Understanding the impact of cognition on process and performance in teams is a dynamic research topic that requires continued development. In this paper, we posit that an underused and understudied element, external representations of cognition, could shed new light on how cognition influences team interaction and team outcomes. We present a framework meant to guide research in team cognition and to help the field begin to more systematically understand this construct and its implications for theory and practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AustinJ. R. (2003). Transactive Memory in Organizational Groups: the Effects of Content, Consensus, Specialization, and Accuracy on Group Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 866-878.
2.
BoineyL.Team Decision Making in Time-Sensitive Environments. In Proceedings of the 2005 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium. Department of Defense Command and Control Research Program: McLean, VA, June2005.
3.
CarleyK. M.RenY. (2001). Tradeoffs Between Performance and Adaptability for C3I Architectures. Proceeding of the 2001 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium. Annapolis, MD.
4.
CookeN.GormanJ.WinnerJ. (2007). Team cognition. Handbook of applied cognition (2nd ed.) (pp. 239-268). Hoboken, NJ US: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
5.
CoxR. (1999). Representation construction, externalized cognition, and individual differences. Learning and Instruction, 9, 343-363.
6.
DayM. (2004). Religion, Off-Line Cognition and the Extended Mind. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 4, 101-121.
7.
De DreuC. K.WeingartL. R. (2003). Task versus Relationship Conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 741-749.
8.
DeChurchL. A.Mesmer-MagnusJ. R. (2010) Measuring Shared Team Mental Models: A Meta-Analysis. Group Dynamics, 14, 1-14.
9.
DwyerN.SuthersD. (2006) Consistent practices in artifact-mediated collaboration. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 481-511.
10.
FioreS. M.RosenM. A.Smith-JentschK. A.SalasE.LetskyM.WarnerN. (2010a). Toward an Understanding of Macrocognition in Teams: Predicting Processes in Complex Collaborative Contexts. Human Factors, 52, 2, 203-224.
11.
FioreS. M.Smith-JentschK. A.SalasE.WarnerN.LetskyM. (2010b). Toward an Understanding of Macrocognition in Teams: Developing and Defining Complex Collaborative Processes and Products. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomic Science, 11, 4, 250-271.
12.
GlynnS. J.HenningR. A. (2002). Can Teams Outperform Individuals in a Simulated Dynamic Control Task?Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings, 6, 141-144.
13.
HutchinsE. (1999). Cognitive Artifacts. In MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14.
JarvenpaaS.LeidnerD. (1999). Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Organization Science, 11, 791-815.
15.
KatzenbachJ. R.SmithD. K. (1993). The Wisdom of Teams.
16.
LetskyM.WarnerN.FioreS.M.SmithC. (Eds.). (2008). Macrocognition in Teams: Theories and Methodologies. London: Ashgate Publishers.
17.
MarksM. A.MathieuJ. E.ZaccaroS. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26, 356-376.
18.
MathieuJ.MaynardM. T.Rapp.T.GilsonL. (2008). Team Effectiveness 1997-2007: A Review of Recent Advancements and a Glimpse Into the Future. Journal of Management, 34, 410-476.
19.
MohammedS.FerzandiL.HamiltonK. (2010). Metaphor no more: A 15-year review of the team mental model construct. Journal of Management, 36, 876-910.
20.
NormanD. A. (1988). The Psychology of Everyday Things.
21.
NormanD. A. (1993). Cognition in the head and in the world: An introduction to the special issue on situated action. Cognitive Science, 17, 1-6.
22.
ParkS.CatramboneR. (2004).. Represented and representing dimensions in relational information displays. Proceedings of the Eight International Conference on Information Visualisation.
23.
RauD. (2005). The Influence of Relationship Conflict and Trust on the Transactive Memory: Performance Relation in Top Management Teams. Small Group Research, 36, 746-771.
24.
ReiserB. J. (2002) Why scaffolding should sometimes make tasks more difficult for learners. Paper presented at the CSCL2002. Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, Boulder, CO.
25.
RosenM. A. (2010) Collaborative Problem Solving: The Role of Team Knowledge Building Processes and External Representation.
26.
St. JohnM.DisterB. (2009). Wireless Collaboration Technology to Support Distributed Teams. Cognitive Technology, 14, 1, 4-13.
27.
TindaleR. S.SheffeyS. (2002). Shared Information, Cognitive Load, and Group Memory. Group Processes Intergroup Relations, 5, 5-18.
28.
Van BruggenJ. M.KirschnerP. A.JochemsW. (2002) External representation of argumentation in CSCL and the management of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 12, 121-138.
29.
ZhangJ.NormanD. A. (1994). Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science, 18, 87-122.
30.
ZhangJ.PatelV. L. (2006). Distributed cognition, representation, and affordance. Pragmatics & Cognition, 14, 333-341.
31.
ZhangJ.WangH. (2005). The Effect of External Representations on Numeric Tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 817-838.
32.
ZhangJ. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21, 179-217.
33.
ZhangJ. (2000) External representations in complex information processing tasks. In KentA. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of library and information science (Vol. 68, pp. 164-180). New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
