psychology.iresearchnet.com

iResearchNet

Psychology » Psychology Articles » I-O Psychology Articles » Emerging Technologies and Trends in Human Factors Engineering Research

Emerging Technologies and Trends in Human Factors Engineering Research

Emerging technologies are fundamentally transforming Human Factors Engineering research through advanced methodologies, novel application domains, and innovative approaches to understanding human-system interactions. This article examines current technological developments that are reshaping Human Factors Engineering research paradigms, including artificial intelligence, virtual and augmented reality, neurophysiological measurement techniques, big data analytics, and Internet of Things applications. These technologies enable unprecedented precision in measuring human performance, creating realistic testing environments, and developing adaptive systems that respond to real-time user states and behaviors. Contemporary Human Factors Engineering research increasingly leverages machine learning algorithms for pattern recognition, predictive modeling, and automated system optimization based on human performance data. Neuroergonomics represents a rapidly expanding field that integrates neuroscience methodologies with traditional Human Factors Engineering approaches to understand cognitive processes underlying human-system interactions. The convergence of these technologies creates opportunities for developing more effective, personalized, and adaptive human-centered designs while also presenting challenges related to privacy, ethics, and technological complexity. Future directions in Human Factors Engineering research will likely focus on seamless human-AI collaboration, real-time physiological adaptation, and sustainable technology integration that enhances rather than replaces human capabilities.

Introduction

The landscape of Human Factors Engineering research is experiencing unprecedented transformation driven by rapid technological advancement and convergence across multiple scientific disciplines. Traditional Human Factors Engineering methodologies, while remaining foundational, are being enhanced and sometimes replaced by sophisticated technologies that enable more precise measurement, realistic simulation, and dynamic adaptation to human performance characteristics (Parasuraman & Wilson, 2008). These technological developments are not merely improving existing research methods but fundamentally changing how researchers conceptualize and study human-system interactions across diverse application domains.

Artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies represent perhaps the most significant paradigm shift in Human Factors Engineering research, enabling automated pattern recognition, predictive modeling, and adaptive system behaviors that were previously impossible to achieve. These technologies allow researchers to process vast amounts of human performance data, identify subtle patterns in behavior and cognition, and develop systems that can learn and adapt to individual user characteristics and preferences (Hancock et al., 2020). The integration of AI capabilities into Human Factors Engineering research tools is creating new possibilities for understanding complex human behaviors while also raising important questions about human agency, system transparency, and appropriate levels of automation.

The convergence of multiple emerging technologies creates synergistic effects that amplify their individual contributions to Human Factors Engineering research advancement. Virtual reality environments enhanced with artificial intelligence, combined with real-time physiological monitoring and big data analytics, enable comprehensive studies of human performance that consider multiple dimensions of human experience simultaneously (Rizzo & Koenig, 2017). This technological convergence is particularly evident in applications such as autonomous vehicle research, healthcare system design, and military training systems where complex human-technology interactions require sophisticated research approaches that can capture the full complexity of real-world performance scenarios.

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Applications

Adaptive Interface Design and Personalization

Machine learning algorithms are revolutionizing Human Factors Engineering research by enabling development of adaptive interfaces that automatically adjust to individual user characteristics, preferences, and performance patterns. These systems continuously monitor user behavior, task performance, and interaction patterns to optimize interface design elements such as layout, information presentation, and control mechanisms in real-time (Gajos & Weld, 2004). Adaptive interface research represents a fundamental shift from one-size-fits-all design approaches to personalized systems that can accommodate individual differences in cognitive style, expertise level, and task requirements without requiring explicit user configuration.

Recommender systems and intelligent agents are being integrated into Human Factors Engineering research to understand how users interact with AI-mediated information and decision support systems. These applications require new methodologies for evaluating user trust, system transparency, and appropriate reliance on automated recommendations across different task domains and user populations (Lee & See, 2004). Research in this area addresses critical questions about how to design AI systems that enhance rather than replace human decision-making capabilities while maintaining user understanding and control over system behavior.

Natural language processing and conversational AI technologies are creating new frontiers for Human Factors Engineering research in voice interface design, chatbot interactions, and human-computer dialogue systems. These applications require understanding of linguistic patterns, conversational pragmatics, and social interaction norms that influence user acceptance and effectiveness of AI-mediated communication (Clark et al., 2019). Contemporary research addresses challenges such as managing user expectations, handling system limitations gracefully, and designing conversational flows that feel natural while achieving functional objectives.

