The DOI matches its Crossref record; 155 of the 155 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 252 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature
Open accessAbstract
Objective: We define human–autonomy teaming and offer a synthesis of the existing empirical research on the topic. Specifically, we identify the research environments, dependent variables, themes representing the key findings, and critical future research directions. Background: Whereas a burgeoning literature on high-performance teamwork identifies the factors critical to success, much less is known about how human–autonomy teams (HATs) achieve success. Human–autonomy teamwork involves humans working interdependently toward a common goal along with autonomous agents. Autonomous agents involve a degree of self-government and self-directed behavior (agency), and autonomous agents take on a unique role or set of tasks and work interdependently with human team members to achieve a shared objective. Method: We searched the literature on human–autonomy teaming. To meet our criteria for inclusion, the paper needed to involve empirical research and meet our definition of human–autonomy teaming. We found 76 articles that met our criteria for inclusion. Results: We report on research environments and we find that the key independent variables involve autonomous agent characteristics, team composition, task characteristics, human individual differences, training, and communication. We identify themes for each of these and discuss the future research needs. Conclusion: There are areas where research findings are clear and consistent, but there are many opportunities for future research. Particularly important will be research that identifies mechanisms linking team input to team output variables.
Overview
CoChat Summary
TL;DR
This integrative review synthesizes 76 empirical articles on human–autonomy teaming (HAT), defines HATs as interdependent human(s) and autonomous agent(s) occupying distinct team roles, and maps findings using an I-M-O framework. It finds generally positive effects of higher agent autonomy, reliability, interdependence, and training, but human–human teams usually outperform HATs and transparency/communication quantity show mixed effects.
Key findings
- The review identified 76 empirical articles; all were simulation/lab studies, none field-based. Of these, 57 were military- or emergency-related simulations, 17 were nonmilitary/emergency simulations, and 2 could not be classified; the most represented testbeds were CERTT-UAS-STE (18 articles) and MIX (15 articles).
- Agent autonomy was coded as high in 26 articles, partial in 31, and multiple levels in 15. Higher agent autonomy generally had positive effects (e.g., easier to work with, higher communication efficiency, stronger coordination, higher performance, lower workload), though some studies found a moderate level ideal; reliability was consistently positive, while transparency had mixed effects (e.g., improved performance/trust/understanding but also complacency, conflict, and workload).
- Human–human teams generally outperformed HATs; interdependence led to positive outcomes; higher task difficulty led to negative outcomes such as higher workload and lower performance; training produced consistently positive results; communication quality was associated with stronger team functioning, but communication quantity findings were mixed.
- Dependent variables studied most often were team and individual performance (70 studies), workload (39), trust (24), situation awareness (23), team coordination (15), and shared mental models (6); little research addressed Hackman’s team viability and individual learning/growth outcomes.
Methods
- Narrative/integrative literature review with four-step search. Inclusion required empirical research, sufficient description to code agent autonomy, and at least one autonomous agent and one human working interdependently toward a common goal; the agent had to reach at least Level 5 on Parasuraman et al.’s (2000) automation continuum.
- Searches covered ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, and Sage Journals: initial search returned 1,942 articles, reduced to 476 after full-text “team” filtering, yielding 33 included; author-focused search returned 930 potential articles, yielding 31 included; Google Scholar search returned 152 articles, yielding 8 included; adding “human–automation interaction” yielded 4 more; total unique articles = 76.
- Coding was inductive and iterative, organized within the I-M-O model of team effectiveness. After calibration, 30% of remaining articles were randomly selected for independent coding; inter-coder agreement was 89% overall.
Limitations
- Stated: the search may have missed relevant articles; using “teamwork” as a search term may have constrained coverage; a disproportionate number of papers came from two laboratories/testbeds (CERTT-UAS-STE 24%, MIX 20%); it is unclear whether humans perceived the autonomous agents as team members; and HRI and autonomous vehicle literatures were omitted.
- Evident from the text: all included studies were simulation/lab-based, most involved short-term “zero-history” teams, often single human–single agent dyads, limited communication, and mostly partial rather than high autonomy, limiting generalizability.
