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 *

165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31834815)

  • 1. Human Performance Benefits of The Automation Transparency Design Principle : Validation and Variation.
    Skraaning G; Jamieson GA
    Hum Factors; 2021 May; 63(3):379-401. PubMed ID: 31834815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Absence of Degree of Automation Trade-Offs in Complex Work Settings.
    Jamieson GA; Skraaning G
    Hum Factors; 2020 Jun; 62(4):516-529. PubMed ID: 31348685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Agent Transparency, Situation Awareness, Mental Workload, and Operator Performance: A Systematic Literature Review.
    van de Merwe K; Mallam S; Nazir S
    Hum Factors; 2024 Jan; 66(1):180-208. PubMed ID: 35274577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The reliability and transparency bases of trust in human-swarm interaction: principles and implications.
    Hussein A; Elsawah S; Abbass HA
    Ergonomics; 2020 Sep; 63(9):1116-1132. PubMed ID: 32370651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The More You Know: Trust Dynamics and Calibration in Highly Automated Driving and the Effects of Take-Overs, System Malfunction, and System Transparency.
    Kraus J; Scholz D; Stiegemeier D; Baumann M
    Hum Factors; 2020 Aug; 62(5):718-736. PubMed ID: 31233695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Intelligent Agent Transparency in Human-Agent Teaming for Multi-UxV Management.
    Mercado JE; Rupp MA; Chen JY; Barnes MJ; Barber D; Procci K
    Hum Factors; 2016 May; 58(3):401-15. PubMed ID: 26867556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Trust in automation. Part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation.
    Muir BM; Moray N
    Ergonomics; 1996 Mar; 39(3):429-60. PubMed ID: 8849495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Can increased automation transparency mitigate the effects of time pressure on automation use?
    Tatasciore M; Loft S
    Appl Ergon; 2024 Jan; 114():104142. PubMed ID: 37757606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Automation transparency: implications of uncertainty communication for human-automation interaction and interfaces.
    Kunze A; Summerskill SJ; Marshall R; Filtness AJ
    Ergonomics; 2019 Mar; 62(3):345-360. PubMed ID: 30501566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Trust Mediating Reliability-Reliance Relationship in Supervisory Control of Human-Swarm Interactions.
    Hussein A; Elsawah S; Abbass HA
    Hum Factors; 2020 Dec; 62(8):1237-1248. PubMed ID: 31590574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Does automation trust evolve from a leap of faith? An analysis using a reprogrammed pasteurizer simulation task.
    Long SK; Lee J; Yamani Y; Unverricht J; Itoh M
    Appl Ergon; 2022 Apr; 100():103674. PubMed ID: 35026680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Revisiting human-machine trust: a replication study of Muir and Moray (1996) using a simulated pasteurizer plant task.
    Lee J; Yamani Y; Long SK; Unverricht J; Itoh M
    Ergonomics; 2021 Sep; 64(9):1132-1145. PubMed ID: 33818301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Near-Perfect Automation: Investigating Performance, Trust, and Visual Attention Allocation.
    Foroughi CK; Devlin S; Pak R; Brown NL; Sibley C; Coyne JT
    Hum Factors; 2023 Jun; 65(4):546-561. PubMed ID: 34348511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Detecting automation failures in a simulated supervisory control environment.
    Foroughi CK; Sibley C; Brown NL; Rovira E; Pak R; Coyne JT
    Ergonomics; 2019 Sep; 62(9):1150-1161. PubMed ID: 31179874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Designing effective human-automation-plant interfaces: a control-theoretic perspective.
    Jamieson GA; Vicente KJ
    Hum Factors; 2005; 47(1):12-34. PubMed ID: 15960084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. More Is Not Always Better: Impacts of AI-Generated Confidence and Explanations in Human-Automation Interaction.
    Ling S; Zhang Y; Du N
    Hum Factors; 2024 Mar; ():187208241234810. PubMed ID: 38437598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Not all trust is created equal: dispositional and history-based trust in human-automation interactions.
    Merritt SM; Ilgen DR
    Hum Factors; 2008 Apr; 50(2):194-210. PubMed ID: 18516832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.