Predictive Modeling and Performance Analytics

Machine learning approaches enable sophisticated predictive modeling of human performance that can anticipate errors, fatigue, and performance decrements before they occur based on patterns in behavioral and physiological data. These predictive models incorporate multiple data streams including task performance metrics, physiological indicators, environmental factors, and historical performance patterns to generate real-time assessments of operator state and capability (Reardon et al., 2013). Such predictive capabilities enable proactive interventions and adaptive system responses that can prevent accidents, optimize task allocation, and maintain performance levels during extended operations.

Big data analytics applied to human performance data from diverse sources including wearable devices, interaction logs, and sensor networks enable identification of previously undetectable patterns in human behavior and system usage. These large-scale analyses can reveal population-level trends, individual differences, and contextual factors that influence human-system interaction effectiveness across different user groups and application domains (Chen & Zhang, 2014). The integration of multiple data sources enables more comprehensive understanding of human performance in naturalistic settings compared to traditional laboratory-based research approaches.

Automated feature extraction and pattern recognition capabilities allow researchers to identify subtle behavioral indicators and performance signatures that may not be apparent through traditional observational methods. Machine learning algorithms can detect complex relationships between multiple variables, identify non-linear patterns, and discover emergent behaviors that result from interactions between human, technological, and environmental factors (Wickens et al., 2015). These capabilities are particularly valuable for understanding complex sociotechnical systems where human behavior emerges from interactions between multiple system components.

Human-AI Collaboration Frameworks

Research on human-AI teaming focuses on understanding how humans and artificial intelligence systems can work together effectively while leveraging the unique strengths of both human and machine capabilities. This research addresses fundamental questions about task allocation, communication protocols, and shared mental models that enable effective collaboration between human and artificial team members (Rahwan et al., 2019). Contemporary studies examine trust calibration, transparency requirements, and appropriate levels of AI autonomy across different task domains and operational contexts.

Explainable AI research within Human Factors Engineering focuses on developing AI systems that can communicate their decision-making processes, reasoning patterns, and uncertainty levels in ways that humans can understand and appropriately calibrate their reliance on system recommendations. This research addresses the black box problem in AI systems by developing interface designs and explanation mechanisms that provide appropriate levels of system transparency without overwhelming users with unnecessary technical details (Gunning & Aha, 2019). Effective explainable AI requires understanding of human mental models, causal reasoning patterns, and information processing limitations that influence how people interpret and use automated explanations.

Research on AI system failures and error recovery examines how humans respond to AI errors, system limitations, and unexpected behaviors that may require human intervention or system override. This research is critical for developing robust human-AI systems that can maintain effectiveness despite imperfect AI performance and changing operational conditions (Parasuraman & Manzey, 2010). Studies in this area address questions about error detection, recovery strategies, and maintaining human situation awareness when supervising autonomous systems.

Virtual and Augmented Reality Technologies

Immersive Research Environments

Virtual reality technologies enable Human Factors Engineering researchers to create controlled, reproducible experimental environments that can simulate complex real-world scenarios while maintaining precise experimental control over variables that would be impossible to manipulate in actual operational settings. VR environments allow researchers to study human behavior in dangerous, expensive, or rare situations such as emergency responses, medical procedures, or industrial accidents without exposing participants to actual risks (Loomis et al., 1999). These capabilities enable more comprehensive research on human performance under extreme conditions while maintaining ethical research standards and participant safety.

Mixed reality environments that combine virtual and real elements enable research on hybrid human-technology interactions where users must simultaneously interact with physical and digital systems. These applications are particularly relevant for studying augmented reality interfaces, heads-up displays, and overlay information systems that are increasingly common in automotive, aviation, and industrial applications (Azuma et al., 2001). Research in mixed reality environments addresses questions about attention allocation, spatial cognition, and information integration across multiple reality layers.

Collaborative virtual environments enable research on team performance, distributed collaboration, and social interaction in digital spaces that simulate real-world teamwork scenarios. These environments allow researchers to study communication patterns, coordination mechanisms, and group dynamics while controlling factors such as team composition, task complexity, and environmental conditions (Benford et al., 2001). Such research is increasingly important for understanding virtual teams, remote collaboration, and distributed work arrangements that have become common in contemporary organizations.