- Evident from the text: no studies formally reported mediation analyses, so mechanisms linking team inputs to outputs remain largely untested.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 Valid · 10 Not valid · 200 Not checked · 136 Own results and interpretations
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We report on research environments and we find that the key independent variables involve autonomous agent characteristics, team composition, task characteristics, human individual differences, training, and communication.”
§ Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature > Abstract > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found 76 articles that met our criteria for inclusion.”
§ Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature > Abstract > Method
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most individual studies in the current review only considered a single path in the I-M-O chain (i.e., did not test mediating mechanisms).”
§ Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature > Method > Coding Framework Development
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“(II) Cultural variables have an impact on user trust in the autonomous agent.”
§ Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature > Results of Literature Review: Research Environments, Themes, and Future Research Opportunities
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chien et al. (2016)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Team coordination | 15 |”
§ Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature > Results of Literature Review: Research Environments, Themes, and Future Research Opportunities
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
179 more claims
Create a free account to see all 346 claims and to verify the 150 references still open.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 118
- It may state two separate claims as one. 80
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature > Introduction > Defining Autonomy and Human–Autonomy Teams (HAT)
“Partial levels of agent autonomy can spontaneously recommend and execute actions unless they are vetoed (Levels 5–6).”
§ Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature > Introduction > Defining Autonomy and Human–Autonomy Teams (HAT)
“At Levels 5–6, Parasuraman et al. (2000) noted that the automation will generate decisions and actions that are communicated to the human(s) and then will execute with approval (Level 5) or with limited time for veto before the actions are implemented autonomously (Level 6).”
Citations
Cites
(1994) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/0002-8223(94)92216-0 · Cited by 45,910
TensorFlow: A system for large-scale machine learning
Abadi, M., Barham, P., Chen, J., Chen, Z., Davis, A., Dean, J., Devin, M., Ghemawat, S., Irving, G., Isard, M., et al. (2016) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1605.08695 · Cited by 11,822
Artificial intelligence: A modern approach
Nilsson, N. J. (1996) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(96)00007-0 · Cited by 10,583
Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values
Gladwin, T. N., & Hofstede, G. (1981) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/257651 · Cited by 9,275
Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis
MacKinnon, D. P. (2012) · doi:10.4324/9780203809556 · Cited by 5,618
A Cyber-Physical Systems architecture for Industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems
Lee, J., Bagheri, B., & Kao, H.-A. (2015) · Manufacturing Letters · doi:10.1016/j.mfglet.2014.12.001 · Cited by 5,113
Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse
Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872097778543886 · Cited by 4,554
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 · cited 12×
“Between Sheridan’s (1980) levels of automation and the taxonomy of automation types proposed by Parasuraman et al. (2000), there are existing taxonomies that relate to the notion of varying levels of agency among automation.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialA Temporally Based Framework and Taxonomy of Team Processes
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259182 · Cited by 3,659
Groups: Interaction and Performance.
Polley, R. B., & McGrath, J. E. (1984) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393041 · Cited by 3,290
Research works printed but not linked: 27
- Abadi M., 2016, 12th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, 16, 265
- *Boyce M. W., 2015, Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction Extended Abstracts (pp. 179–180).
- Byrne D. E, 1971, The attraction paradigm
- *Chen J. Y., 2013, [Conference session]. 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp. 103–104)
- *Chen J. Y., 2016, Companion Publication of the 21st International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) (pp. 28–31).
- *Chien S., 2016, In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC) (pp.2884–2889).
- *Demir M., 2016, 2016 IEEE International Multi-Disciplinary Conference on Cognitive Methods in Situation Awareness and Decision Support (CogSIMA) (pp. 28–34). IEEE
- *Demir M., 2019, 2019 IEEE Conference on Cognitive and Computational Aspects of Situation Management (CogSIMA) (pp. 122–126).
