The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Engineering Trust in Complex Automated Systems
Abstract
We studied the transparency of automated tools used during emergency operations in commercial aviation. Transparency (operationalized as increasing levels of explanation associated with an automated tool recommendation) was manipulated to evaluate how transparent interfaces influence pilot trust of an emergency landing planning aid. We conducted a low-fidelity study in which commercial pilots interacted with simulated recommendations from NASA’s Emergency Landing Planner (ELP) that varied in their associated levels of transparency. Results indicated that trust in the ELP was influenced by the level of transparency within the human–machine interface of the ELP. Design recommendations for automated systems are discussed.
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.
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
Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance
Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392 · Cited by 6,605 · cited 3×
“Trust is believed to play a critical role in shaping how humans interact with technology (Chen & Barnes, 2014; Lee & See, 2004; Lyons & Stokes, 2012).”
BackgroundHumans 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
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- 10.1109/THMS.2013.2293535 · DOI
- 10.1109/TSMCC.2010.2056682 · DOI
- 10.1080/10508414.2013.799355 · DOI
- Lyons J. B., 2013, Trust and autonomous systems: Papers from the AAAI Spring Symposium
- 10.1177/0018720811427034 · DOI
- Meuleau N., 2011, ICAPS-11: Proceedings of the Scheduling and Planning Applications Workshop, 60
- Meuleau N., 2008, ICAPS-08: Proceedings of the Scheduling and Planning Applications Workshop
- National Transportation Safety Board, 2009, Loss of trust in both engines after encountering a flock of birds and subsequent ditching on the Hudson River US Airways Flight 1549
- National Transportation Safety Board, 2013, Descent below visual glidepath and impact with seawall Asiana Airlines Flight 214
- 10.1177/0018720809338842 · DOI
- 10.1002/9780470713181.ch14 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Demand-Driven Transparency for Monitoring Intelligent Agents
Vered, M., Howe, P., Miller, T., Sonenberg, L., & Velloso, E. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems · doi:10.1109/thms.2020.2988859 · Cited by 21
Metadata
- Authors
- Lyons, J. B., Koltai, K. S., Ho, N. T., Johnson, W. B., Smith, D. E., & Shively, R. J.
- Venue
- Ergonomics in Design: The Quarterly of Human Factors Applications
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-01
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 13-17
- ISSN
- 1064-8046
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 2
- Language
- en
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