Presence and Embodiment Research

Presence research examines psychological and physiological factors that contribute to users’ sense of being present in virtual environments, which directly impacts the validity and effectiveness of VR-based research and applications. Understanding presence mechanisms is crucial for Human Factors Engineering researchers who need to ensure that virtual environment studies produce results that generalize to real-world situations (Slater, 2009). Contemporary presence research investigates multimodal sensory integration, individual differences in presence susceptibility, and technological factors that enhance or diminish presence experiences.

Embodiment research in virtual environments examines how users experience ownership and control over virtual avatars or robotic systems that serve as extensions of their physical bodies. This research is particularly relevant for teleoperation systems, prosthetic devices, and virtual reality applications where users must perform tasks through mediated embodiment (Kilteni et al., 2012). Studies in this area address questions about sensorimotor adaptation, body schema modification, and the psychological effects of altered or extended embodiment on task performance and user well-being.

Haptic feedback integration in virtual environments enables research on tactile and kinesthetic aspects of human-system interaction that cannot be studied through visual interfaces alone. Advanced haptic technologies allow researchers to simulate texture, force, temperature, and other tactile properties that influence how users interact with virtual objects and environments (Hayward & Astley, 1996). This research is critical for applications such as surgical simulation, manufacturing training, and rehabilitation systems where tactile feedback is essential for effective task performance.

Training and Skill Acquisition Applications

Virtual reality training systems represent a major application area for Human Factors Engineering research that enables controlled study of skill acquisition, transfer of training, and performance improvement across diverse domains. VR training environments can provide immediate feedback, adaptive difficulty adjustment, and detailed performance measurement that would be difficult to achieve in traditional training settings (Salas et al., 2012). Research in this area addresses questions about training effectiveness, skill transfer, and optimal feedback mechanisms for different types of skills and learner characteristics.

Simulation-based research on expertise development examines how experts differ from novices in their interaction with complex systems and how expertise can be accelerated through targeted training interventions. Virtual environments enable researchers to present identical scenarios to different skill levels while measuring detailed performance metrics that reveal expertise-related differences in attention allocation, decision-making, and error recovery (Ericsson, 2008). This research contributes to understanding of skill acquisition processes and development of more effective training programs.

Assessment and evaluation methodologies for VR-based systems require new approaches to measuring learning outcomes, user experience, and system effectiveness that account for the unique characteristics of virtual environments. Traditional Human Factors Engineering evaluation methods may not adequately capture the complexity of user experience in immersive environments or the multidimensional nature of VR system effectiveness (Wilson & Soranzo, 2015). Contemporary research develops new measurement techniques and evaluation frameworks specifically designed for virtual and augmented reality applications.

Neuroergonomics and Physiological Monitoring

Brain-Computer Interfaces and Neural Feedback

Brain-computer interface technology enables direct measurement of neural activity during task performance, providing unprecedented insights into cognitive processes underlying human-system interactions. EEG, fNIRS, and other neuroimaging techniques allow Human Factors Engineering researchers to study attention allocation, mental workload, and cognitive strategy selection in real-time without interrupting task performance (Parasuraman & Rizzo, 2007). These capabilities enable development of brain-controlled interfaces and neurofeedback systems that can adapt to user cognitive states and optimize system performance based on neural indicators.

Passive brain-computer interfaces monitor neural activity to assess user states such as workload, attention, and fatigue without requiring active control from the user. These systems can provide continuous monitoring of operator capability and trigger adaptive responses when cognitive resources become overwhelmed or attention becomes misdirected (Zander & Kothe, 2011). Research in passive BCIs addresses challenges such as artifact removal, individual calibration, and real-time processing of neural signals in operational environments.

Neurofeedback applications in Human Factors Engineering examine how real-time feedback about brain activity can enhance learning, improve performance, and optimize cognitive resource allocation. These applications range from attention training systems to cognitive enhancement protocols that help users develop better cognitive control and mental resource management (Gruzelier, 2014). Research in this area addresses questions about optimal feedback modalities, training protocols, and individual differences in neurofeedback responsiveness.

Physiological State Monitoring

Wearable sensor technologies enable continuous monitoring of physiological indicators such as heart rate variability, galvanic skin response, eye movements, and muscle tension that reflect user states relevant to Human Factors Engineering applications. These technologies allow researchers to study human performance in naturalistic settings while collecting objective data about stress levels, cognitive load, and physical demands (Fairclough & Mulder, 2012). Integration of multiple physiological measures provides more comprehensive assessment of user state than single-measure approaches and enables detection of complex patterns that may not be apparent through behavioral observation alone.

