collaborative Scheduling of Multiple Unmanned Vehicles.
Clare AS; Cummings ML; Repenning NP
Hum Factors; 2015 Nov; 57(7):1208-18. PubMed ID: 26060238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effects of human-machine competition on intent errors in a target detection task.
Beck HP; McKinney JB; Dzindolet MT; Pierce LG
Hum Factors; 2009 Aug; 51(4):477-86. PubMed ID: 19899358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Supporting trust calibration and the effective use of decision aids by presenting dynamic system confidence information.
McGuirl JM; Sarter NB
Hum Factors; 2006; 48(4):656-65. PubMed ID: 17240714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
