2011
DOI: 10.1109/mis.2011.47
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Beyond Cooperative Robotics: The Central Role of Interdependence in Coactive Design

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
41
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These results are no surprise, because this is the only treatment in which the agent player could make its own decision about which block to pick up, but they do emphasize that functional differences matter when automating tasks. 11 Second was the number of boxes lost (dropped in the hallway or placed in the drop zone in the wrong order). BW4T is very simple, and the human players didn't make many mistakes (and the agent players didn't make any, because they were programmed to perform perfectly).…”
Section: Quantitative Performance Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These results are no surprise, because this is the only treatment in which the agent player could make its own decision about which block to pick up, but they do emphasize that functional differences matter when automating tasks. 11 Second was the number of boxes lost (dropped in the hallway or placed in the drop zone in the wrong order). BW4T is very simple, and the human players didn't make many mistakes (and the agent players didn't make any, because they were programmed to perform perfectly).…”
Section: Quantitative Performance Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From this wide range of collected publications, we identified criteria for collaborative work dedicated to specific technology (Borghoff and Schlichter (2000)) like table tops (Scott et al (2003)) or mobile devices (Donker and Blumberg (2011)). We extracted criteria of collaboration support systems in information visualization (Tobiasz et al (2009)), visual analytics (Bren-nan et al (2006)), business processes (Mundbrod (2012)), virtual reality (Liu et al (2012)) and de-sign and engineering (French et al (2014), Johnson et al (2011), Briggs et al (2010 and Briggs et al (2003)). Also, existing work about single aspects of successful cooperation like awareness indication (BeaudouinLafon and Karsenty (1992), Dourish and Bellotti (1992)), as well as satisfaction and team effectiveness as investigated by Kot-tke (2013), Jose´ et al (2014) and Rousseau and Aube´ (2010)) have been considered.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Collaboration can be defined as a joint activity in which individual participants share an obligation to coordinate in individual autonomy in the service of progress towards a common goal (Johnson et al (2011)). This definition indicates that different working styles and different work phases exist in collaborative work.…”
Section: Collaborative Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Johnson et al [10] investigated how human participants on a team with agents thought they worked better as a team when the agents provided explanations about their actions, even when the agents performed the same tasks regardless of human input. This belief may contribute to trusting other team members more, and this established trust helps the team work together better.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%