Pith. sign in

Reference change · event page

Reference changes · DOI

Correction

Published notice on a work cited in the Pith corpus. Exact quotes below. No model judges whether any citation was load-bearing.

This page records that a citing paper's bibliography includes a work with a published notice. It is not a judgment on the citing paper.

Correction Crossref 31 open · 31 total · 0 disputed
DOI
10.1080/10447318.2024.2307670
Notice DOI
10.1080/10447318.2024.2327167
Event date
2024-03-06
Machine twin
JSON

01One-hop citing occurrences

Correction Open
Talking to a Know-It-All GPT or a Second-Guesser Claude? How Repair reveals unreliable Multi-Turn Behavior in LLMs

ref [110] · 2604.19245 · notice #6993 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

What. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction , author =. doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2443263 , abstract =

Parser render (TeX stripped for reading; raw above is the evidence)

What. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, author =. doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2443263, abstract =

Correction Open
From Prompts to Context: An Ontology-Driven Framework for Human-Generative AI Collaboration

ref [59] · 2605.29675 · notice #7013 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Young Woo Kim, S.H.Y. Min Chul Cha, Lee, S.C.: Not merely useful but also amusing: Impact of perceived usefulness and perceived enjoyment on the adop- tion of ai-powered coding assistant. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction0(0), 1–13 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2375701
Correction Open
"It Felt a Bit Eerie": Exploring Humanlike Interactions During Collaborative Writing with an Artificial Agent

ref [105] · 2605.24729 · notice #7015 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Jiyoun Seok, Brandon Hwansun Lee, Dongmi Kim, Sunyoung Bak, Saeyeong Kim, Sungtae Kim, and Somin Park. 2025. What Emotions and Personalities Determine Acceptance of Generative AI?: Focusing on the CASA Paradigm.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction41, 18 (Sept. 2025), 11436–11458. doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2443263
Correction Open
How Creatives Approach GenAI Image Generation: Tensions Between Structured Guidance, Self-Experimentation, and Creative Autonomy

ref [77] · 2605.10898 · notice #6995 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Jonas Oppenlaender, Rhema Linder, and Johanna Silvennoinen. 2025. Prompt- ing AI Art: An Investigation into the Creative Skill of Prompt Engineer- ing.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction0, 0 (2025), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2431761
Correction Open
How Creatives Approach GenAI Image Generation: Tensions Between Structured Guidance, Self-Experimentation, and Creative Autonomy

ref [46] · 2605.10898 · notice #6996 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Soomin Kim, Jinsu Eun, Changhoon Oh, and Joonhwan Lee. 2025. “Journey of Finding the Best Query”: Understanding the User Experience of AI Image Generation System.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction41, 2 (Jan. 2025), 951–969. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2307670
Correction Open
Adaptive Prompt Elicitation for Text-to-Image Generation

ref [41] · 2602.04713 · notice #6998 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Soomin Kim, Jinsu Eun, Changhoon Oh, and Joonhwan Lee. 2025. “Journey of Finding the Best Query”: Understanding the User Experience of AI Image Generation System. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 41, 2 (2025), 951–969. doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2307670
Correction Open
"If You're Very Clever, No One Knows You've Used It": The Social Dynamics of Developing Generative AI Literacy in the Workplace

ref [107] · 2602.01386 · notice #6999 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Auste Simkute, Lev Tankelevitch, Viktor Kewenig, Ava Elizabeth Scott, Abigail Sellen, and Sean Rintel. 2024. Ironies of Generative AI: Understanding and Mitigating Productivity Loss in Human-AI Interaction.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction(Oct. 2024), 1–22. doi:10.1080/10447318.2024. 2405782
Correction Open
Measuring Machine Companionship: Scale Development and Validation for AI Companions

