Dynamic measures of team adaptation based in team cognition theory and the measurement of real-time team cognition are developed. The present study examines the validity and context-specificity of this measurement framework for simulation-based team training.
Background
Teams adapt by reorganizing their coordination behavior to overcome challenges in dynamic environments. Theoretically grounded objective metrics for measuring adaptive skill in teams are needed. We developed dynamic measures of team adaptation to help fill this gap.
Method
Communication data from critical care air transport team training were analyzed using moving window entropy and recurrence-based determinism metrics of communicative adaptation in response to training event perturbations involving stabilizing deteriorating patient status. The measures were validated across four simulation-based training scenarios using objective and subjective metrics of team performance.
Results
We validated performance prediction in all scenarios, demonstrating generalizability. Critically, teams reorganized significantly more during perturbation segments than routine segments, validating the measures as indices of team adaptation. We also observed context-specificity, wherein the relationships between reorganization and successful performance depended on the training scenario.
Conclusion
The communicative reorganization measures advanced in this paper present a valid method for assessing adaptive competencies in teams. These analytics generalize in terms of performance prediction across training scenarios, but they are also context-specific, wherein patterns of effective reorganization depend on the type of scenario.
Application
We discuss the practical deployment of the measurement framework in a Team Dynamics Measurement System for assessing team adaptation competencies in critical care air transport team training.
AmonM. J.VrzakovaH.D’MelloS. K. (2019). Beyond dyadic coordination: Multimodal behavioral irregularity in triads predicts facets of collaborative problem solving. Cognitive Science, 43(10), e12787. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12787
2.
AshbyW. R. (1956). An introduction to cybernetics. John Wiley & Sons.
3.
BrownD.CheneyM.RobinsonE.FrasierL.EarnestR.SalvatorA.AndresenM.ProctorM.WatersK.NelsonE.ParkerM.HareJ.PrittsT.StrilkaR. (2022). Relevance of mission experience and provider clinical currency and specialty on military critical care air transport team readiness: A study of simulation construct validity. Military Medicine, 188(1), 1376–1381.
4.
CarcassiG.AidalaC. A.BarbourJ. (2021). Variability as a better characterization of Shannon entropy. European Journal of Physics, 42(4), 1.
5.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.
CookeN. J.GormanJ. C.MeyersC. W.DuranJ. L. (2013). Interactive team cognition. Cognitive Science, 37(2), 255–285.
8.
DaleR.WarlaumontA. S.RichardsonD. C. (2011). Nominal cross recurrence as a generalized lag sequential analysis for behavioral streams. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 21(04), 1153–1161. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218127411028970
9.
DavisJ. H. (1973). Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review, 80(2), 97–125. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033951
10.
DeChurchL. A.Mesmer-MagnusJ. R. (2010). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 32–53. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017328
11.
GarrisonC. M.RitterF. E.BauchwitzB. R.NiehausJ.WeyhrauchP. W. (2021). A computer-based tutor to teach nursing trauma care that works as an adjunct to high-fidelity simulation. Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 39(2), 63–68.
12.
GibsonJ. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin.
13.
GoodwinG. F.BlacksmithN.CoatsM. R. (2018). The science of teams in the military: Contributions from over 60 years of research. American Psychologist, 73(1), 322–333.
14.
GoodwinK. A.GoodwinC. J. (2016). Research in psychology: Methods and design. Wiley.
15.
GormanJ. C.AmazeenP. G.CookeN. J. (2010). Team coordination dynamics. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 14(3), 265–289.
16.
GormanJ. C.DemirM.CookeN. J.GrimmD. A. (2019). Evaluating sociotechnical dynamics in a simulated remotely-piloted aircraft system: A layered dynamics approach. Ergonomics, 62(5), 629–643. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2018.1557750
17.
GormanJ. C.DunbarT. A.GrimmD.GipsonC. L. (2017). Understanding and modeling teams as dynamical systems. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(1), 1053. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01053
18.
GormanJ. C.GrimmD. A.StevensR. H.GallowayT.Willemsen-DunlapA. M.HalpinD. J. (2020). Measuring real-time team cognition during team training. Human Factors, 62(5), 825–860. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819852791
19.
GormanJ. C.HesslerE. E.AmazeenP. G.CookeN. J.ShopeS. M. (2012). Dynamical analysis in real time: Detecting perturbations to team communication. Ergonomics, 55(1), 825–839. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2012.679317
20.
GormanJ. C.WiltshireT. J. (2024). A typology for the application of team coordination dynamics across increasing levels of dynamic complexity. (At the Forefront of Human Factors & Ergonomics invited mini-review). Human Factors, 66(1), 5–16.
21.
GrimmD. A. P.GormanJ. C.CookeN. J.DemirM.McNeeseN. J. (2023). Dynamical measurement of team resilience. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 17(4), 351–382. https://doi.org/10.1177/15553434231199729
22.
GrimmD. A. P.GormanJ. C.RobinsonE.WinnerJ. (2022). Measuring adaptive team coordination in an enroute care training scenario. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society - Annual Meeting, 66(1), 50–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181322661074
23.
HackmanJ. R.MorrisC. G. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 8(1), 45–99.
24.
HamD.-H. (2021). Safety-II and resilience engineering in a nutshell: An introductory guide to their concepts and methods. Safety and Health at Work, 12(1), 10–19.
25.
HarrisonJ. L.GormanJ. C.ReitmanJ. G.D’MelloS. K. (2023). Toward the validation of a novel measure of individuals’ influence during team collaborations. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society - Annual Meeting, 67(1), 290–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/21695067231192643
26.
