Human performance plays an important role in system performance and is influenced by a wide set of internal, organizational, and environmental factors. Human–robot systems are being developed for a large number of domains, including in-home care, military deployments, emergency response, industrial robots, and therapeutic applications. Human performance modeling provides the opportunity to investigate multiple system prototypes and theories regarding human performance that can be further evaluated in human-in-the-loop experiments, to quickly adapt to rapidly changing robotic technology, and to represent human behavior in extreme conditions. Interacting with robots also influences human performance, and models of the human–robot system provide an avenue to investigate the impact on human performance that the human–robot teaming elicits. This chapter provides an overview of examples representing common methods for assessing human performance in human–robot systems. The topics are summarized in Table 3.2 and include a description of human performance modeling, a summary of commonly used human performance modeling tools, examples of human performance modeling with a focus on its application in human–robot systems, information regarding the validation of models, and guidelines for implementing human performance modeling techniques for robotics.
AasmanJ.MulderG.MulderL. J. M. (1987). Operator effort and the measurement of heart-rate variability. Human Factors, 29, 161–170.
2.
AdamsJ. A.HarriottC. E.ZhuangR.DeLoachS. (2012). Human–robot teams informed by human performance moderator functions: A final report (Tech. Rep. HMT-12-01). Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
3.
AkgunB.CakmakM.YooJ. W.ThomazA. L. (2012). Trajectories and keyframes for kinesthetic teaching: A human-robot interaction perspective. In Proceedings of the Seventh Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (pp. 391–398). New York, NY: ACM.
4.
AllenderL.KelleyT. D.SalviL.LockettJ.HeadleyD. B.PromiselD.. . . FengT. (1995). Verification, validation, and accreditation of a soldier–system modeling tool. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting (pp. 1219–1223). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
5.
AndersonJ. R. (2007). How can the human mind exist in the physical universe?New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
6.
AndersonJ. R.LebiereC. (1998). The atomic components of thought. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
AndersonJ. R.BothellD.ByrneM. D.DouglassS.LebiereC.QinY. (2004). An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review, 111, 1036–1060.
8.
ArcherS.GosakanM.ShorterP.LockettJ. F.III. (2005). New capabilities of the army’s maintenance manpower modeling tool. Journal of the International Test and Evaluation Association, 26, 19–26.
9.
BadlerN. I.PhillipsC. B.WebberB. L. (1993). Simulating humans: Computer graphics, animation, and control. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
10.
BainesT. S.AschR.HadfieldL.MasonJ. P.FletcherS.KayJ. M. (2005). Towards a theoretical framework for human performance modelling within manufacturing systems design. Simulation Model Practices and Theory, 13, 486–504.
11.
BainesT. S.BenedettiO. (2007). Modeling of human performance within manufacturing systems design: From theoretical towards practical framework. Journal of Simulation, 1, 121–130.
12.
BallJ. T. (2004). A cognitively plausible model of language comprehension. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference on Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation (pp. 305–316). Red Hook, NY: Curran & Associates.
13.
BarcelliniA.BascettaL.RaymoM.RoccoP.ZanchettinA. M.RobertssonA. (2012). Integrating an anti-collision system based on laser time-of-flight sensor in an industrial robot controller. Robot Control, 10, 664–669.
14.
BaronS.KruserD.Messick HueyB. (Eds.). (1990). Quantitative modeling of human performance in complex, dynamic systems. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
15.
BertholdA.JamesonA. (1999). Interpreting symptoms of cognitive load in speech input. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on User Modeling (pp. 235–244). Secaucus, NJ: Springer-Verlag.
16.
BestB. J.LebiereC. (2006). Cognitive agents interacting in real and virtual worlds. In SunR. (Ed.), Cognition and multi-agent interaction: From cognitive modeling to social simulation (pp. 186–218). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
17.
BloechleW. K.SchunkD. (2003). Micro Saint Sharp simulation software. In Proceedings of the 35th Conference on Winter Simulation: Driving Innovation (pp. 182–187). New York, NY: ACM.
18.
BolesD. B.BurksJ. H.PhillipsJ. B.PerdelwitzJ. R. (2007). Predicting dual-task performance with the Multiple Resources Questionnaire (MRQ). Human Factors, 49, 32–45.
19.
BooherH. R. (2003). Handbook of human systems integration. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
20.
BooherH. R.MinningerJ. (2003). Human systems integration in army systems acquisition. In BooherH. R. (Ed.), Handbook of human systems integration (pp. 663–698). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
21.
