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 *

132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35026680)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Automation trust and attention allocation in multitasking workspace.
    Karpinsky ND; Chancey ET; Palmer DB; Yamani Y
    Appl Ergon; 2018 Jul; 70():194-201. PubMed ID: 29866311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 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. Providing different levels of accuracy about the reliability of automation to a human operator: impact on human performance.
    Avril E
    Ergonomics; 2023 Feb; 66(2):217-226. PubMed ID: 35451925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Displaying contextual information reduces the costs of imperfect decision automation in rapid retasking of ISR assets.
    Rovira E; Cross A; Leitch E; Bonaceto C
    Hum Factors; 2014 Sep; 56(6):1036-49. PubMed ID: 25277015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The use of adaptable automation: Effects of extended skill lay-off and changes in system reliability.
    Sauer J; Chavaillaz A
    Appl Ergon; 2017 Jan; 58():471-481. PubMed ID: 27633244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Effects of extended lay-off periods on performance and operator trust under adaptable automation.
    Chavaillaz A; Wastell D; Sauer J
    Appl Ergon; 2016 Mar; 53 Pt A():241-51. PubMed ID: 26603139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Understanding Is Key: An Analysis of Factors Pertaining to Trust in a Real-World Automation System.
    Balfe N; Sharples S; Wilson JR
    Hum Factors; 2018 Jun; 60(4):477-495. PubMed ID: 29613815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Dancing With Algorithms: Interaction Creates Greater Preference and Trust in Machine-Learned Behavior.
    Gutzwiller RS; Reeder J
    Hum Factors; 2021 Aug; 63(5):854-867. PubMed ID: 32048883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. A Meta-Analysis of Factors Influencing the Development of Trust in Automation: Implications for Understanding Autonomy in Future Systems.
    Schaefer KE; Chen JY; Szalma JL; Hancock PA
    Hum Factors; 2016 May; 58(3):377-400. PubMed ID: 27005902
    [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 7.