Supporting joint human-computer judgment under uncertainty

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

Volumn 1, Issue , 2008, Pages 408-412

  Miller, Sarah ^a   Kirlik, Alex ^a   Kosorukoff, Alex ^a   Tsai, Jennifer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL MODEL; DESIGN IMPLICATIONS; FUTURE DIRECTIONS; HUMAN-COMPUTER; INTERFACE DESIGNS; JOINT SYSTEM; MODEL SYSTEM; VISUAL GUIDANCE;

COMPETITION; DESIGN; ERGONOMICS; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

CURRICULA;

EID: 70350591800     PISSN: 10711813     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. (2nd ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
2. Camerer, C. F. (1981). General conditions for the success of bootstrapping models. Organizational Behavior and Human Performances, 27, 411-422.
3. Dawes, R. M. (1971). A Case Study of Graduate Admissions: Application of Three Principles of Human Decision Making. American Psychologist, 26, 180-188.
4. Goldberg, L. R. (1968). Simple models of simple processes? Some research on clinical judgments. American Psychologist, 23, 483-496.
5. Horrey, W. J., Wickens, C. D., Strauss, R. A., Kirlik, A., & Stewart, T. R. (2006). Supporting situation assessment through attention guidance and diagnostic aiding: The benefits and costs of display enhancement on judgment skill. In A. Kirlik (Ed.), Adaptive Perspectives on Human-Technology Interaction (pp. 55-70). New York: Oxford University Press.
6. Kirlik, A., & Strauss, R. A. (2006). Situation awareness as judgment I: Statistical modeling and measurement. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 36, 463-474.
7. Meehl, P. E. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction: University of Minnesota.
8. Morrow, D. G., Wickens, C. D., & North, R. (2006). Reducing and mitigating human error in medicine. In R. S. Nickerson (Ed.), Annual Review of Human Factors and Ergonomice (Vol. 1). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
9. Murphy, A. H. (1988). Skill Scores Based on the Mean Square Error and Their Relationships ot the Correlation Coefficient. Monthly Weather Review, 116, 2417-2424.
10. Strauss, R. A., & Kirlik, A. (2006). Situation awareness as judgment II: Experimental demonstration. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 34, 475-484.
11. Thomas, J. J., & Cook, K. A. (Eds.). (2005). Illuminating the Path: The Research and Development Agenda for Visual Analytics.
12. Weigmann, D., McCarley, J., Kramer, A., & Wickens, C. D. (2006). Age and automation interact to influence performance of a simulated luggage screening task. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 77, 825-831.
13. Wickens, C. D., Mavor, A., Parasuraman, R., & McGee, J. (1998). The future of air traffic control: Human operators and automation. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
14. Yaniv, I., & Hogarth, R. M. (1993). Judgmental versus statistical prediction: Information asymmetry and combination rules. Psychological Science, 4, 58-62.