These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28146673)

  • 1. A Little Anthropomorphism Goes a Long Way.
    de Visser EJ; Monfort SS; Goodyear K; Lu L; O'Hara M; Lee MR; Parasuraman R; Krueger F
    Hum Factors; 2017 Feb; 59(1):116-133. PubMed ID: 28146673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Simple manipulations of anthropomorphism fail to induce perceptions of humanness or improve trust in an automated agent.
    Cockram L; Bartlett ML; McCarley JS
    Appl Ergon; 2023 Sep; 111():104027. PubMed ID: 37100010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Meaningful Communication but not Superficial Anthropomorphism Facilitates Human-Automation Trust Calibration: The Human-Automation Trust Expectation Model (HATEM).
    Carter OBJ; Loft S; Visser TAW
    Hum Factors; 2023 Dec; ():187208231218156. PubMed ID: 38041565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Almost human: Anthropomorphism increases trust resilience in cognitive agents.
    de Visser EJ; Monfort SS; McKendrick R; Smith MA; McKnight PE; Krueger F; Parasuraman R
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2016 Sep; 22(3):331-49. PubMed ID: 27505048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Trust and the Compliance-Reliance Paradigm: The Effects of Risk, Error Bias, and Reliability on Trust and Dependence.
    Chancey ET; Bliss JP; Yamani Y; Handley HAH
    Hum Factors; 2017 May; 59(3):333-345. PubMed ID: 28430544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Not All Information Is Equal: Effects of Disclosing Different Types of Likelihood Information on Trust, Compliance and Reliance, and Task Performance in Human-Automation Teaming.
    Du N; Huang KY; Yang XJ
    Hum Factors; 2020 Sep; 62(6):987-1001. PubMed ID: 31348863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Knowing When to Pass: The Effect of AI Reliability in Risky Decision Contexts.
    Elder H; Canfield C; Shank DB; Rieger T; Hines C
    Hum Factors; 2024 Feb; 66(2):348-362. PubMed ID: 35603703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Who's the real expert here? Pedigree's unique bias on trust between human and automated advisers.
    Pearson CJ; Geden M; Mayhorn CB
    Appl Ergon; 2019 Nov; 81():102907. PubMed ID: 31422272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The effect of oxytocin on group formation and strategic thinking in men.
    Aydogan G; Jobst A; Loy F; Dehning S; Zill P; Müller N; Kocher M
    Horm Behav; 2018 Apr; 100():100-106. PubMed ID: 29526749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cooperation in Human-Agent Systems to Support Resilience: A Microworld Experiment.
    Chiou EK; Lee JD
    Hum Factors; 2016 Sep; 58(6):846-63. PubMed ID: 27178676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Decision support aids with anthropomorphic characteristics influence trust and performance in younger and older adults.
    Pak R; Fink N; Price M; Bass B; Sturre L
    Ergonomics; 2012; 55(9):1059-72. PubMed ID: 22799560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Affective processes in human-automation interactions.
    Merritt SM
    Hum Factors; 2011 Aug; 53(4):356-70. PubMed ID: 21901933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The Influence of Anthropomorphic Cues on Patients' Perceived Anthropomorphism, Social Presence, Trust Building, and Acceptance of Health Care Conversational Agents: Within-Subject Web-Based Experiment.
    Li Q; Luximon Y; Zhang J
    J Med Internet Res; 2023 Aug; 25():e44479. PubMed ID: 37561567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Keep Your Scanners Peeled: Gaze Behavior as a Measure of Automation Trust During Highly Automated Driving.
    Hergeth S; Lorenz L; Vilimek R; Krems JF
    Hum Factors; 2016 May; 58(3):509-19. PubMed ID: 26843570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Introduction matters: Manipulating trust in automation and reliance in automated driving.
    Körber M; Baseler E; Bengler K
    Appl Ergon; 2018 Jan; 66():18-31. PubMed ID: 28958427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The frequency of positive and negative interactions influences relationship equity and trust in automation.
    Sharp WH; Jackson KM; Shaw TH
    Appl Ergon; 2023 Apr; 108():103961. PubMed ID: 36640742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The (Im)perfect Automation Schema: Who Is Trusted More, Automated or Human Decision Support?
    Rieger T; Kugler L; Manzey D; Roesler E
    Hum Factors; 2024 Aug; 66(8):1995-2007. PubMed ID: 37632728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Do concurrent task demands impact the benefit of automation transparency?
    Tatasciore M; Bowden V; Loft S
    Appl Ergon; 2023 Jul; 110():104022. PubMed ID: 37019048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.