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 *

134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37635389)

  • 1. Transparent Automated Advice to Mitigate the Impact of Variation in Automation Reliability.
    Gegoff I; Tatasciore M; Bowden V; McCarley J; Loft S
    Hum Factors; 2024 Aug; 66(8):2008-2024. PubMed ID: 37635389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Impact of Transparency and Decision Risk on Human-Automation Teaming Outcomes.
    Loft S; Bhaskara A; Lock BA; Skinner M; Brooks J; Li R; Bell J
    Hum Factors; 2023 Aug; 65(5):846-861. PubMed ID: 34340583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Transparency improves the accuracy of automation use, but automation confidence information does not.
    Tatasciore M; Strickland L; Loft S
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2024 Oct; 9(1):67. PubMed ID: 39379606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of automation transparency in the management of multiple unmanned vehicles.
    Bhaskara A; Duong L; Brooks J; Li R; McInerney R; Skinner M; Pongracic H; Loft S
    Appl Ergon; 2021 Jan; 90():103243. PubMed ID: 32919121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Reliable and transparent in-vehicle agents lead to higher behavioral trust in conditionally automated driving systems.
    Taylor S; Wang M; Jeon M
    Front Psychol; 2023; 14():1121622. PubMed ID: 37275735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. The Perception of Automation Reliability and Acceptance of Automated Advice.
    Hutchinson J; Strickland L; Farrell S; Loft S
    Hum Factors; 2023 Dec; 65(8):1596-1612. PubMed ID: 34979821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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; 2024 Nov; 66(11):2485-2502. PubMed ID: 38041565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Individual differences in the calibration of trust in automation.
    Pop VL; Shrewsbury A; Durso FT
    Hum Factors; 2015 Jun; 57(4):545-56. PubMed ID: 25977317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Adaptive Cognitive Mechanisms to Maintain Calibrated Trust and Reliance in Automation.
    Lebiere C; Blaha LM; Fallon CK; Jefferson B
    Front Robot AI; 2021; 8():652776. PubMed ID: 34109222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Ironic efficiency in automation-aided signal detection.
    Bartlett ML; McCarley JS
    Ergonomics; 2021 Jan; 64(1):103-112. PubMed ID: 32790530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Trust with increasing and decreasing reliability.
    Rittenberg BSP; Holland CW; Barnhart GE; Gaudreau SM; Neyedli HF
    Hum Factors; 2024 Dec; 66(12):2569-2589. PubMed ID: 38445652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.