- Endsley M. R., 2012, Designing for situation awareness: An approach to human-centered design
- Endsley M. R., 1995, Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT) TRACON air traffic control version user guide
- Fitts P. M, 1951, Human engineering for an effective air-navigation and traffic-control system
- Hackman J. R, 1990, Groups that work and those that don't (No E10 H123)
- *Hafızoğlu F. M., 2018, Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (AAMAS) (pp. 514–522).
- *Hanna N., 2014, Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems (pp. 1485–1486).
- Hanna N., 2014, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (pp.1369–1370).
- *Hanna N., 2015, Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (pp. 1777–1778).
- Kazi S., Human Factors.
- Kidd C. D., 2005, Proceeding of AISB, 5, 141
- 10.1037/0021-9010.61.4.395 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.61.4.395 · Paper page
- Powers A., 2007, Proceedings of the Acm/ieee International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 145–152).
- Reig S., 2019, 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp. 742–744).
- Sheridan T. B, 1980, Technology Review, 83, 60
- 10.1177/014920639902500205 · doi:10.1177/014920639902500205 · Paper page
- Woods D. D, 1985, Conference Record for 1985 IEEE Third Conference on Human Factors and Nuclear Safety
- Woods D. D, 1994, Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum (pp. 961–971).
- Woods D. D. (1996). Decomposing automation: Apparent simplicity, real complexity (pp. 3–17). Theory and applications.
- You S., 2018, International Journal of Robotic Engineering, (IJRE), 2
Cited by
Items 401–500 of 694
Davitti, E., & Wallinheimo, A.-S. (2025) · Target International Journal of Translation Studies · doi:10.1075/target.00035.dav · Cited by 1
Identifying Human Out-of-the-Loop in Cruising Flights Using EEG Spectral Features with Deep Learning
Yiu, C. Y., Ng, K. K. H., Li, Q., & 中原, 信. (2025) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-94153-5_12 · Cited by 1
Unlocking Collective Potential: Modeling Creativity in Human-AI Teams
Basappa, R., Mallick, R., Flathmann, C., & McNeese, N. J. (2025) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/10711813251358795 · Cited by 1
Self-citationSeraj, R., Mahajan, A., & Ny, J. L. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems · doi:10.1109/thms.2025.3591550 · Cited by 1
Murthy, S. V., Lee, Y., Doh, W., Goh, Y., & Kim, S.-H. (2025) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/10711813251368830 · Cited by 1
Feedback from AI Team Members: Implications on Self-image and Trust
Georganta, E., Ulfert, A., & Ng, Z.-C. (2025) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-01377-4_12 · Cited by 1
Basjuka, J., Westin, C., Söderholm, G., Klang, K. J., & Lundberg, J. (2025) · European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics · doi:10.1145/3746175.3747191 · Cited by 1
How Should Your Artificial Teammate Tell You How Much It Trusts You?
Jorge, C. C., Dumitrescu, E., Jonker, C. M., Loghin, R., Marossi, S., Uleia, E., & Tielman, M. L. (2025) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents (IVA) · doi:10.1145/3717511.3747086 · Cited by 1
VirTLab-Eval: Human-Agent Team and Digital Twin Performance Evaluation Demonstration
Volkova, S., Kao, H.-T., Penafiel, L., Nguyen, D., Cohen, M. C., McCormack, R., & Cassani, L. (2025) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/10711813251369797 · Cited by 1
Formosa, P., Bankins, S., Griep, Y., & Richards, D. (2025) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2025.2579773 · Cited by 1
An Approach to Joint Hybrid Decision Making Between Humans and Artificial Intelligence
Rockbach, J. D., Fuchs, S., & Bennewitz, M. (2025) · Studies in neuroscience, psychology and behavioral economics · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-00880-0_4 · Cited by 1
From Automation to Autonomy Through AI: Enabling and Retaining Human Controllability
KABER, D. B. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-95-3658-0_5 · Cited by 1
Dong, Z., Han, B., Zhang, J., Ens, B. M., Clark, A., & Piumsomboon, T. (2025) · IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality Adjunct (ISMAR-Adjunct) · doi:10.1109/ismar-adjunct68609.2025.00209 · Cited by 1
Uncovering the Teamwork Competencies for Multi-Team Systems Operating in Extreme Environments
Berger, L., Khalid, M., & Salas, E. (2025) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/10464964251384643 · Cited by 1
Basjuka, J., Westin, C., Söderholm, G., Klang, K. J., & Lundberg, J. (2025) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2025.2596891 · Cited by 1