ByrneM. D.AndersonJ. R. (1998). Perception and action. In AndersonJ. R.LebiéreC. (Eds.), Atomic components of thought (pp. pp. 167–200). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22.
CardS.MoranT. P.NewellA. (1983). The psychology of human computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23.
CassimatisN. L. (2002). Polyscheme: A cognitive architecture for integrating multiple representation and inference schemes (Doctoral dissertation). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
24.
CassimatisN. L. (2006). A cognitive substrate for achieving human-level intelligence. AI Magazine, 27(2), 45–56.
25.
ChenJ. Y. C.BarnesM. J.Harper-SciariniM. (2011). Supervisory control of multiple robots: Human-performance issues and user-interface design. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics–Part C, 41, 435–454.
26.
ConnK.LiuC.SarkarN.StoneW.WarrenZ. (2008). Towards affect-sensitive assistive intervention technologies for children with autism. In OrJ. (Ed.), Affective computing: Focus on emotion expression, synthesis and recognition (pp. 365–390). Vienna, Austria: ARs/I-Tech Education and Publishing.
27.
CoradeschiS.KristofferssonA.LoutfiA.von RumpS.CestaA.CortellessaG.GonzalezJ. (2011). Towards a methodology for longitudinal evaluation of social robotic telepresence for elderly. In Proceedings of the first HRI Workshop on Social Robotic Telepresence at the 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (pp. 1–7). New York, NY: ACM.
28.
CrandallJ. W.CummingsM. L. (2007). Identifying predictive metrics for supervisory control of multiple robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 23, 942–951.
29.
CrandallJ. W.CummingsM. L.NehmeC. E. (2009). A predictive model for human-unmanned vehicle systems. AIAA Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information, and Communication, 6, 585–603.
30.
CrandallJ. W.CummingsM. L.PennaM. D.De JongP. M. A. (2011). Computing the effects of operator attention allocation in human control of multiple robots. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics–Part A, 41, 385–397
31.
CrandallJ. W.GoodrichM. A.OlsenD. R.NielsenC. W. (2005). Validating human–robot interaction schemes in multi-tasking environments. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics–Part A, 35, 438–449.
32.
CrandallJ. W.NielsenC. W.GoodrichM. A. (2003). Towards predicting robot team performance. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (pp. 906–911). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Computer Society.
33.
DahnD.BelyavinA. (1997). The Integrated Performance Modeling Environment: A tool for simulating human–system performance. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting (pp. 1037–1041). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
34.
DahnD.LaugheryK. R. (1997) The Integrated Performance Modeling Environment: Simulating human–system performance. In Proceedings of the 1997 Winter Simulation Conference (pp. 1141–1145). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Computer Society.
35.
DeutschS. (2006). UAV operator human performance models (AFRL Tech. Rep. AFRL-HE-WP-TR-2006-0158). Human Effectiveness Directorate, Warfighter Interface Division, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH.
36.
DeutschS.CramerN.KeithG.FreemanB. (1999). The Distributed Operator Model Architecture (AFRL Tech. Rep. AFRL-HE-WP-TR-1999-0023). Human Effectiveness Directorate, Warfighter Interface Division, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH.
37.
DuricZ.GrayW. D.HeishmanR.LiF.RosenfeldA.SchoellesM. J.. . . WechslerH. (2002). Integrating perceptual and cognitive modeling for adaptive and intelligent human–computer interaction. Proceedings of the IEEE, 90, 1272–1289.
38.
ElaraM. R.CalderonC. A. A.ZhouC.WijesomaW. S. (2010). On the redefinition of fan out metric for human robot interactions with humanoid soccer robots. International Journal of Humanoid Robots, 7, 565–586.
39.
EndsleyM. R.GarlandD. J. (Eds.). (2000). Situation awareness analysis and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
40.
EndsleyM. R.KaberD. B. (1999). Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Ergonomics, 42, 462–492.
41.
Feil-SeiferD.MataricM. (2011). Automated detection and classification of positive vs. negative robot interactions with children with autism using distance-based features. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (pp. 323–330). New York, NY: ACM.
42.
Fowles-WinklerA. M. (2003). Modelling with the Integrated Performance Modelling Environment (IPME). In VerbraeckA.HlupicV. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th European Simulation Symposium (pp. 26–29). Erlangen, Germany: SCS Publishing House.
43.
FoyleD. C.HooeyB.L. (2008). Human performance modeling in aviation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC/Taylor & Francis.
44.
GawronV. J. (2008). Human performance, workload, and situational awareness measures handbook. London, UK: CRC Press.
45.
