Assessing Human-Agent Teams for Future Space Missions

Smets, N.J.J.M.; Bradshaw, Jeffrey M.; Diggelen, J. van; Jonker, Catholijn M.; Neerincx, Mark A.; Rijk, Lennard J V de; Senster, Pieter A M; Sierhuis, Maarten; Thije, O. Ten

doi:10.1109/mis.2010.105

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Few studies have focused on task scope, complexity and interdependence. Smets, et al [58] argue that for the effectiveness of HATs, organizational structure should not impede the autonomy of the participating agents and agents should be able to disobey a policy. Agents who are not bound to predefined policies all the time are essential in complex task environments, as the changing scenarios might not be covered by the policies.…”

Section: Task Structure: Scope Complexity and Interdependencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four of these typesstatic division of labor, adjustable automation, mixed-initiative collaborations, and adaptive automationare intrinsically linked to task design and the interpersonal dynamics between human and agent team members. Extant research on interpersonal processes has mainly focused on mixed-initiative collaborations [58,66,69,[87][88][89][90], where humans and agents negotiate who will do what [86].…”

Section: Team Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Human–Agent Team Dynamics: A Review and Future Research Opportunities

Iftikhar,

Chiu,

Khan

et al. 2024

IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans teaming with intelligent autonomous agents are becoming indispensable in work environments.However, human-agent teams pose significant challenges as team dynamics are complex arising from the task and social aspects of human-agent interactions. To improve our understanding of human-agent team dynamics, we conducted a systematic literature review. Drawing on Mathieu et al.'s (2019) teamwork model developed for all-human teams, we map the landscape of research to human-agent team dynamics, including structural features, compositional features, mediating mechanisms, and the interplay of the above features and mechanisms. We reveal that the development of human-agent team dynamics is still nascent, with a particular focus on information sharing, trust development, agents' human likeness behaviors, shared cognitions, situation awareness, and function allocation. Gaps remain in many areas of team dynamics, such as team processes, adaptability, shared leadership, and team diversity. We offer various interdisciplinary pathways to advance research on human-agent teams.

show abstract

Section: Task Structure: Scope Complexity and Interdependencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Team Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human–Agent Team Dynamics: A Review and Future Research Opportunities

Iftikhar,

Chiu,

Khan

et al. 2024

IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…sCE addresses Human-Computer Interaction issues related to users and the realization of complex and dynamic tasks and goals, in specific contexts, and with the use of certain tools. It has been proven effective for development of ICT support, which contribute to realizing performance objectives in different complex domains, such as on naval ships [24], space stations [25], and health promotion (e.g., performing selfmanagement behavior) [21].…”

Section: A Multidisciplned Approach For Developing Persuasive Tecmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lost in persuasion A multidisciplinary approach for developing usable, effective, and reproducible persuasive technology for health promotion

Henkemans¹,

Empelen²,

Paradies³

et al. 2015

Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Despite its acknowledged benefits for health promotion, the full potential of persuasive technology is not (yet) reached in regard to usability, effectiveness, and reproducibility. It often lacks an effective combination of technical features and behavior change strategies. This paper presents a multidisciplinary approach, addressing both aspects. It builds on the frameworks of situated Cognitive Engineering and Intervention Mapping. The approach generates building blocks from theory originating from different relevant disciplines; it specifies change objectives and requirements, described in the context of use, for intervention (strategy) and interaction (technology); it evaluates process, effect and impact, whereby claims on interaction and intervention are validated. To cope with language barriers between developers from different disciplines, the approach is presented as a guideline, illustrated with a case study. This approach is expected to contribute to a sound design rationale, a broad reach and ongoing use of the technology, and larger results in regard to health promotion.

show abstract

“…For the two studies in this paper both the fidelity and realism of the evaluation stetting are important (Smets et al, 2010). The fidelity of our evaluation is determined by how well it captures the awareness trade-off (e.g., divided attention situations) and core task features of police patrol (e.g, notification, navigation and incident handling).…”

Section: Evaluating Context-aware Notificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In evaluating context-aware systems, the evaluation setting, participants and metrics should be chosen carefully (Streefkerk, van Esch-Bussemakers, Neerincx, & Looije, 2008). For the two studies in this paper both the fidelity and realism of the evaluation stetting are important (Smets et al, 2010). The fidelity of our evaluation is determined by how well it captures the awareness trade-off (e.g., divided attention situations) and core task features of police patrol (e.g., notification, navigation and incident handling).…”

Section: Evaluating Context-aware Notificationmentioning

confidence: 99%