Cai, Y., & Rau, P. P. (2026) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2026.104738 · Cited by 1
Team Workload in Action Teams: A Review of Empirical Research
Johnson, C. J., Gutzwiller, R. S., Cohen, M. C., & Cooke, N. J. (2026) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/00187208261419344 · Cited by 1
Zhu, Y., Chen, R., & Zheng, L. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2628148 · Cited by 1
Evaluating humachine dynamics in process industry AI applications
Cuzzola, F. A., Quadrini, W., Teocchi, S., Pinzone, M., & Fumagalli, L. (2026) · Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management · doi:10.1108/jmtm-05-2025-0406 · Cited by 1
The stochastic nature of machine learning and its implications for high-consequence AI
Stadelmann, T., Merkt, P. H., & Barr, K. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-026-01042-1 · Cited by 1
Christoforakos, L., Jürgens, T. M., Busch, M., Beuckelmann, L., Laschke, M., & Diefenbach, S. (2026) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2026.2628766 · Cited by 1
Schelble, B. G., Flathmann, C., Aly, H., Lyons, J. B., & McNeese, N. J. (2026) · Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making · doi:10.1177/15553434261434613 · Cited by 1
Self-citationDiversity in Teams and Approaches for Studying Teams
Paletz, S. B. F. (2026) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/10464964261430661 · Cited by 1
Wang, J., Xue, Y.-X., Zhang, Y.-T., Kuai, S., & Xie, X. (2026) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.106752 · Cited by 1
The AI-Augmented Super Soldier: An Interface-Based Approach to the Cognition of Enhanced Humans
Bächle, T. C. (2026) · T.M.C. Asser Press eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-6265-759-5_6 · Cited by 1
“Matilda is Lazy Today”: How Mind Perceptions Trigger Relational Job Crafting With Industrial Robots
Goštautaitė, B., Liubertė, I., Reay, T., Bučiūnienė, I., Blaževičius, M. D., & Moniz, A. B. (2026) · Group & Organization Management · doi:10.1177/10596011261428932 · Cited by 1
"Should I Rely on You or the AI?" Leaders' Trust and Perceptions in Mixed Human-AI Teams
Chung, H., & Yang, X. J. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3790995 · Cited by 1
Attig, C., Wiebel-Herboth, C. B., Wollstadt, P., Schrills, T., Zoubir, M., & Franke, T. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2739657 · Cited by 1
Designing Artificial Social Intelligence for Human–AI Team Effectiveness
Huang, L., Cooke, N. J., Cohen, M. C., & Willett, M. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-95-3658-0_118 · Cited by 1
Yun, L., Hao, Y., Gong, H., & Li, B. (2026) · iScience · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2026.116056 · Cited by 1
AI Teammates for Conflict Support: A Taxonomy Refined through Design Fiction in Germany and Japan
Chen, Y., Seitz, J., Nguyen, A. M. B., & Cheng, S. (2026) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3802974.3809459 · Cited by 1
Huang, Y.-H., Lu, Y.-J., & Zhang, W. (2026) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139.2026.2686285 · Cited by 1
Chung, H., & Yang, X. J. (2026) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/00187208261464006 · Cited by 1
Human–AI Cooperation Reconsidered: Integrating Reciprocity and Psychological Needs
Attig, C., Wollstadt, P., Sarkisian, A., Chew, J. Y., & Wiebel-Herboth, C. B. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-30846-7_15 · Cited by 1
Optimisation of university instructors’ professional practice through AI agents: a systematic review
Doszhanov, B., Zhumadilla, B., & Zhapparbergenov, R. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1893124 · Cited by 1
Gong, L., & Gong, Y. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1886229 · Cited by 1
Pan, Y., Alzuman, A., Liu, J., Gao, Y., & Zahra, K. (2026) · The Journal of Environment & Development · doi:10.1177/10704965261469590 · Cited by 1
A Review on Assessing Situation Awareness in Human AI Teaming
Farghaly, M. R. M., Hettiarachchi, I. T., Jui, J. J., & Bhatti, A. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2702693 · Cited by 1
Olesk, J., Bernal, A. M. R., & Cleland‐Huang, J. (2026) · IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE) · doi:10.1109/re68928.2026.00011 · Cited by 1
Task Allocation and Role Distribution in Humane-AI Ecosystems
Nowak, A., Ziembowicz, K., Pitt, J. V., Biesaga, M., Boros, A., Bartkowski, W., Lewandowska, W. M., Borkowski, W., & Mertzani, A. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-61050-9_24-1 · Cited by 1
General‐purpose agents in human‐machine teams: Can we preserve meaningful human control?
