Cited by 8Human-Automation Interaction and SafetyUsability and User Interface DesignPersonal Information Management and User Behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Operator work load: when is enough enough?

Open access
LeMay, Moira, Hird, Eric·1986·Communications of the ACM

Abstract

Three measures of operator mental work load were tested with a large, interactive computer system. Two—operator rating of time stress, and the ratio of the time required to time allowed for each subtask—proved to be significant and easy to use.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/6138.6147

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Show all 7 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Albanese . R.A. Malhematical analysis and computer simulation in military mission workload assessment . In Proceeditlgs of fhe AGARD COII~WC~ 011 Methods fo Assess Workload. AGARD-CPP-126 (Apr.) 1977 . A13-l-A13-6. Albanese. R.A. Malhematical analysis and computer simulation in military mission workload assessment. In Proceeditlgs of fhe AGARD COII~WC~ 011 Methods fo Assess Workload. AGARD-CPP-126 (Apr.) 1977. A13-l-A13-6.
  2. Card . S. Moran . T. and Newell , A . Tile Psychology of Humarb- Con~yuter Itffrracf~or~ . Lawrence Erlbaum Associates , Hillsdale, N.J. , 1983 . Card. S. Moran. T. and Newell, A. Tile Psychology of Humarb- Con~yuter Itffrracf~or~. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J., 1983.
  3. Wierwille , W.W. and Connor . S.A. Evaluation of 20 workload measures using a moving-base aircraft simulator. Hum. Facfors 25 , 1 {Feb. 1983). 1 - 16 . Wierwille, W.W. and Connor. S.A. Evaluation of 20 workload measures using a moving-base aircraft simulator. Hum. Facfors 25, 1 {Feb. 1983). 1-16.
  4. Wierwille , W.W. Williges . R.C. and Schiflett , S.G . Aircrew workload assessment techniques. In Survey ofMethods to Assess Workload. B.O. Hartman and R.E . McKenzie. Eds. Agardograph , Aug. 1979 . Wierwille, W.W. Williges. R.C. and Schiflett, S.G. Aircrew workload assessment techniques. In Survey ofMethods to Assess Workload. B.O. Hartman and R.E. McKenzie. Eds. Agardograph, Aug. 1979.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 8

Metadata

Authors
LeMay, M., & Hird, E.
Affiliations
  • Montclair State University (US)
  • California Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Communications of the ACM
Published
1986-07
Volume
29
Issue
7
Pages
638-642
ISSN
  • 0001-0782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7317
OpenAlex
W1989624571
Cited by
8
References
7
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Communications of the ACM (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  • California Institute of Technology
  • Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
Keywords
interactive computer systems, workload measurement, human-computer 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