Real-time physiological adaptation systems use continuous physiological monitoring to trigger automatic adjustments in system behavior, interface design, or task allocation based on user state indicators. These systems can reduce cognitive load when physiological measures indicate overload, increase task difficulty when measures suggest underutilization, or provide warnings when fatigue indicators exceed safe thresholds (Fairclough, 2009). Research in adaptive systems addresses challenges such as sensor reliability, individual calibration, and appropriate response strategies for different physiological patterns.

Stress and arousal measurement through physiological indicators enables more objective assessment of emotional and motivational factors that influence human-system interaction effectiveness. Traditional self-report measures of stress and emotion may be biased or insensitive to rapid changes in user state that occur during dynamic task performance (Backs et al., 2000). Physiological measures provide continuous, objective indicators of user state that can reveal patterns not captured through subjective measures or behavioral observation.

Cognitive Load Assessment

Mental workload measurement using neurophysiological indicators provides more direct assessment of cognitive demands than traditional performance-based measures that may be confounded by individual differences in capability or motivation. EEG-based workload measures such as theta/alpha ratios and P300 amplitude provide real-time indicators of cognitive resource allocation that can guide system design and task allocation decisions (Kramer et al., 1987). These measures enable optimization of system design to maintain appropriate levels of mental workload while avoiding overload or underload conditions.

Attention allocation measurement through eye tracking, EEG, and other neurophysiological techniques reveals how users distribute cognitive resources across multiple information sources and tasks. Understanding attention patterns is crucial for interface design, information display optimization, and development of attention management systems that can guide user focus when needed (Just & Carpenter, 1976). Contemporary research combines multiple measurement techniques to provide comprehensive assessment of attention allocation across different time scales and cognitive processes.

Individual differences in cognitive capacity and processing style can be assessed through neurophysiological measures that reveal stable patterns in brain activity related to working memory capacity, processing speed, and cognitive flexibility. These measures enable development of personalized systems that adapt to individual cognitive characteristics rather than assuming uniform capabilities across users (Gopher & Donchin, 1986). Research in this area addresses questions about how to measure individual differences reliably and how to use this information to optimize system design for diverse user populations.

Internet of Things and Ubiquitous Computing

Smart Environment Integration

Internet of Things technologies enable Human Factors Engineering research in smart environments where multiple connected devices can monitor human behavior, environmental conditions, and system performance to optimize overall system effectiveness. Smart home research examines how users interact with interconnected devices and how these systems can adapt to user preferences and behaviors without creating excessive complexity or privacy concerns (Cook et al., 2009). This research addresses challenges such as device interoperability, user control mechanisms, and appropriate levels of system automation in domestic environments.

Workplace IoT applications examine how connected sensors and devices can monitor work environments and employee activities to optimize productivity, safety, and well-being. These systems can track environmental factors such as lighting, temperature, and air quality alongside behavioral factors such as activity levels, social interactions, and task performance (Abowd & Mynatt, 2000). Research in this area addresses questions about privacy boundaries, data ownership, and appropriate uses of workplace monitoring technology while maintaining employee autonomy and dignity.

Healthcare IoT applications examine how connected medical devices, wearable monitors, and smart home technologies can support aging in place, chronic disease management, and preventive healthcare through continuous monitoring and early intervention systems. These applications require careful consideration of user acceptance, data security, and appropriate alert mechanisms that provide useful information without creating anxiety or false alarms (Patel et al., 2012). Research addresses challenges such as data integration across multiple devices, clinical decision support, and maintaining human agency in health management decisions.

Context-Aware Computing

Context-aware systems use sensor data and machine learning algorithms to infer user context, intentions, and needs, then automatically adapt system behavior to provide appropriate support without explicit user commands. Human Factors Engineering research in context-aware computing examines how systems can accurately infer context while avoiding inappropriate assumptions or intrusive monitoring (Dey, 2001). This research addresses challenges such as context recognition accuracy, user privacy protection, and graceful handling of context inference errors.

Location-based services and spatial computing applications examine how geographic information systems, GPS tracking, and augmented reality can provide location-relevant information and services while respecting user privacy and autonomy. These applications require understanding of spatial cognition, wayfinding behavior, and individual differences in spatial ability that influence how users interact with location-based systems (Montello, 2005). Research addresses questions about appropriate information presentation, privacy protection mechanisms, and accessibility for users with different spatial abilities.