den Bosch, K. V., van Maanen, P.-P., & van Diggelen, J. (2026) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1002/aaai.70091 · Cited by 1
Blomqvist, K., Möhlmann, M., & Järvenpää, S. L. (2021) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.24251/hicss.2021.663 · Cited by 1
Collaborative Communications Between A Human And A Resilient Safety Support System
Samani, S., Jessop, R., & Harrivel, A. R. (2021) · IEEE International Conference on Autonomous Systems (ICAS) · doi:10.1109/icas49788.2021.9551108 · Cited by 1
King, J. M., Hough, A. R., & Collins, M. G. (2022) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/1071181322661238 · Cited by 1
Remote Inspection Schemes: Past, Present, and Future
Knukkel, D. (2023) · Studies in national governance and emerging technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-25296-9_17 · Cited by 1
La confiance : nouvel horizon social ?
Riedel, M., Grauwin, S., Laffay, P.-O., & Reniaud, C. (2023) · Champ social eBooks · doi:10.3917/chaso.obert.2023.01.0119 · Cited by 1
Communication dynamics of a two-agent interaction model with applications to human-autonomy teaming
Rodriguez, L. R., Bustamante-Orellana, C., Cooke, N. J., Demir, M., & Kang, Y. (2024) · The Journal of Difference Equations and Applications · doi:10.1080/10236198.2024.2343834 · Cited by 1
Harris, D., Chan, W. T.-K., Chatzi, A. V., Griebel, H. S., Li, W., Lu, T.-T., McCarthy, P., Nakanishi, M., Plioutsias, A., & Ziakkas, D. (2024) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-60728-8_15 · Cited by 1
Evolution of interaction-free usage in the wake of AI
Herrmann, T. A. (2024) · i-com · doi:10.1515/icom-2024-0005 · Cited by 1
The Groundwork for an Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Defence
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.003.0001 · Cited by 1
Adversarial and Kinetic Uses of AI: The Definition of Autonomous Weapon Systems
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.003.0006 · Cited by 1
Driskell, T., Funke, G. J., Tolston, M. T., Capiola, A., & Driskell, J. E. (2024) · Military Psychology · doi:10.1080/08995605.2024.2413726 · Cited by 1
Stensrud, R., Nummedal, O. R., & Valaker, S. (2024) · Human-Intelligent Systems Integration · doi:10.1007/s42454-024-00058-4 · Cited by 1
Autonomous Last Mile: Speculative Futuring in Virtual Reality
Karlgren, K., Soltani, N., Rostami, A., & McMillan, D. (2025) · ACM International Conference on Interactive Media Experiences · doi:10.1145/3706370.3731709 · Cited by 1
Leveraging Generative AI to Create Lightweight Simulations for Far-Future Autonomous Teammates
Flathmann, C., Schelble, B. G., & Ihekweazu, C. (2025) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/10711813251357885 · Cited by 1
Self-citationEnhancing Adaptive Human-Agent Teaming Systems with Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy
Eloy, L., Doherty, E. J., Spencer, C. A., & Hirshfield, L. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2524490 · Cited by 1
Communication Dynamics and Team Performance in Multiple-Operator-Multiple-Agent (MOMA) Team
Chung, H., & Yang, X. J. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Human-Machine Systems (ICHMS) · doi:10.1109/ichms65439.2025.11154362 · Cited by 1
Vocabulary at the Living–Machine Interface: A Narrative Review of Shared Lexicon for Hybrid AI
Prahl, A., & Li, Y. (2025) · Biomimetics · doi:10.3390/biomimetics10110723 · Cited by 1
Designing Artificial Social Intelligence for Human–AI Team Effectiveness
Huang, L., Cooke, N. J., Cohen, M. C., & Willett, M. M. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-8440-0_118-1 · Cited by 1
Adaptive AUV-assisted diver navigation for loosely-coupled teaming in undersea operations
O’Neill, B. W. (2023) · Open Access Server of the Woods Hole Scientific Community (Woods Hole Scientific Community) · doi:10.1575/1912/67070 · Cited by 1