ref [2] · 2511.00654 · notice #7003 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2375797 Seibt, J., Vestergaard, C., & Damholdt, M. F. (2020). Sociomorphing, not anthropomorphizing: Towards a typology of experienced sociality. Proceedings of Robophilosophy 2020. 335, pp. 51-67. IOS Press. Shank, D. B. (2025). Providing companionship. In The machine penalty (pp. 171- 191). Springer. Sherry, A., & Henson, R. K. (2005). Conducting and interpreting canonical correlation analysis in personality research: A user-friendly primer. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84(1), 37-48. Simondon, G. (1958/2017). On the mode of existence of technical objects. (C. Malaspina, & J. Rogove, Trans.) Univocal. Singles in America. (2025). The great relationship reset: What 5,000 singles taught us about connection. https://www.singlesinamerica.com/ Starke, C., Ventura, A., Bersch, C., Cha, M., de Vreese, C., Doebler, P., . . . Köbis, N. (2024). Risks and protective measures for synthetic relationships. Nature Human Behavior, 8, 1834-1836. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02005-4 Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93(2), 119-135. Suchman, L. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions
Correction Open
Same Scrutiny, More Time: Eye Tracking Insights into Reviewing LLM-Labelled Code

ref [43] · 2606.26505 · notice #7005 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Auste Simkute, Lev Tankelevitch, Viktor Kewenig, Ava Elizabeth Scott, Abi- gail Sellen, and Sean Rintel. 2025. Ironies of Generative AI: Understand- ing and Mitigating Productivity Loss in Human-AI Interaction.Inter- national Journal of Human–Computer Interaction41, 5 (2025), 2898–2919. arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2405782 doi:10.1080/10447318.2024. 2405782
Correction Open
Comparing Controller-Free Pointing Techniques Across Depth for 2D Selection in Augmented Reality

ref [20] · 2606.08441 · notice #7007 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Ajoy S. Fernandes, Murdison , T. Scott, , and Michael J. Proulx. 2025. Looking in Depth: Targeting by Eye and Controller Input for Multi-Depth Target Placement. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction41, 13 (July 2025). https: //doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2401657 Publisher: Taylor & Francis, pages = 7952–7967,

Parser render (TeX stripped for reading; raw above is the evidence)

Ajoy S. Fernandes, Murdison, T. Scott,, and Michael J. Proulx. 2025. Looking in Depth: Targeting by Eye and Controller Input for Multi-Depth Target Placement. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction41, 13 (July 2025). https: //doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2401657 Publisher: Taylor & Francis, pages = 7952–7967

Correction Open
From Prompts to Preferences: An Open-Source Platform for Generative AI-Enhanced Conjoint Analysis

ref [22] · 2606.12972 · notice #7008 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

J. Y eon, Y . Jung, Y . Baek, D. Lee, J. Shin, and W. Y . Chung, “User preferences on a generative AI user interface through a choice experiment,” International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction , vol. 41, no. 12, pp. 7626–7637, 2024, doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2400379

Parser render (TeX stripped for reading; raw above is the evidence)

J. Y eon, Y . Jung, Y . Baek, D. Lee, J. Shin, and W. Y . Chung, “User preferences on a generative AI user interface through a choice experiment,” International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 41, no. 12, pp. 7626–7637, 2024, doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2400379

Correction Open
From Prompts to Preferences: An Open-Source Platform for Generative AI-Enhanced Conjoint Analysis

ref [21] · 2606.12972 · notice #7009 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

M. Keil, L. V ervier, P . Brauner, and M. Ziefle, “Will you be watching me? A conjoint-based study on employee attitudes toward personal data usage in smart factories,”International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 41, no. 16, pp. 10024–10044, 2024, doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2430494
Correction Open
Personalized to Persuade: The Effects of Contextualization and Warmth on Trust and Reliance in Conversational AI

ref [58] · 2605.31275 · notice #7011 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Ruilin Xiao, Mert Yazan, and Frederik B. I. Situmeang. 2025. Rethinking Conver- sation Styles of Chatbots from the Customer Perspective: Relationships between Conversation Styles of Chatbots, Chatbot Acceptance, and Perceived Tie Strength and Perceived Risk.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction41, 2 (2025), 1343–1363. doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2314348
Correction Open
Typing Behavior in Human-LLM Interaction: Keystroke Dynamics Reveal Cognitive Effort During Prompting