GertmanD.BlackmanH.MarbleJ.ByersJ.SmithC. (2005). The SPAR-H human reliability analysis method (Idaho National Laboratory Report INL/EXT-05-00509. NUREG/CR-6883). Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
46.
GielniakM. J.ThomazA. L. (2012). Enhancing interaction through exaggerated motion synthesis. In Proceedings of the Seventh Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (pp. 375–382). New York, NY: ACM.
47.
GluckK. A.BallJ. T.GunzelmannG.KrusmarkM. A.LyonD. R.CookeN. J. (2005). A prospective look at a synthetic teammate for UAV applications. In Proceedings of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Infotech@Aerospace Conference (pp. 1–13). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
48.
GoodrichM. A.BoerE. R. (2003). Model-based human-centered task automation: A case study in ACC design. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics–Part A: Systems and Humans, 33, 325–336.
49.
GoreB. F.JarvisP. A. (2005). New integrated modeling capabilities: MIDAS‚ recent behavioral enhancements (SAE Paper #2005-01-2701). Warrendale, PA: SAE.
50.
HaddadinS.Albu-SchäfferA.HirzingerG. (2007a). Safe physical human–robot interaction: Measurements, analysis and new insight. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Robotics Research (439–450). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
51.
HaddadinS.Albu-SchäfferA.HirzingerG. (2007b). Safety evaluation of physical human–robot interaction via crash-testing. In Proceedings of the Robotics: Science and Systems Conference (pp. 217–224). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
52.
HardinB.GoodrichM. A. (2009). On using mixed-initiative control: A perspective for managing large-scale robotic teams. In Proceedings of ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (pp. 165–172). New York, NY: ACM.
53.
HarriottC. E.ZhangT.AdamsJ. A. (2011a). Evaluating the applicability of current models of workload to peer-based human–robot teams. In Proceedings of the Sixth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (pp. 45–52). New York, NY: ACM.
54.
HarriottC. E.ZhangT.AdamsJ. A. (2011b). Predicting and validating workload in human–robot teams. In Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation (pp. 162–169). Red Hook, NY: Curran & Associates.
55.
HartS.StavelandL. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In HancockP.MeshkatiN. (Eds.), Human mental workload (pp. 139–183). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North Holland Press.
56.
HowardA. M. (2007). A systematic approach to predict performance of human–automation systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics–Part C, 37, 594–601.
57.
HumphreyC. M.AdamsJ. A. (2010). General visualization abstraction algorithm for directable interfaces: Component performance and learning effects. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics–Part A: Humans and Systems, 40, 1156–1167.
58.
HunnB. P.HeuckerothO. H. (2006). A Shadow unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) Improved Performance Research Integration Tool (IMPRINT) model to support future combat systems (Army Research Laboratory Tech. Rep. ARL-TR-3731). Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: Army Research Laboratory.
59.
JohnB. E.NewellA. (1989). Cumulating the science of HCI: From s-R compatibility to transcription typing. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 109–114). New York, NY: ACM.
60.
JungY.ChoiY.ParkH.ShinW.MyaengS. (2007). Integrating robot task scripts with a cognitive architecture for cognitive human–robot interactions. In IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (pp. 152–157). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Computer Society.
61.
KaberD. B.WangX.KimS-H. (2006). Computational cognitive modeling of operator behavior in telerover navigation. In Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (pp. 3210–3215). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Computer Society.
62.
KierasD. E.MeyerD. E. (1997). An overview of the EPIC architecture for cognition and performance with application to human-computer interaction. Human–Computer Interaction, 12, 391–438.
63.
KierasD. E.WoodS. D.AbotelK.HornofA. (1995). GLEAN: A computer-based tool for rapid GOMS model usability evaluation of user interface designs. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface and Software Technology (pp. 91–100). New York, NY: ACM.
64.
KontogiannisT. (2005). Integration of task networks and cognitive user models using colored Petri nets and its application to job design for safety and productivity. Cognition, Technology and Work, 7, 241–261.
65.
LairdJ. E. (2012). The Soar cognitive architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
66.
LairdJ. E.NewellA.RosenbloomP. S. (1987). SOAR: An architecture for general intelligence. Artificial Intelligence, 33(1), 1–64.
67.
LeeM. K.ForlizziJ.KieslerS.RybskiP.AntanitisJ.SavetsilaS. (2012). Personalization in HRI: A longitudinal field experiment. Proceedings of the Seventh Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (pp. 319–326). New York, NY: ACM.
68.