HoffmanR. R.HancockP. A. (2017). Measuring resilience. Human factors, 59(4), 564–581.
27.
IlgenD. R.HollenbeckJ. R.JohnsonM.JundtD. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56(1), 517–543.
28.
KozlowskiS. W. J. (1998). Training and developing adaptive teams: Theory, principles, and research. In Cannon-BowersJ. A.SalasE. (Eds.), Making decisions under stress: Implications for individual and team training (pp. 115–153). American Psychological Association.
29.
KozlowskiS. W. J.ChouG. T. (2018). Unpacking team process dynamics and emergent phenomena: Challenges, conceptual advances, and innovative methods. American Psychologist, 73(4), 576–592.
30.
KozlowskiS. W. J.KleinK. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent properties. In KleinK. L.KozlowskiS. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 3–90). Jossey-Bass.
31.
LaveJ.WengerE. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. University of Cambridge Press.
32.
LeiZ.WallerM. J.HagenJ.KaplanS. (2016). Team adaptiveness in dynamic contexts: Contextualizing the roles of interaction patterns and in-process planning. Group & Organization Management, 41(4), 491–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601115615246
33.
MarksM. A.MathieuJ. E.ZaccaroS. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 356–376.
34.
MohammedS.DunvilleB. C. (2001). Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across discipline boundaries. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.86
35.
PerezR.GrayW. D.MoxleyJ.MendoncaD.GormanJ. C. (2019). In vivo studies of solo and team performance. In Proceedings of the 41st annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 29–30).
36.
ReitmanJ. G.HarrisonJ. L.GormanJ. C.LieberR.D’MelloS. K. (2025). Communicative influence: A novel measure of team dynamics that integrates team cognition theory with collaborative problem solving assessment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 117(1), 134–151.
37.
RobinsonF. E.GrimmD.HorningD.GormanJ. C.WieseC.WinnerJ.FrenchD.EveridgeR. (2023). Integrating content-based analyses into an automated measure of closed-loop communication. In Military health system research symposium. Kissimmee, FL, United States.
38.
SalasE.DickinsonT. L.ConverseS. A.TannenbaumS. I. (1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training. In SwezeyR. W.SalasE. (Eds.), Teams: Their training and performance (pp. 3–29). Ablex.
39.
SchrodingerE. (1944). Order, disorder, and entropy. In JuarreroA.RubinoC. A. (Eds.), Emergence, complexity, an self-organization (pp. 199–204). Emergent Publications.
40.
Secretary of the Air Force. (2023). Air Force tactics, techniques, and procedures, Tactical doctrine, Critical Care Air Transport Team (CCATT). Department of the Air Force e-Publishing.
41.
SelyeH. (1950). Stress and the general adaptation syndrome. British Medical Journal, 1(4667), 1383.
42.
ShannonC.WeaverW. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press.
43.
SmithS. M.VelaE. (2001). Environmental context-dependent memory: A review and meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8(1), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196157
44.
StanovichK. E. (2018). How to think straight about psychology (11th ed.). Pearson.
45.
SteinerI. D. (1972). Group processes and productivity. Academic Press.
46.
StevensR.GallowayT.HalpinD.Willemsen-DunlapA. (2016). Healthcare teams neurodynamically reorganize when resolving uncertainty. Entropy, 18(12), 427. https://doi.org/10.3390/e18120427
47.
TolstonM. T.FunkeG. J.RileyM. A.MancusoV.FinomoreV. (2020). Using conceptual recurrence analysis to decompose team conversations. In McNeeseM.SalasE.EndsleyM. R. (Eds.), Contemporary research: Models, methodologies, and measures in distributed team cognition (pp. 235–256). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429459733-10
TurveyM. T.FitchH. L.TullerB. (1982). The Bernstein perspective I: The problems of degrees of freedom and context-conditioned variability. In KelsoJ. A. S. (Ed.), Understanding human motor control (pp. 239–252). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
50.
van den OeverF.SchraagenJ. M. (2021). Team communication patterns in critical situations. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 15(1), 28–51.
51.
WertschJ. V. (1990). A sociocultural approach to socially shared cognition. In ResnickL. B.LevineJ. M.TeasleyS. D. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 85–100). American Psychological Association.
52.
WiltshireT. J.SteffensenS. V.FioreS. M. (2019). Multiscale movement coordination dynamics in collaborative team problem solving. Applied Ergonomics, 79(1), 143–151.
53.
WinnerJ.KingJ.GormanJ. C.GrimmD. (2022). Team coordination dynamics measurement in enroute care training: Defining requirements and usability study. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care, 11(1), 21–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/2327857922111004
54.
WoodsD. D. (2015). Four concepts for resilience and the implications for the future of resilience engineering. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 141, 5–9.
55.
YinX.ClarkJ.JohnsonC.GrimmD.ZhouS.WongM.CauffmanD. , M.CookeN.GormanJ. (2022). Development of a distributed teaming scenario for future space operations. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 66th Annual Meeting, pp. 788–792.
56.
YinX.GrimmD. A. P.ZhouS.PisorsJ.TeoA. Z. T.LijenstolpeM.Zahmat DoostE.CookeN. J.GormanJ. C. (2025). Observing resilient performance in space-based teaming mission using digital technologies. Applied Ergonomics, 124(1), 2.
57.
ZsambokC. E.KleinG. (Eds.), (1997). Naturalistic decision making. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
