The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Autonomy and interdependence in human-agent-robot teams
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
In the citing paper
“participants viewed higher levels of agent autonomy as less burdensome to work with (Johnson et al., 2012)”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Johnson et al., 2012
In the citing paper
“with higher levels of agent autonomy, the autonomous agent was generally perceived as easier to work with (Johnson et al., 2012)”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Johnson et al., 2012
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation
Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T. B., & Wickens, C. D. (2000) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans · doi:10.1109/3468.844354 · Cited by 4,195
Ten challenges for making automation a ‘team player’ in joint human-agent activity
Klein, G., Woods, D. D., Bradshaw, J. M., Hoffman, R. R., & Feltovich, P. J. (2004) · IEEE Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1109/mis.2004.74 · Cited by 590
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- 10.1007/978-3-642-21268-0_10 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1109/MIS.2007.21 · DOI
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198521914.003.0014 · DOI
- Woods, 1997, Automation Surprises, 1926
- 2007, Unmanned Systems Roadmap. 2007-2032, US Dept. of Defense
- 10.1109/MSPEC.2010.5520612 · doi:10.1109/mspec.2010.5520612
- 10.1007/978-3-642-10203-5_26 · DOI
- Sheridan, 1978, Human and Computer Control of Undersea Teleoperators, 10.21236/ADA057655 · DOI · Paper page
- Olsen, 2003, Metrics for Evaluating Human-Robot Interactions, 507
- 10.1109/MIS.2007.21 · DOI
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198521914.003.0014 · DOI
- Woods, 1997, Automation Surprises, 1926
- 10.1145/1228716.1228722 · DOI
- 10.1109/MIS.2011.47 · DOI
- 10.1109/MIS.2004.74 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/0471739448.ch6 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature
O’Neill, T., McNeese, N., Barron, A., & Schelble, B. (2022) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720820960865 · Cited by 695
Hamacher, A., Bianchi-Berthouze, N., Pipe, A. G., & Eder, K. (2016) · 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) · doi:10.1109/roman.2016.7745163 · Cited by 135
Kox, E. S., Siegling, L. B., & Kerstholt, J. H. (2022) · International Journal of Social Robotics · doi:10.1007/s12369-022-00871-4 · Cited by 22
Liu, Y., Zha, S., Zhang, Y., Wang, Y., Zhang, Y., Xin, Q., Nie, L. Y., Zhang, C., & Xu, Y. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3714212 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Johnson, M., Bradshaw, J. M., Feltovich, P. J., Jonker, C., van Riemsdijk, B., & Sierhuis, M.
- Venue
- IEEE Intelligent Systems
- Published
- 2012-03
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 43-51
- ISSN
- 1541-1672
- Cited by
- 72
- References
- 2
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.