LehmanJ. F.LairdJ. E.RosenbloomP. (1998). A gentle introduction to Soar: An architecture for human cognition. In OshersonD. N.ScarboroughD.SternbergS. (Eds.), An invitation to cognitive science (Vol. 4, 2nd ed., pp. 212–251). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
69.
LiuC.AgrawalP.SarkarN.ChenS. (2009). Dynamic difficulty adjustment in computer games through real-time anxiety-based affective feedback. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 25, 506–529.
70.
LiuC.RaniP.SarkarN. (2006). Human–robot interaction using affective cues. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Robots and Human Interactive Communications (pp. 285–290). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Computer Society.
71.
LivelyS.PisoniD.Van SummersW.BernackiR. (1993). Effects of cognitive workload on speech production: Acoustic analysis and perceptual consequences. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 93, 2962–2973.
72.
ManusovV. (Ed.). (2005). The sourcebook of nonverbal measures: Going beyond words. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
73.
MazzeiD.LazzeriN.BilleciL.IgliozziR.ManciniA.AhluwaliaA.. . . De RossiD. (2011). Development and evaluation of a social robot platform for therapy in autism. Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 4515-4518.
74.
MichaudF.BoissyP.LabonteD.BriereS.PerreaultK.CorriveauH.. . . LetourneauD. (2010). Exploratory design and evaluation of a homecare teleassistive mobile robotic system. Mechatronics, 20, 751–766.
75.
MicireM.DesaiM.DruryJ. L.McCannE.NortonA.TsuiK. M.YancoH. A. (2011). Design and validation of two-handed multi-touch tabletop controllers for robot teleoperation. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (pp. 145–154). New York, NY: ACM.
76.
MurphyR.SteimleE.GriffinE.CullinsC.HallM.PrattK. (2008). Cooperative use of unmanned sea surface and micro aerial vehicle at Hurricane Wilma. Journal of Field Robotics, 25, 164–180.
77.
MutluB.ShiwaT.KandaT.IshiguroH.HagitaN. (2009). Footing in human–robot conversations: How robots might shape participant roles using gaze cues. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 61–68). New York, NY: ACM.
78.
OlsenD. R.Jr.GoodrichM. A. (2003). Metrics for evaluating human–robot interactions. In Proceedings of PerMIS 2003 (NIST Special Publication 1014, pp. 4–11). Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
79.
OlsenD. R.Jr.WoodS. B. (2004). Fan-out: Measuring human control of multiple robots. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 231–238). New York, NY: ACM.
80.
ParasuramanR.BarnesM.CosenzoK. (2007). Adaptive automation for human–robot teaming in future command and control systems. International C2 Journal, 1(2), 43–68.
81.
ParasuramanR.WickensC. D.SheridanT. (2000). A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 30, 286–297.
82.
PelechanoN.O’BrienK.SilvermanB. G.BadlerN. (2005). Crowd simulation incorporating agent psychological models, roles and communication. In Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Crowd Simulation (pp. 21–30). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.
83.
PetkosekM. A.WarfieldL.CarrettaT. R. (2005). Development of a human performance model of a UAV sensor operator: Lessons learned (AFRL Tech. Rep. ARFL-HE-WP-TR-2005-0118). Human Effectiveness Directorate, Warfighter Interface Division, Wright-Patterson AFB OH.
84.
PewR. W.MavorA. S. (Eds.). (1998). Modeling human and organizational behavior: Applications to military simulations. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
85.
PewR. W.MavorA. S. (Eds.). (2007). Human–system integration in the system development process: A new look. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11893
86.
PohM.-Z.KimK.GoesslingA.SwensonN.PicardR. (2011). Cardiovascular monitoring using earphones and a mobile device. Pervasive Computing, 11(4), 18–26.
87.
PohM.-Z.McDuffD. J.PicardR. W. (2011). Advancements in noncontact, multiparameter physiological measurements using a webcam. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 58, 7–11.
88.
RaniP.SarkarN.AdamsJ. A. (2007). Anxiety-based affective communication for implicit human–machine interaction. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 21, 323–334.
89.
RaniP.SarkarN.SmithC. A.KirbyL. D. (2004). Anxiety detecting robotic system: Towards implicit human–robot collaboration. Robotica, 22, 85–95.
90.
ReitterD.LebiereC. (2010). A cognitive model of spatial path-planning. Computational and Mathematical Organization Science, 16, 220–245.
91.
RitterF. E.KukrejaU.St. AmantR. (2007). Including a model of visual processing with a cognitive architecture to model a simple teleoperation task. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 1, 121–147.
92.
