The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Supervisory Control of Multiple Robots: Effects of Imperfect Automation and Individual Differences
Abstract
Objective: A military multitasking environment was simulated to examine the effects of an intelligent agent, RoboLeader, on the performance of robotics operators. Background: The participants’ task was to manage a team of ground robots with the assistance of RoboLeader, an intelligent agent capable of coordinating the robots and changing their routes on the basis of battlefield developments. Method: In the first experiment, RoboLeader was perfectly reliable; in the second experiment, RoboLeader’s recommendations were manipulated to be either false-alarm prone or miss prone, with a reliability level of either 60% or 90%. The visual density of the targeting environment was manipulated by the presence or absence of friendly soldiers. Results: RoboLeader, when perfectly reliable, was helpful in reducing the overall mission times. The type of RoboLeader imperfection (false-alarm vs. miss prone) affected operators’ performance of tasks involving visual scanning (target detection, route editing, and situation awareness). There was a consistent effect of visual density (clutter of the visual scene) for multiple performance measures. Participants’ attentional control and video gaming experience affected their overall multitasking performance. In both experiments, participants with greater spatial ability consistently outperformed their low-spatial-ability counterparts in tasks that required effective visual scanning. Conclusion: Intelligent agents, such as RoboLeader, can benefit the overall human-robot teaming performance. However, the effects of type of agent unreliability, tasking requirements, and individual differences have complex effects on human-agent interaction. Application: The current results will facilitate the implementation of robots in military settings and will provide useful data to designs of systems for multirobot control.
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
“(III) Experience (both quantity and quality) with computers that are similar or that utilize autonomous agents is associated with higher trust, performance, and multitasking performance.”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Chen and Barnes (2012)
In the citing paper
“(II) Reliability is positively associated with all outcomes examined in HATs.”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Chen and Barnes (2012)
In the citing paper
“their performance was higher than when they were unaware of the reliability (Chen & Barnes, 2012).”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Chen & Barnes, 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
Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research
(1988) · Advances in Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9 · Cited by 15,003
Foundations for an Empirically Determined Scale of Trust in Automated Systems
Jian, J.-Y., Bisantz, A. M., & Drury, C. G. (2000) · International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics · doi:10.1207/s15327566ijce0401_04 · Cited by 1,799
Complacency and Bias in Human Use of Automation: An Attentional Integration
Parasuraman, R., & Manzey, D. H. (2010) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720810376055 · Cited by 1,710 · cited 1×
“For example, the automation-induced complacency effect repeatedly demonstrated in previous research (Dzindolet, Pierce, Beck, Dawe, & Anderson, 2001; Parasuraman & Manzey, 2010; Thomas & Wickens, 2004; Young & Stanton, 2007) may be more severe for individuals with poor attentional control compared…”
ResultHuman Performance Issues and User Interface Design for Teleoperated Robots
Chen, J. Y. C., Haas, E. C., & Barnes, M. J. (2007) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews) · doi:10.1109/tsmcc.2007.905819 · Cited by 646
Self-citationMiller, C. A., & Parasuraman, R. (2007) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872007779598037 · Cited by 434
The benefits of imperfect diagnostic automation: a synthesis of the literature
Wickens, C. D., & Dixon, S. R. (2007) · Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science · doi:10.1080/14639220500370105 · Cited by 423 · cited 1×
“Finally, Wickens and Dixon (2007) demonstrated that when the reliability level is below approximately 70%, operators will often ignore the alerts.”
Individual differences in working memory capacity predict visual attention allocation
Bleckley, M. K., Durso, F. T., Crutchfield, J. M., Engle, R. W., & Khanna, M. M. (2003) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03196548 · Cited by 156
Lathan, C. E., & Tracey, M. (2002) · Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments · doi:10.1162/105474602760204282 · Cited by 123 · cited 2×
“…(Morgan et al., 2011), virtual environment navigation (Chen, Czerwinski, & Macredie, 2000), target search task (Chen, 2010; Chen et al., 2008; Chen & Joyner, 2009; Chen & Terrence, 2008, 2009), and robotics task performance (Cassenti, Kelley, Swoboda, & Patton, 2009; Lathan & Tracey, 2002).”