Developing human-autonomy teaming characteristics and guidance in aerospace operations
Tokadlı, G. (2021) · doi:10.31274/td-20240329-223 · Cited by 1
Human Factors Respect in Human Autonomy TeamsPreprint
Ulusoy, U., & Reisman, G. E. (2024) · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.171502760.01527479/v1 · Cited by 1
Using team gameplay to develop observable metrics for teaming behavior measurement
Francis, R. (2023) · doi:10.31274/td-20240617-357 · Cited by 1
Designing Human-Automation Redundancy: Overreliance, Automation Shirking, and the Operator’s Dilemma
Cohen, D., Roth, Y., Rieskamp, J., & Schöbel, M. (2025) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5098488
Black, M., Slapakova, L., Fusaro, P., & Black, J. (2022) · RAND Corporation eBooks · doi:10.7249/rra1377-2
From human-human trust to human-autonomous system trust
Pushparaj, K. (2022) · DR-NTU (Nanyang Technological University) · doi:10.32657/10356/161893
Cognitive architectures for human factors in aviation and aerospace
Gluck, K. A., & King, J. M. (2022) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-420139-2.00005-8
Maybe I Can Do Better Myself: The Impact of Automation Levels on HRI
Benton, R. A., McDonald, M. D., Sackett, M. A., Poncy, J. R., McLaughlin, A. C., Rovira, E. M., & Novitzky, M. M. (2022) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/1071181322661287
Examining the Effects of Cognitive Assistive Agents on Team Coordination in Manufacturing Teams
Begerowski, S. R., Waldherr, F., Biddlecom, J., Traylor, A., Krugh, M., Mears, L., & Shuffler, M. L. (2022) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/1071181322661401
Artificial Agents Inspired by Human Motivation Psychology for Teamwork in Hazardous Environments
Arukgoda, A., Lakshika, E., Barlow, M., & Gunawardana, K. (2023) · International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2023/2
Call for Papers_dec issue 2023 Small Group Research
(2023) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/10464964231204076
Complex Access Scenarios (CAS) Service Request
Rufus, R. (2023) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-49212-9_11
CALL FOR PAPERS Small Group Research
Bezrukova, K., Griffith, T. L., Bradley, B., Gevers, J., & Meyer, B. M. (2024) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/10464964231225682
CALL FOR PAPERS Small Group Research Special Guest Edited Issue on AI in Groups and Teams
Bezrukova, K., Griffith, T. L., Kivlighan, D. M., Swol, L. M. V., Bradley, B., Gevers, J., & Meyer, B. M. (2024) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/10464964241230607
Supporting Adaptive Coordination in Human-Autonomy-Teams: A Conceptual FrameworkPreprint
Nols, T., Ulfert, A., & Gevers, J. (2024) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/ytced
O’Neill, T., Flathmann, C., McNeese, N. J., Jones, S. K., & Schelble, B. G. (2024) · Academy of Management Discoveries · doi:10.5465/amd.2024.0009
Self-citationHuman-Centered AI at Work: Common Ground in Theories and Methods
(2024) · Frontiers research topics · doi:10.3389/978-2-8325-4840-0
(2024) · Advances in Machine Learning & Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.33140/amlai.05.02.02
CALL FOR PAPERS Small Group Research Special Guest Edited Issue on AI in Groups and Teams
Bezrukova, K., Griffith, T. L., Kivlighan, D. M., Swol, L. M. V., Bradley, B., Gevers, J., & Meyer, B. M. (2024) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/10464964241246136
Hart, S., Steane, V., & Chattington, M. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Human-Machine Systems (ICHMS) · doi:10.1109/ichms59971.2024.10555657
Perceptions of Autonomous Robot Teammates During Field Operations
Patten, T., Benton, R. A., Rovira, E. M., Mohammed, S., & McLaughlin, A. C. (2024) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/10711813241262267
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.002.0008
