Cited by 28Human-Automation Interaction and SafetySocial Robot Interaction and HRIUsability and User Interface Design

Insights into Human-Agent Teaming: Intelligent Agent Transparency and Uncertainty

Open access
Stowers, Kimberly, Kasdaglis, Nicholas, Rupp, Michael, Chen, Jessie, Barber, Daniel, Barnes, Michael·2017·Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-3-319-41959-6_13

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stowers, K., Kasdaglis, N., Rupp, M., Chen, J., Barber, D., & Barnes, M.
Affiliations
DEVCOM Army Research Laboratory (US)
Corresponding author
Chen, Jessie
Venue
Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing
Published
2016-07-02
Pages
149-160
ISSN
  • 2194-5357 (ISSN-L)
  • 2194-5365
OpenAlex
W2485543143
Cited by
28
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
10.37
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Advances in intelligent systems and computing (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
human-agent teaming, agent transparency, joint cognitive systems, supervisory control, decision-making, operator performance, reaction time (psychology), perceived workload, perceived usability, trust in agents, human-automation interaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review