ref [50] · 2606.28090 · notice #7012 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Auste Simkute, Lev Tankelevitch, Viktor Kewenig, Ava Elizabeth Scott, Abigail Sellen, and Sean Rintel and. 2025. Ironies of Generative AI: Understanding and Mitigating Productivity Loss in Human-AI Interaction.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction41, 5 (2025), 2898–2919. doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2405782
Correction Open
Beliefs and Misconceptions around Integrated Conversational AI

ref [23] · 2605.14849 · notice #7016 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Changhyun Lee and Kyungjin Cha and. 2024. Toward the Dynamic Relationship Between AI Transparency and Trust in AI: A Case Study on ChatGPT.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction0, 0 (2024), 1–18. arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2405266 doi:10.1080/ 10447318.2024.2405266
Correction Open
How Creatives Approach GenAI Image Generation: Tensions Between Structured Guidance, Self-Experimentation, and Creative Autonomy

ref [46] · 2605.10898 · notice #7017 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Soomin Kim, Jinsu Eun, Changhoon Oh, and Joonhwan Lee. 2025. “Journey of Finding the Best Query”: Understanding the User Experience of AI Image Generation System.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction41, 2 (Jan. 2025), 951–969. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2307670
Correction Open
How Creatives Approach GenAI Image Generation: Tensions Between Structured Guidance, Self-Experimentation, and Creative Autonomy

ref [77] · 2605.10898 · notice #7018 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Jonas Oppenlaender, Rhema Linder, and Johanna Silvennoinen. 2025. Prompt- ing AI Art: An Investigation into the Creative Skill of Prompt Engineer- ing.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction0, 0 (2025), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2431761
Correction Open
Vibe Visualizing: How Visualization Novices Try (and Fail) to Generate and Interpret Visualizations with Conversational AI

ref [55] · 2606.08914 · notice #7019 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

A. Simkute, L. Tankelevitch, V . Kewenig, A. E. Scott, A. Sellen, and S. Rintel. Ironies of generative AI: Understanding and mitigating productivity loss in human-AI interaction.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 41(5):2898–2919, 2025. doi: 10.1080/ 10447318.2024.2405782 9
Correction Open
GenAI in Software Engineering: The Role of Technology Acceptance Models

ref [19] · 2604.27642 · notice #6997 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Young Woo Kim, Min Chul Cha, Sol Hee Yoon, and Seul Chan Lee. 2025. Not Merely Useful but Also Amusing: Impact of Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Enjoyment on the Adoption of AI-Powered Coding Assistant.International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction41, 10 (May 2025), 6210–6222. doi:10. 1080/10447318.2024.2375701
Correction Open
AI Washing Inflates Expected Performance but Not Interaction Outcomes: An AI Placebo Study Using Fitts' Law

ref [39] · 2605.00582 · notice #6990 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

Sebastian A. C. Perrig, Nick von Felten, Beat Vollenwyder, and Klaus Opwis. 2025. Development and Psychometric Validation of a Positively Worded German Version of the System Usability Scale (SUS).International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction41, 16 (2025), 10399–10419. doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2434720
Correction Open
LLM Harms: A Taxonomy and Discussion

ref [148] · 2512.05929 · notice #7002 · dispute

Raw extraction · bibliography line

A. Simkute, L. Tankelevitch, V . Kewenig, A. E. Scott, A. Sellen, and S. Rintel, “Ironies of Generative AI: Understanding and mitigating productivity loss in human-AI interactions,” Int J Hum Comput Interact , vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 2898 –2919, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2405782

Parser render (TeX stripped for reading; raw above is the evidence)

A. Simkute, L. Tankelevitch, V . Kewenig, A. E. Scott, A. Sellen, and S. Rintel, “Ironies of Generative AI: Understanding and mitigating productivity loss in human-AI interactions,” Int J Hum Comput Interact, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 2898 –2919, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2405782

Status lifecycle on notices: open → disputed → (response attached on the notice page). Repaired counts matter as much as open counts. There is no “safe,” “invalid,” or “resolved” badge.