ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Physiological Synchrony Predict Task Performance and Negative Emotional State during a Three-Member Collaborative Task.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpersonal Synchronization of Autonomic Physiology via Mere Visual Contact.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Article
- Validity of the Polar H10 for Continuous Measures of Heart Rate and Heart Rate Synchrony Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Physiological team dynamics explored: physiological synchrony in medical simulation training.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2025Article
- Interpersonal Physiological Synchrony During Dyadic Joint Action Is Increased by Task Novelty and Reduced by Social Anxiety.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
- Advancements in Sensors and Analyses for Emotion Sensing.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Robustness of Physiological Synchrony in Wearable Electrodermal Activity and Heart Rate as a Measure of Attentional Engagement to Movie Clips.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evaluation of team performance in naturalistic contexts has gained popularity during the last two decades. Among other human factors, physiological synchrony has been adopted to investigate team performance and emotional state when engaged in collaborative team tasks. A variety of methods have been reported to quantify physiological synchrony with a varying degree of correlation with the collaborative team task performance and emotional state, reflected in the inconclusive nature of findings. Little is known about the effect of the choice of synchrony calculation methods and the level of analysis on these findings. In this research work, we investigate the relationship between outcomes of different methods to quantify physiological synchrony, emotional state, and team performance of three-member teams performing a collaborative team task. The proposed research work employs dyadic-level linear (cross-correlation) and team-level non-linear (multidimensional recurrence quantification analysis) synchrony calculation measures to quantify task performance and the emotional state of the team. Our investigation indicates that the physiological synchrony estimated using multidimensional recurrence quantification analysis revealed a significant negative relationship between the subjectively reported frustration levels and overall task performance. However, no relationship was found between cross-correlation-based physiological synchrony and task performance. The proposed research highlights that the method of choice for physiological synchrony calculation has direct impact on the derived relationship of team task performance and emotional states.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.