Activity recognition systems use sensor data to identify and classify user activities, which can enable automatic system adaptation and activity-based computing applications. Human Factors Engineering research examines how activity recognition systems can be designed to respect user privacy while providing useful functionality, and how users understand and control these systems (Chen & Kotz, 2000). This research addresses challenges such as activity classification accuracy, user consent mechanisms, and appropriate responses to recognized activities.

Privacy and Ethical Considerations

Privacy protection in IoT environments requires new approaches to data collection, processing, and sharing that balance functionality benefits with user privacy rights and expectations. Human Factors Engineering research addresses how users understand privacy risks and make decisions about data sharing in complex IoT ecosystems where data flows may not be transparent or easily controlled (Crabtree et al., 2003). This research examines user mental models of data privacy, effective consent mechanisms, and interface designs that help users make informed privacy decisions.

Ethical considerations in ubiquitous computing research address questions about appropriate boundaries for system monitoring and intervention, user autonomy preservation, and fair treatment of different user groups who may have varying levels of technical sophistication or privacy concerns. These considerations are particularly important for vulnerable populations such as elderly users, children, or individuals with disabilities who may be more dependent on ubiquitous computing systems (Friedman et al., 2013). Research in this area develops frameworks for ethical design and evaluation of ubiquitous computing applications.

Data ownership and control mechanisms in IoT systems require clear policies and interface designs that enable users to understand what data is collected, how it is used, and how to exercise control over their personal information. Human Factors Engineering research examines how to design transparency and control mechanisms that are understandable and usable by diverse user populations without creating excessive complexity (Beckwith, 2003). This research addresses challenges such as data visualization, consent management, and user empowerment in complex data ecosystems.

Future Directions and Research Challenges

Sustainable Technology Integration

Sustainability considerations in Human Factors Engineering research address both environmental impact and long-term usability of technology systems that must function effectively over extended periods without creating negative consequences for users or society. Research on sustainable interaction design examines how to create technology systems that promote sustainable behaviors, reduce resource consumption, and maintain effectiveness over long time periods (DiSalvo et al., 2010). This research requires interdisciplinary collaboration between Human Factors Engineering, environmental science, and policy researchers to develop comprehensive approaches to sustainable technology design.

Circular economy principles applied to technology design require consideration of product lifecycle, repairability, and resource efficiency alongside traditional Human Factors Engineering concerns about usability and effectiveness. Research in this area examines how design decisions about modularity, upgradeability, and material selection influence both user experience and environmental impact over product lifecycles (Bakker et al., 2014). These considerations are becoming increasingly important as organizations and consumers seek technology solutions that balance performance with environmental responsibility.

Energy efficiency optimization in human-computer systems examines how interface design, interaction patterns, and system architecture decisions influence power consumption while maintaining acceptable user experience. This research is particularly important for mobile devices, IoT systems, and other battery-powered technologies where energy efficiency directly impacts usability and functionality (Rahmati & Zhong, 2009). Contemporary research addresses trade-offs between system performance, battery life, and user satisfaction across different usage patterns and contexts.

Interdisciplinary Collaboration Expansion

Cross-disciplinary research integration continues to expand as Human Factors Engineering researchers collaborate with experts from neuroscience, computer science, psychology, engineering, design, and other fields to address complex sociotechnical challenges that cannot be solved through single-discipline approaches. These collaborations require new methodologies, shared vocabularies, and integrated theoretical frameworks that can accommodate different disciplinary perspectives and research traditions (Vicente, 2006). Contemporary research develops new models for interdisciplinary collaboration that leverage diverse expertise while maintaining scientific rigor and practical relevance.

Industry-academic partnerships are becoming increasingly important for Human Factors Engineering research that must address real-world problems while advancing scientific understanding. These partnerships enable access to operational data, realistic testing environments, and implementation opportunities that are essential for validating research findings and ensuring practical impact (Helander, 2006). Research in this area addresses challenges such as balancing academic freedom with commercial interests, protecting intellectual property, and ensuring that research benefits both scientific advancement and practical problem-solving.

Global research collaboration facilitated by digital technologies enables Human Factors Engineering researchers to conduct cross-cultural studies, share resources, and address global challenges that require coordinated international research efforts. These collaborations require new approaches to research coordination, data sharing, and cultural adaptation that account for different regulatory environments, ethical frameworks, and research traditions across countries (Hollan et al., 2000). Contemporary research develops frameworks for international collaboration that promote both scientific advancement and equitable participation across different regions and institutions.