Taking a Moral Gambit: Accepting Moral Responsibility for the Actions of Autonomous Weapons Systems
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.003.0007
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.002.0007
Adversarial and Non-kinetic Uses of AI: Conceptual and Ethical Challenges
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.003.0004
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.002.0003
Adversarial and Non-kinetic Uses: The Case of Artificial Intelligence for Cyber Deterrence
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.003.0005
Sustainment and Support Uses of AI in Defence: The Case of AI-Augmented Intelligence Analysis
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.003.0003
Ethical Principles for AI in Defence
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.003.0002
Taddeo, M. (2024) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197745441.002.0005
Development of an Analysis of Alternatives Tool for Human-Agent Teaming Research
Nguyen, D., Cohen, M. C., Rebensky, S., Knight, R. S., Ficke, C., Fortier, L., & Fegley, B. D. (2024) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/10711813241279793
Human-Machine Communication: Complete Volume. Volume 9
(2024) · Human-Machine Communication · doi:10.30658/hmc.9
Stenroos, J., Edelman, H., & Kalliola, J. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5061024
Methodology for managing employee performance in modern commercial organizations.
Саматоев, А. Т. (2025) · Management Sciences · doi:10.26794/2304-022x-2024-14-4-91-107
Willingness to work as a predictor of human-agent team success
Gurney, N., Pynadath, D. V., & Miller, J. H. (2025) · Frontiers in Computer Science · doi:10.3389/fcomp.2025.1405436
Technoskepticism or Justified Caution? The Future of Human-Centered AI in Mental Health Care
Swinger, N., Moran, L. H., Abdullah, S., Wiese, C. W., Lee, U., Tseng, Y., Sherrill, A. M., & Arriaga, R. I. (2025) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3706599.3716286
Grace, R., Son, C., Pang, F., Parker, K., & Hernandez, J. (2025) · Proceedings of the ... International ISCRAM Conference · doi:10.59297/1v67zn37
Advances and challenges in work motivation: A whole-person perspective
Kanfer, R., Lyndgaard, S. F., & Tatel, C. E. (2025) · Advances in motivation science · doi:10.1016/bs.adms.2024.12.002
Toward a Framework for Characterizing Teaming Difficulties in Cooperative Video Games
Li, Z., & Harpstead, E. (2025) · Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series · doi:10.1609/aaaiss.v5i1.35565
Intuitive Recognition of a Virtual Agent’s Learning State Through Facial Expressions in VR
Lee, W., & Jin, D. H. (2025) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics14132666
Metadata
- Authors
- O’Neill, T., McNeese, N., Barron, A., & Schelble, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Clemson University (US)
- University of Waterloo (CA)
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-10-22
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 904-938
- ISSN
- 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-8181
- PMC
- PMC9284085
- OpenAlex
- W3093840653
- Cited by
- 695
- References
- 155
- Citations by year
- 2026: 225 · 2025: 174 · 2024: 120 · 2023: 88 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 8.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- TigerPrints (Clemson University) (submittedVersion)
- Sage Journals Data (cc-by)
- Funders
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Keywords
- human-autonomy teaming, autonomous agents, team composition, task characteristics, individual differences, team training, team communication, team performance, human agency
- MeSH terms
- Communication, Humans
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-14, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-14 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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.
