Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 13

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Individual Differences in Human-Agent Teaming: An Analysis of Workload and Situation Awareness through Eye Movements

Wright, Julia L., Quinn, Stephanie A., Chen, Jessie Y.C., Barnes, Michael J.·2014·Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting

Abstract

Studies investigating the effects of level of autonomy (LOA) on workload and performance in human-agent teams typically utilize subjective measures, but do not often incorporate physiological measures. This paper examines how well eye movement data collected in a recent experiment converges with the findings suggested by the subjective measures. Several eye behavior measures (fixation count, average fixation duration, blink rate, saccade amplitude and pupil diameter) were evaluated, and findings based on these compared to findings of NASA-TLX and situation awareness questionnaires. In addition, individual differences due to perceived attentional control were evaluated. Findings indicate that the physiological measures account for variance in workload that typical subjective measures may not, as they are more sensitive to individual differences among participants.

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 · 10.1177/1541931214581294

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Barber D., 2008, Proceedings of the 26th Army Science Conference
  2. 10.1109/THMS.2013.2293535 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1177/0018720811435843 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1080/00140139.2012.689013 · DOI
  5. 10.1109/TSMCC.2010.2056682 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1080/08995600802565785 · DOI
  7. 10.1037/0021-843X.111.2.225 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Drexler J.M., 2012, Effects of display dimension and viewpoint synchronization on robot teleoperation performance in a simulated environment
  9. 10.14236/ewic/HCI2007.12 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1016/S0169-8141(98)00068-7 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1007/1-4020-3389-3_15 · DOI
  12. Hoffman J. E., 1998, Attention, 119
  13. Jacob R. J., 2003, Mind, 2, 4
  14. Kasarskis P., 2001, Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology
  15. 10.1016/0001-6918(90)90067-P · DOI
  16. 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1974.tb01114.x · DOI
  17. 10.1037/1076-898X.9.2.119 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1109/CTS.2010.5478467 · doi:10.1109/cts.2010.5478467
  19. 10.1177/001872089403600209 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1016/S0301-0511(99)00043-5 · DOI
  21. 10.1518/001872001775992570 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Wright J.L., 2013, The effects of level of autonomy on human-agent teaming for multi-robot control and local security maintenance
  23. 10.1037/0096-1523.23.1.244 · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Wright, J. L., Quinn, S. A., Chen, J. Y. C., & Barnes, M. J.
Affiliations
  • U.S. Army Research Laboratory—Human Research and Engineering Directorate, Orlando, FL
  • U.S. Army Research Laboratory—Human Research and Engineering Directorate, Fort Huachuca, AZ
Venue
Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting
Published
2014-09
Volume
58
Issue
1
Pages
1410-1414
ISSN
  • 1071-1813
  • 2169-5067
Cited by
13
References
3
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.