Participants completed a complex team exercise designed to mimic military planning operations. Each member of the three-person team was eye-tracked as they completed the group task. Members of successful teams had more fixations, were less reliant on external memory aids (push-pins), and created plans that were longer. Additionally, team members in key roles were more likely to experience decisional conflict and to have less confidence in their performance. Further examination of this finding showed that those who experienced greater decisional conflict also had fewer fixations. Low level eye movements may indicate high level team cognition.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BerntsonG.G.CacioppoJ.T. (2002). Psychophysiology. In D'haenenH.Den BoerJ.A.WillnerP. (Eds.) Biological Psychiatry. Belgium, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
2.
CacciabueP.C.HollnagelE.Simulation of Cognition: Applications. Expertise and Technology: Cognition and Human-Computer Cooperation, HocJ.M.CacciabueP.C.HollnagelE., eds., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1995, pp. 55–73.
3.
CacioppoJ. T.BernstonG. G.SheridanJ. F.McClintockM. K. (2000). Multilevel integrative analyses of human behavior: Social neuroscience and the complementing nature of social and biological approaches. Psychological Bulletin, 6, 829–843.
4.
CookeN.J.SalasE.KiekelP.A.BellB. (2004). Advances in measuring team cognition. In SalasE.FioreS. M. (Eds.), Team Cognition. Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp 83–106). Washington D.C., APA.
5.
FioreS. M.SchoolerJ. W. (2004). Process mapping and shared cognition: Teamwork and the development of shared problem models. In SalasE.FioreS. M. (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 133–152). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
6.
JacobR.J.K.KarnK.S. (2003). Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: Ready to deliver the promises (Section Commentary), In HyonaJ.RadachR.DeubelH., (Eds.) The Mind's Eyes: Cognitive and Applied Aspects of Eye Movements, Oxford, Elsevier Science.
7.
KendallD.L.SalasE. (2004). Measuring team performance: Review of current methods and consideration of future needs. In SalasE.FioreS. M. (Eds.), Team Cognition. Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp 307–326). Washington D.C., APA.
LetskyM.WarnerN.FioreS.M.RosenM.A.SalasE. (2007). Macrocognition in complex team problem solving. Proceedings of the 12 International Command And Control Research and Technology Symposium (12th ICCRTA), Newport, RI, June 2007. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Defense Command and Control Research Program.
10.
PooleA.BallL.J. (2006). Eye tracking in HCI and usability research. In GhaouiC. (Ed.): Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction. Pennsylvania: Idea Group, Inc.
11.
SalasE.BurkeC. S.FowlkesJ. E. (2006). Measuring team performance ‘in the wild’: Challenges and tips. In BennettW.LanceC.WoehrD. (Eds.), Performance Measurement: Current Perspectives and Future Challenges (245–272). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12.
SalasE.CookeN.RosenM.A. (2008). On teams, teamwork, and team performance: Discoveries and developments. Human Factors, 50(3), 540–547.
13.
SalasE.RosenM.A.BurkeC. S.NicholsonD.HowseW.R. (2007, May). Markers for enhancing team cognition in complex environments: The power of team performance diagnosis. Aviation, Space & Environmental Medicine, 78(5), B77–B85.
14.
SimsD.E.SalasE. (2007). When teams fail in organizations: What creates teamwork breakdowns?. In Langan-FoxJ.CooperC. L.KlimoskiR. J. (Eds.), Research companion to the dysfunctional workplace: management challenges and symptoms (pp 302–318). Northampton, MA, Edgar Elgar Publishing, Inc.
15.
WarnerN.LetskyM.CowenM. (2005). Cognitive model of team collaboration: Macrocognitive focus. Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Santa Monica, CA.
