AndresenG.SvengrenH.HeimdalJ. O.NilsenS.HulsundJ. E.BisioR.DebroiseX. (2004). Procedure automation: The effect of automated procedure execution on situation awareness and human performance (HWR-759). OECD Halden Reactor Project.
2.
CalhounG. L.DraperM. H.RuffH. A. (2009). Effect of level of automation on unmanned aerial vehicle routing task. InProceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society 53rd annual meeting (Vol. 53, pp.197–201). Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.doi:10.1177/154193120905300408
3.
CopiI. (1953). Introduction to logic. Macmillan.
4.
DekkerS. W. A.NyceJ. M.van WinsenR.HenriqsonE. (2010). Epistemological self-confidence in human factors research. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 4, 27–38.doi:10.1518/155534310X495573
5.
EndsleyM. R. (2015). Situation awareness misconceptions and misunderstandings. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 9, 4–32.doi:10.1177/1555343415572631
6.
EndsleyM. R. (2019). The divergence of objective and subjective situation awareness: A meta-analysis. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 14, 34–53.
7.
GoodmanS. N.BerlinJ. A. (1994). The use of predicted confidence intervals when planning experiments and the misuse of power when interpreting results. Annals of Internal Medicine, 121, 200–206.doi:10.7326/0003-4819-121-3-199408010-00008
8.
HoenigJ. M.HeiseyD. M. (2001). The abuse of power: The pervasive fallacy of power calculations for data analysis. The American Statistician, 55, 19–24.
9.
JamiesonG. A.SkraaningG. (2018). Levels of automation in human factors models for automation design: Why we might consider throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 12, 42–49.doi:10.1177/1555343417732856
10.
JamiesonG. A.SkraaningG. (2019). The absence of degree of automation trade-offs in complex work settings. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Advance online publication. http://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819842709.doi:10.1177/0018720819842709
11.
KaberD. B. (2018a). Issues in human–automation interaction modeling: Presumptive aspects of frameworks of types and levels of automation. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 12, 7–24.doi:10.1177/1555343417737203
12.
KaberD. B. (2018b). Reflections on commentaries on “Issues in human–automation interaction modeling.”Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 12, 86–93.doi:10.1177/1555343417749376
13.
LenthR. V. (2000). Two sample-size practices that I don’t recommend. InProceedings of the section on physical and engineering sciences (pp.8–11). Joint Statistical Meetings of the American Statistical Association.
14.
MeisterD. (1991). The epistemological basis of human factors research and practice. InProceedings of the human factors society annual meeting (Vol. 35, No. 18, pp.1275–1279). SAGE Publications.doi:10.1177/154193129103501805
15.
MellenberghG. J. (2019). Counteracting methodological errors in behavioral research. Springer.
16.
O'KeefeD. J. (2007). Prospective power, achieved power: Sorting out appropriate uses of statistical power analyses. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 291–299.
17.
OnnaschL.WickensC. D.LiH.ManzeyD. (2014). Human performance consequences of stages and levels of automation: An integrated meta-analysis. Human Factors, 56, 476–488.doi:10.1177/0018720813501549
18.
PopperK. R. (2005). The logic of scientific discovery. Taylor & Francis. (Original work published 1935).
19.
SebokA.WickensC. D. (2017). Implementing lumberjacks and black swans into model-based tools to support human–automation interaction. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 59, 189–203.doi:10.1177/0018720816665201
20.
SkraaningG.JamiesonG. A. (2017). Twenty years of HRP research on human-automation interaction: Insights on automation transparency and levels of automation (HPR-387). OECD Halden Reactor Project.
21.
WickensC. (2018). Automation stages & levels, 20 years after. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 12, 35–41.doi:10.1177/1555343417727438
22.
WickensC. D.LiH.SantamariaA.SebokA.SarterN. B. (2010, September). Stages and levels of automation: An integrated meta-analysis. InProceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting (Vol. 54, No. 4, pp.389–393). Sage Publications.doi:10.1177/154193121005400425
23.
WickensC. D.OnnaschL.SebokA.ManzeyD. (2019). Absence of DOA effect but no proper test of the lumberjack effect: A reply to Jamieson and Skraaning (2019). Human Factors. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720820901957.
24.
XiaoY.VicenteK. J. (2000). A framework for epistemological analysis in empirical (laboratory and field) studies. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 42, 87–101.doi:10.1518/001872000779656642
25.
YuanK.-H.MaxwellS. (2005). On the post hoc power in testing mean differences. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 30, 141–167.doi:10.3102/10769986030002141