Research works printed but not linked: 50
- Barber D., 2008, Paper presented at the 26th Army Science Conference
- Barnes M. J., 2010, Human-robot interactions in future military operations, 9
- 10.1207/s15327043hup1903_4 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193120905300441 · doi:10.1177/154193120905300441
- Chappelle W., 2010, Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 81, 339
- Chappelle W., 2010, Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 81, 253
- 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(2000)51:6<499::AID-ASI2>3.0.CO;2-K · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(2000)51:6<499::aid-asi2>3.0.co;2-k
- 10.1080/00140139.2010.500404 · DOI
- 10.1109/TSMCC.2010.2056682 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1071181311551312 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/08995600802115904 · DOI
- 10.1080/08995600802565785 · DOI
- 10.1080/00140130802030706 · DOI
- 10.1080/00140130802680773 · DOI
- 10.1109/TSMCA.2005.850587 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/0018720810368674 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-843X.111.2.225 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1518/001872006778606822 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1518/001872007X215656 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.neuron.2009.06.005 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1207/S15327876MP1303_2 · DOI
- Ekstrom R. B., 1976, Kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests
- 10.1037/0033-2909.130.4.553 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1071181311551087 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.10.004 · DOI · Paper page
- Green D., 1988, Signal detection theory and psychophysics
- 10.1037/1076-898X.10.2.75 · DOI
- 10.1002/acp.1624 · DOI
- 10.1002/wcs.116 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0035426 · DOI
- 10.1177/0018720810366859 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193120605002304 · DOI
- McKinley A., 2010, Proceedings of the Aerospace Medical Association 81st Annual Scientific Meeting, 336
- 10.1518/001872001775870395 · DOI
- 10.1518/hfes.46.2.196.37335 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1071181311551191 · DOI
- Rodes W., 2005, Poster presented at the Human Factors of UAVs Workshop
- 10.1037/0096-1523.27.4.763 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/1467-9280.00318 · DOI · Paper page
- Schurr N. (2007). Toward human-multiagent teams (Unpublished dissertation). University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
- 10.1038/scientificamerican0710-56 · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0710-56
- 10.1109/CTS.2010.5478467 · doi:10.1109/cts.2010.5478467
- 10.1080/00140139.2010.489969 · DOI
- 10.1080/00140139508925181 · DOI
- 10.1145/1349822.1349871 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193120404800148 · doi:10.1177/154193120404800148
- Triplett J. (2008). The effects of commercial video game playing: A comparison of skills and abilities for the Predator UAV (Unpublished thesis). U.S. Air Force–Air University, Montgomery, AL.
- 10.1109/ROMAN.2002.1045607 · doi:10.1109/roman.2002.1045607
- 10.1177/1071181311551190 · DOI
- 10.1080/00140130600980789 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Schaefer, K. E., Chen, J. Y. C., Szalma, J. L., & Hancock, P. A. (2016) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720816634228 · Cited by 768
Self-citationHuman–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
Formal Methods for Autonomous Systems
Wongpiromsarn, T., Ghasemi, M., Cubuktepe, M., Bakirtzis, G., Carr, S., Karabag, M. O., Neary, C., Gohari, P., & Topcu, U. (2023) · Foundations and Trends® in Systems and Control · doi:10.1561/2600000029 · Cited by 17
A study of dynamic information display and decision-making in abstract trust games
Schaffer, J., O’Donovan, J., Marusich, L., Yu, M., Gonzalez, C., & Höllerer, T. (2018) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.01.002 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, J. Y. C., & Barnes, M. J.
- Affiliations
- U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Orlando, Florida
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-02-13
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 157-174
- ISSN
- 0018-7208
- 1547-8181
- Cited by
- 144
- References
- 8
- Language
- en
- Licence
- journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Supervisory Control of Multiple Robots: Effects of Imperfect Automation and Individual Differences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0018720811435843
- The paper
- Chen, J. Y. C., & Barnes, M. J. (2012). Supervisory Control of Multiple Robots: Effects of Imperfect Automation and Individual Differences. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720811435843
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.
