2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2012.03.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detecting system failures from durations and binary cues

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
(29 reference statements)
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As mentioned above, although task predictability is a major topic in current research on task switching, the effects of time-based task expectancy have not yet been investigated and research on time-based expectancy has exclusively been confined to single task studies so far. This lack of research interest is particularly surprising as it is known that in most areas of applied multitasking, like communication, sports, or human machine interaction, delays are predictive with regard to the following task (Roberts & Francis, 2013; Shahar, Meyer, Hildebrandt, & Rafaely, 2012; Thomaschke & Haering, 2014).…”
Section: Time-based Expectancy In Task Switchingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As mentioned above, although task predictability is a major topic in current research on task switching, the effects of time-based task expectancy have not yet been investigated and research on time-based expectancy has exclusively been confined to single task studies so far. This lack of research interest is particularly surprising as it is known that in most areas of applied multitasking, like communication, sports, or human machine interaction, delays are predictive with regard to the following task (Roberts & Francis, 2013; Shahar, Meyer, Hildebrandt, & Rafaely, 2012; Thomaschke & Haering, 2014).…”
Section: Time-based Expectancy In Task Switchingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is growing evidence that humans do indeed automatically and precisely adapt to the predictability of time-event combinations. For instance, the duration of pauses in speech induces expectancies about the complexity (Watanabe, Hirose, Den, & Minematsu, 2008) or valence (Roberts & Francis, 2013; Roberts, Margutti, & Takano, 2011) of the following expression (see also MacGregor, Corley, & Donaldson, 2010), and computer users predict system responses based on preceding system delays (Shahar, Meyer, Hildebrandt, & Rafaely, 2012; Thomaschke & Haering, 2014). It is, however, not clear yet how previous theories, which model time expectancy and event expectancy as distinct systems, can account for this phenomenon.…”
Section: Time-event Correlationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is converging evidence that humans are highly sensitive to the distribution and probability of delays in their environment. When the length of the current delay in an interaction is predictable, processing capacities are scheduled to be optimally prepared after the most likely delay duration (Correa, Lupiáñez, Milliken, & Tudela, 2004;Kingstone, 1992;Seibold, Bausenhart, Rolke, & Ulrich, 2011;Seibold, Fiedler, & Rolke, 2011; see Figure 1b).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Time-based expectancy is typically induced by correlations between a foreperiod and targets (Thomaschke & Dreisbach, 2013;Volberg & Thomaschke, 2017;Wagener & Hoffmann, 2010). Moreover, time-based expectancy has already been demonstrated in other domains such as visual stimulus perception (Thomaschke et al, 2016), attentional adjustment to conflict contingencies (Wendt, & Kiesel, 2011), language processing (Roberts & Francis, 2013;Roberts et al, 2011;Roberts & Norris, 2016), human-machine interaction (Shahar et al, 2012;Thomaschke & Haering, 2014) or the perception of emotional word valence (Thomaschke et al, 2018). These studies typically examined timebased expectancy in single tasks.…”
Section: Time-based Expectancymentioning
confidence: 99%