The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Agent-Based Training of Distributed Command and Control Teams
Abstract
We developed and tested a partner agent for training distributed teams on a DDD/AWACS simulation. We compared 3 conditions that were identical on test trials but differed on practice trials, which had either human partners, agent partners, or no partners (control). Each condition had 20 four-member teams who trained for about 8 hrs each. Relative to the control condition, practicing with human partners and agent partners afforded about the same substantial advantage. Comparisons with formative testing suggested that the advantage of the agent partner depended on the agent responding quickly and adaptively to trainee demands. The results extended the foundation for developing and testing agent-based training in operational settings.
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
“(I) Training humans with agent autonomy produced consistently positive results including increased mental model similarity, trust, and lower uncertainty.”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Cohen and Imada (2005)
In the citing paper
“suggesting that they could better anticipate each other’s movements and coordinate task execution better (Cohen & Imada, 2005).”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Cohen & Imada, 2005
In the citing paper
“a higher learning rate was observed when the human was able to practice with the agent before completing a task (Cohen & Imada, 2005).”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Cohen & Imada, 2005
In the citing paper
“Humans and autonomous agents also had more instances of concurrent motion after cross-training”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Cohen & Imada, 2005
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 Dyadic Protocol for Training Complex Skills
Shebilskem, W. L., Regian, J. W., Arthur, W., & Jordan, J. A. (1992) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/001872089203400309 · Cited by 106
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- 10.1111/1467-8721.ep10773005 · DOI
- Clark, 1997, Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and Mind Together again
- Gildea K. (2004). Human Partner Dyads in Training Teamwork: The Influence of Interaction Anxiety and Cognitive. Dissertation, Wright State University.
- 10.1037/1076-898X.5.4.413 · DOI
- 10.1037/1076-898X.5.3.227 · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.5.3.227
- Shebilske W. L., 1999, Attention and Performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance: Interaction of theory and application, 401, 10.7551/mitpress/1480.003.0021 · DOI
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
The Impact of Training on Human–Autonomy Team Communications and Trust Calibration
Johnson, C. J., Demir, M., McNeese, N. J., Gorman, J. C., Wolff, A. T., & Cooke, N. J. (2023) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/00187208211047323 · Cited by 68
Metadata
- Authors
- Cohen, J., & Imada, A.
- Affiliations
- Error Analysis, Inc.
- A.S. Imada & Associates
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-09
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 25
- Pages
- 2164-2168
- ISSN
- 1071-1813
- 2169-5067
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 1
- 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
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.