Ethical Framework Development

Responsible innovation frameworks for Human Factors Engineering research require systematic consideration of potential negative consequences, unintended uses, and societal impacts of research outcomes throughout the research process rather than only at the end. These frameworks require integration of ethical analysis with technical design and empirical evaluation to ensure that research contributes positively to human welfare and social justice (von Schomberg, 2013). Contemporary research develops practical tools and methodologies for implementing responsible innovation principles in Human Factors Engineering research and development.

Human agency preservation in increasingly automated systems requires research on how to design technology that enhances rather than replaces human capabilities while maintaining human control and decision-making authority. This research addresses fundamental questions about the appropriate balance between automation and human control across different application domains and user populations (Bradshaw et al., 2013). Future research must develop frameworks for preserving human agency while leveraging technological capabilities to enhance human performance and well-being.

Equity and inclusion considerations in Human Factors Engineering research require systematic attention to how research methods, participant selection, and design solutions may differentially impact different user groups based on factors such as age, disability status, cultural background, and socioeconomic status. This research develops more inclusive methodologies and design approaches that consider diverse user needs and capabilities rather than designing for assumed typical users (Newell et al., 2011). Contemporary research addresses both methodological improvements and policy changes needed to promote more equitable outcomes in Human Factors Engineering research and applications.

Conclusion

Emerging technologies are fundamentally transforming Human Factors Engineering research by enabling new methodologies, creating novel application domains, and facilitating more sophisticated understanding of human-system interactions across diverse contexts. Artificial intelligence and machine learning applications are revolutionizing how researchers collect and analyze human performance data while enabling development of adaptive systems that can respond to individual user characteristics and real-time performance states. Virtual and augmented reality technologies provide unprecedented capabilities for creating controlled experimental environments and studying human behavior in simulated scenarios that would be impossible or impractical to replicate in real-world settings.

Neuroergonomics and physiological monitoring technologies are providing direct access to cognitive and physiological processes underlying human-system interactions, enabling more objective and comprehensive assessment of user states and system effectiveness. Internet of Things and ubiquitous computing applications are expanding Human Factors Engineering research into everyday environments where technology is seamlessly integrated into daily activities and social interactions. These technological developments create both opportunities for enhanced research capabilities and challenges related to privacy, ethics, and responsible innovation that require careful consideration and systematic attention.

Future directions in Human Factors Engineering research will likely focus on sustainable technology integration that balances performance with environmental responsibility, interdisciplinary collaboration that leverages diverse expertise to address complex sociotechnical challenges, and ethical framework development that ensures research contributes positively to human welfare and social justice. The continued evolution of emerging technologies will require Human Factors Engineering researchers to remain adaptive, interdisciplinary, and ethically grounded while pursuing scientific advancement and practical solutions to complex human-technology interaction challenges.

