ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Unveiling the dynamics of team cognition in emergency response teams.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reassessment of aviation risk safety barriers using stochastic and lexical uncertainty.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Effective emergency response in various industries depends on the synergy between team coordination and cognitive abilities. Industries should prioritize investing in the development of team cognition to improve readiness and ensure swift, effective responses to emergencies and crises. This study aimed to identify and model factors influencing team cognition within Emergency Response Teams (ERTs). Methods: This cross-sectional study undertook two principal phases: qualitative research using meta-synthesis and quantitative research using Best Worst Method (BWM), Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM), and Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping (FCM). These methods were employed to assign weights to factors, establish their hierarchy, and determine cause-and-effect relationships among team cognition shaping factors (TCSFs). Results: Through a comprehensive evaluation of the articles, 13 dimensions were identified as the primary TCSFs influencing team cognition. The reliability of the extracted factors was validated using the Kappa indicator, with a value of 0.63 signifying an acceptable level of agreement. Using BWM analysis, "Team maturity (The team members' harmonization)" and "Inefficient 4Cs (communication, coordination, cooperation, and collaboration)" were identified as the most influential factors shaping team cognition, with weights of 0.132 and 0.112, respectively. ISM analysis revealed "Improper team training programs" as a critical independent factor influencing other dimensions. FCM modeling further emphasized the significance of "Failure in decision-making" and "Leadership behavior and performance" as pivotal contributors to team cognition, with "Team maturity" and "Inefficient 4Cs" achieving the highest centrality scores of 13.44 and 13.28, respectively. Conclusion: Stakeholders can enhance team performance and effectiveness in emergency situations by understanding the relative importance of various factors, their hierarchical relationships, and the causal links between them. This allows for informed decision-making and targeted interventions, such as training programs to improve team maturity and team communication.
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.