The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Display Signaling in Augmented Reality: Effects of Cue Reliability and Image Realism on Attention Allocation and Trust Calibration
Abstract
This experiment seeks to examine the relationships among three advanced technology features (presentation of target cuing, reliability of target cuing, and level of image reality and the attention and trust given to that information). The participants were 16 military personnel who piloted an unmanned air vehicle and searched for targets camouflaged in terrain, which was presented at two levels of image realism. Cuing was available for some targets, and the reliability of this information was manipulated at two levels (100% and 75%). The results showed that the presence of cuing aided target detection for expected targets but drew attention away from the presence of unexpected targets. Cuing benefits and attentional tunneling were both reduced when cuing became less reliable. Increasing image realism was compelling but increased reliance on the cuing information when those data were reliable. Potential applications include a cost-benefit analysis of how trust modulates attention in the use of automated target recognition systems and the extent to which increased realism may influence this trust.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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
“Yang and colleagues [139] found that likelihood alarms took more time to adjust trust calibration than binary warning signals.”
From Measuring and Understanding Trust Calibrations for Automated Systems: A Survey of the State-Of-The-Art and Future Directions (2023) · cites this paper as [139]
In the citing paper
“Yet, uncertainty cues also increased workload in some cases [70] but not in others [92] and led to instances of over-trust when the cues were not reliable [140].”
From Measuring and Understanding Trust Calibrations for Automated Systems: A Survey of the State-Of-The-Art and Future Directions (2023) · cites this paper as [140]
In the citing paper
“To assess trust, one paper found that trust is best refected at each moment in the interaction rather than at the end of the interaction [139].”
From Measuring and Understanding Trust Calibrations for Automated Systems: A Survey of the State-Of-The-Art and Future Directions (2023) · cites this paper as [139]
Citations
Cites
Engineering Psychology and Human Performance
Wickens, C. D., Hollands, J. G., Banbury, S. P., & Parasuraman, R. (2015) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315665177 · Cited by 5,017
Self-citationHumans 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
Self-citationTrust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems
LEE, J., & MORAY, N. (1992) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139208967392 · Cited by 1,459
Engineering Psychology and Human Performance
Alluisi, E. A., & Morgan, B. B. (1976) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.27.020176.001513 · Cited by 1,204
Human Factors in Simple and Complex Systems
Proctor, R. W., & Zandt, T. V. (2008) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781420063608 · Cited by 478
Automation Bias: Decision Making and Performance in High-Tech Cockpits
Mosier, K. L., Skitka, L. J., Heers, S., & Burdick, M. (1998) · The International Journal of Aviation Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0801_3 · Cited by 353
Alarm effectiveness in driver-centred collision-warning systems
PARASURAMAN, R., HANCOCK, P. A., & OLOFINBOBA, O. (1997) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/001401397188224 · Cited by 205
Sorkin, R. D., Kantowitz, B. H., & Kantowitz, S. C. (1988) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/001872088803000406 · Cited by 187
FORUM: Why are people turning off our alarms?
Sorkin, R. D. (1988) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.397232 · Cited by 158
Viewing psychology as a whole: The integrative science of William N. Dember.
(1998) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/10290-000 · Cited by 124
Workload and Reliability of Predictor Displays in Aircraft Traffic Avoidance
Wickens, C. D., Gempler, K., & Morphew, M. E. (2000) · Transportation Human Factors · doi:10.1207/sthf0202_01 · Cited by 111
Self-citationVisual Displays: The Highlighting Paradox
Fisher, D. L., & Tan, K. C. (1989) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/001872088903100102 · Cited by 102
Yeh, M., Wickens, C. D., & Seagull, F. J. (1999) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872099779656752 · Cited by 92
Self-citationOmissions in Radiology: Faulty Search or Stringent Reporting Criteria?
Swensson, R. G., Hessel, S. J., & Herman, P. G. (1977) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/123.3.563 · Cited by 60
Attention and Trust Biases in the Design of Augmented Reality Displays
Yeh, M., & Wickens, C. D. (2000) · Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) · doi:10.21236/ada440368 · Cited by 35
Self-citationUnreliable Automated Attention Cueing for Air-Ground Targeting and Traffic Maneuvering
Wickens, C. D., Conejo, R., & Gempler, K. (1999) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/154193129904300105 · Cited by 29
Self-citationEffect of Reliability on Cue Effectiveness and Display Signaling.
Merlo, J. L. (1999) · Cited by 28
Enhancing diagnostic decisions.
Swets, J. A. (1998) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/10290-026 · Cited by 13
Operator Reliance on Automated Support for Target Recognition
MacMillan, J., Entin, E. B., & Serfaty, D. (1994) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/154193129403801908 · Cited by 9
Spatial terrain displays: promises and potential pitfalls
Theunissen, E. (2002) · IEEE/AIAA Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC) · doi:10.1109/dasc.1998.741583 · Cited by 9
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Entin, E. B., 1998, The effects of decision aid availability and accuracy on performance and confidence
- Ockerman, J. J., Presented at the International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction in Aeronautics
- Theunissen, E., Presented at the 17th Digital Avionics Systems Conference
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
Automation bias: a systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators
Goddard, K., Roudsari, A., & Wyatt, J. C. (2012) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000089 · Cited by 1,162
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
Self-citationSupporting Human-AI Teams:Transparency, explainability, and situation awareness
Endsley, M. R. (2022) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2022.107574 · Cited by 366
Attention: Theory, Principles, Models and Applications
Wickens, C. D. (2021) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2021.1874741 · Cited by 222
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Yeh, M., & Wickens, C. D.
- Affiliations
- Mitre (United States) (US)
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2001-09
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 355-365
- ISSN
- 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-8181
- OpenAlex
- W2129001561
- Cited by
- 175
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 4.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Army Research Laboratory (DAAL01-96-2-0003)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Augmented Reality Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Interactive and Immersive Displays
- Keywords
- augmented reality, cue reliability, photorealism, attention allocation, trust calibration, attentional tunneling, automatic target recognition, target detection, military personnel
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Analysis of Variance, Attention, Computer Graphics, Cues, Data Display, Female, Humans, Male, Military Personnel, Reaction Time, Sensitivity and Specificity, Task Performance and Analysis, User-Computer Interface, Visual Perception, Reproducibility of Results
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