References

  1. Abowd, G. D., & Mynatt, E. D. (2000). Charting past, present, and future research in ubiquitous computing. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7(1), 29-58.
  2. Azuma, R., Baillot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2001). Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 21(6), 34-47.
  3. Backs, R. W., Lenneman, J. K., Wetzel, J. M., & Green, P. (2000). Cardiac measures of driver workload during simulated driving with and without visual occlusion. Human Factors, 42(3), 454-468.
  4. Bakker, C., Wang, F., Huisman, J., & den Hollander, M. (2014). Products that go round: Exploring product life extension through design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 69, 10-16.
  5. Beckwith, R. (2003). Designing for ubiquity: The perception of privacy. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 2(2), 40-46.
  6. Benford, S., Greenhalgh, C., Reynard, G., Brown, C., & Koleva, B. (2001). Understanding and constructing shared spaces with mixed-reality boundaries. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 5(3), 185-223.
  7. Bradshaw, J. M., Hoffman, R. R., Woods, D. D., & Johnson, M. (2013). The seven deadly myths of “autonomous systems”. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 28(3), 54-61.
  8. Chen, G., & Kotz, D. (2000). A survey of context-aware mobile computing research. Technical Report TR2000-381, Dartmouth College Computer Science.
  9. Chen, M., & Zhang, D. (2014). A data mining framework for large-scale transportation systems. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 15(1), 83-96.
  10. Clark, L., Pantidi, N., Cooney, O., Doyle, P., Garaialde, D., Edwards, J., … & Cowan, B. R. (2019). What makes a good conversation? Challenges in designing truly conversational agents. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-12.
  11. Cook, D. J., Augusto, J. C., & Jakkula, V. R. (2009). Ambient intelligence: Technologies, applications, and opportunities. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 5(4), 277-298.
  12. Crabtree, A., Hemmings, T., Rodden, T., Cheverst, K., Clarke, K., Dewsbury, G., … & Rouncefield, M. (2003). Designing with care: Adapting cultural probes to inform design in sensitive settings. Proceedings of the 2003 Australasian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction, 4-13.
  13. Dey, A. K. (2001). Understanding and using context. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 5(1), 4-7.
  14. DiSalvo, C., Sengers, P., & Brynjarsdóttir, H. (2010). Mapping the landscape of sustainable HCI. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1975-1984.
  15. Ericsson, K. A. (2008). Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: A general overview. Academic Emergency Medicine, 15(11), 988-994.
  16. Fairclough, S. H. (2009). Fundamentals of physiological computing. Interacting with Computers, 21(1-2), 133-145.
  17. Fairclough, S. H., & Mulder, L. J. M. (2012). Psychophysiological processes of mental effort investment. In R. A. Wright & G. H. E. Gendolla (Eds.), How motivation affects cardiovascular response (pp. 61-76). Academic Press.
  18. Friedman, B., Hendry, D. G., & Borning, A. (2017). A survey of value sensitive design methods. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction, 11(2), 63-125.
  19. Gajos, K., & Weld, D. S. (2004). SUPPLE: Automatically generating user interfaces. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, 93-100.
  20. Gopher, D., & Donchin, E. (1986). Workload: An examination of the concept. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (pp. 41-1 to 41-49). Wiley.
  21. Gruzelier, J. H. (2014). EEG-neurofeedback for optimising performance. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 44, 124-141.
  22. Gunning, D., & Aha, D. W. (2019). DARPA’s explainable artificial intelligence program. AI Magazine, 40(2), 44-58.
  23. Hancock, P. A., Kessler, T. T., Kaplan, A. D., Brill, J. C., & Szalma, J. L. (2020). Evolving perspectives on technology, work, and human factors research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30(1), 30-36.
  24. Hayward, V., & Astley, O. R. (1996). Performance measures for haptic interfaces. Robotics Research, 7, 195-206.
  25. Helander, M. (2006). A guide to human factors and ergonomics. CRC Press.
  26. Hollan, J., Hutchins, E., & Kirsh, D. (2000). Distributed cognition: Toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7(2), 174-196.
  27. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1976). Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognitive Psychology, 8(4), 441-480.
  28. Kilteni, K., Groten, R., & Slater, M. (2012). The sense of embodiment in virtual reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 21(4), 373-387.
  29. Kramer, A. F., Wickens, C. D., & Donchin, E. (1987). Processing of stimulus properties: Evidence for dual-task integrality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13(3), 516-528.
  30. Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1), 50-80.
  31. Loomis, J. M., Blascovich, J. J., & Beall, A. C. (1999). Immersive virtual environment technology as a basic research tool in psychology. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(4), 557-564.
  32. Montello, D. R. (2005). Navigation. In P. Shah & A. Miyake (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking (pp. 257-294). Cambridge University Press.
  33. Newell, A. F., Gregor, P., Morgan, M., Pullin, G., & Macaulay, C. (2011). User-sensitive inclusive design. Universal Access in the Information Society, 10(3), 235-243.
  34. Parasuraman, R., & Manzey, D. H. (2010). Complacency and bias in human use of automation: An attentional integration. Human Factors, 52(3), 381-410.
  35. Parasuraman, R., & Rizzo, M. (2007). Neuroergonomics: The brain at work. Oxford University Press.
  36. Parasuraman, R., & Wilson, G. F. (2008). Putting the brain to work: Neuroergonomics past, present, and future. Human Factors, 50(3), 468-474.
  37. Patel, S., Park, H., Bonato, P., Chan, L., & Rodgers, M. (2012). A review of wearable sensors and systems with application in rehabilitation. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 9(1), 21.
  38. Rahmati, A., & Zhong, L. (2009). Human-battery interaction on mobile phones. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 5(5), 465-477.
  39. Rahwan, I., Cebrian, M., Obradovich, N., Bongard, J., Bonnefon, J. F., Breazeal,