ReviewHuman factors2024
From Teams to Teamness: Future Directions in the Science of Team Cognition.
Review in Human factors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.
- Team cognition in remote maritime operations: a scoping review and cross-domain theoretical synthesis.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Toward a science of human-AI teaming for decision making: A complementarity framework.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Beyond boundaries: a location-based toolkit for quantifying group dynamics in diverse contexts.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Article
- Bringing team science to the ambulatory diagnostic process: how do patients and clinicians develop shared mental models?Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 2025Review
- Helpful factors of group cognitive behavioral therapy in overweight and obese college students.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Unveiling the dynamics of team cognition in emergency response teams.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Collaborative Wayfinding: A Critical Review.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive scienceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe review the current state-of-the-art in team cognition research, but more importantly describe the limitations of existing theories, laboratory paradigms, and measures considering the increasing complexities of modern teams and the study of team cognition.
backgroundResearch on, and applications of, team cognition has led to theories, data, and measures over the last several decades.
methodThis article is based on research questions generated in a spring 2022 seminar on team cognition at Arizona State University led by the first author.
resultsFuture research directions are proposed for extending the conceptualization of teams and team cognition by examining dimensions of teamness; extending laboratory paradigms to attain more realistic teaming, including nonhuman teammates; and advancing measures of team cognition in a direction such that data can be collected unobtrusively, in real time, and automatically.
conclusionThe future of team cognition is one of the new discoveries, new research paradigms, and new measures. APPLICATION: Extending the concepts of teams and team cognition can also extend the potential applications of these concepts.
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.