RitterF. E.Van RooyD.St. AmantR.SimpsonK. (2006). Providing user models direct access to interfaces: An exploratory study of a simple interface with implications for HRI and HCI. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics–Part A, 36, 592–601.
93.
RobinsB.DautenhahnK.FerrariE.KronreifG.Prazak-AramB.MartiP.. . . LaudannaE. (2012). Scenarios of robot-assisted play for children with cognitive and physical disabilities. Interaction Studies, 13, 189–234.
94.
RobinsonS. (2004). Simulation: The practice of model development and use. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
95.
RoscoeA. H. (1992). Assessing pilot workload: Why measure heart rate, HRV and respiration?Biological Psychology, 34, 259–287.
SalvucciD. D. (2006). Modeling driver behavior in a cognitive architecture. Human Factors, 48, 362–380.
98.
ScholtzJ. (2003). Theory and evaluation of human robot interactions. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’03) (pp. 125–134). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Computer Society.
99.
SchreiberB. T.LyonD. R.MartinE. L.ConferH. A. (2002). Impact of prior flight experience on learning Predator UAV operator skills (AFRL-HE-AZ-TR-2002-0026). Mesa, AZ: Air Force Research Laboratory, Warfighter Training Research Division.
100.
SilvermanB. G. (2004). Toward realism in human performance simulation. In NessJ. W.RitzerD. R.TepeV. (Eds.), The science and simulation of human performance (pp. 469–498). New York, NY: Elsevier.
101.
SilvermanB. G.JohnsM.ShinH.WeaverR. (2002). Performance moderator functions for human behavior modeling in military simulations. Report prepared for Human Behavior Program Defense Modeling and Simulation Office, Alexandria, VA.
102.
SinghP. (2005). EM-ONE: An architecture for reflective commonsense thinking (Doctoral dissertation). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
103.
St. AmantR.HortonT. E.RitterF. E. (2004). Model-based evaluation of expert cell phone menu interaction. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 343–350). New York, NY: ACM.
104.
SteeleB. G.HoltL.BelzaB.FerrisS.LakshminaryanS. (2000). Quantitating physical activity in COPD using a triaxial accelerometer. Chest, 117, 1359–1367.
105.
SteinfeldA.FongT.KaberD.LewisM.ScholtzJ.SchultzA.GoodrichM. (2006). Common metrics for human–robot interaction. In Proceedings of the First Annual SIGCHI/SIGART Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (pp. 33–40). New York, NY: ACM.
106.
TraftonJ. G.BugajskaM. D.FransenB. R.RatwaniR. M. (2008). Integrating vision and audition within a cognitive architecture to track conversations. In Proceedings of the Third ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (pp. 201–208). New York, NY: ACM.
107.
TraftonJ. G.CassimatisN. L.BugajskaM. D.BrockD. P.MintzF. E.SchultzA. C. (2005). Enabling effective human–robot interaction using perspective-taking in robots. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics–Part A, 35, 460–470.
108.
TylerS.NeukomC.LoganM.ShivelyJ. (1998). The MIDAS human performance model. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting (pp. 320–325). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
109.
U.S. Army Research Laboratory. (2009). Improved Performance Research Integration Tool Pro (IMPRINT Pro) user’s guide, Version 3.0 (Vol. 1–3). Adelphi, MD: U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Human Research and Engineering Directorate. Retrieved from http://www.arl.army.mil/www/pages/446/IMPRINTPro_vol1.pdf
110.
van LentM.McAlindenR.ProbstP.SilvermanB. G.O’BrienK.CornwellJ. (2004). Enhancing the behavioral fidelity of synthetic entities with human behavior models. In Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation (pp. 248–256). Redhook, NY: Curran & Associates.
111.
VicenteK. J.ThorntonD. C.MorayN. (1987). Spectral analysis of sinus arrhythmia: A measure of mental effort. Human Factors, 29, 171–182.
112.
WickensC. D.LeeJ. D.LiuY.Gordon BeckerS. (2003). Introduction to human factors engineering. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
WrayR. E.JonesR. M. (2005). An introduction to Soar as an agent architecture. In SunR. (Ed.), Cognition and multi-agent interaction: From cognitive modeling to social simulation (pp. 53–78). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
115.
ZacharyW.RyderJ.StokesJ.GlennF.Le MentecJ.-C.SantarelliT. (2005). A COGNET/IGEN cognitive model that mimics human performance and learning in a simulated work environment. In GluckK. A.PewR. W. (Eds.), Modeling human behavior with integrated cognitive architectures (pp. 113–176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
