Cited by 6Human-Automation Interaction and SafetyTeam Dynamics and PerformanceOccupational Health and Safety Research

Behavioral and psychophysiological responses of initial pilots in collaboration with an experienced but risky captain: A flight-simulation study based on the social facilitation

Gao, Shan, Bai, Yu, Hong, Ruiyuan, Wang, Lei·2025·Safety Science

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ssci.2025.106858

Cites

47 of 47 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

1 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gao, S., Bai, Y., Hong, R., & Wang, L.
Affiliations
Civil Aviation University of China (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Gao, Shan
  • Wang, Lei
Venue
Safety Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-07
Volume
187
Pages
106858
ISSN
0925-7535 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4408477288
Cited by
4
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2
FWCI
4.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Safety Science (publishedVersion)
Funders
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (3122024026)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Radiological and Ultrasound Technology › Occupational Health and Safety Research
Keywords
social facilitation, pilot monitoring, mental workload, stress, emotion regulation, flight safety

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