This paper provides a detailed explanation of the link between NeoCITIES, a crisis management simulation of emergency response teams, and team cognition. Descriptions of the NeoCITIES simulation structure, interface, and modifications are provided, along with its functionality in effectively studying team cognition. The paper focuses on three commonly examined constructs within the team cognition literature, namely, team situation awareness, team mental models, and information sharing.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BalakrishnanB.PfaffM.McNeeseM. D.AdibhatlaV. (2009). NeoCITIES geo-tools: Assessing impact of perceptual anchoring and spatially annotated chat on geo collaboration. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 53rd Annual meeting, 294–298.
2.
Cannon-BowersJ. A.SalasE. (2001). Reflections on shared cognition. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 195–202.
3.
CookeN. J.GormanJ. C.RoweL. J. (2009). An ecological perspective on team cognition. In SalasE.GoodwinG. F.BurkeC. S. (Eds.), Team effectiveness in complex organizations: Cross-disciplinary perspectives, (pp. 157–182) New York, NY: Psychology Press.
4.
DeChurchL. A.Mesmer-MagnusJ. (2010a). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 32–53.
5.
DeChurchL.A.Mesmer-MagnusJ.R. (2010b). Measuring shared team mental models: A meta-analysis. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, & Practice, 14, 1–14.
6.
EndsleyM. (1995a). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1), 32–64.
7.
EndsleyM. (1995b). Measurement of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1), 65–84.
8.
EnsleyM.PearceC. L. (2001). Shared cognition in top management teams: Implications for new venture performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 145–160.
9.
EllisA. P. J. (2006). System breakdown: The role of mental models and transactive memory in the relationship between stress and team performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 576–589.
10.
HamiltonK.MohammedS.MancusoV.HoultR.MinotraD.McNeeseM. (in progress). Investigating the effect of team situation awareness, team mental models, and information sharing on team performance.
11.
HeJ.ButlerJ. S.KingW. R. (2007). Team cognition: Development and evolution in software project teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24, 261–292.
12.
JonesR. E. T.McNeeseM. D.ConnorsE.S.JeffersonT.HallD. L. (2004). A distributed cognition simulation involving homeland security and defense: The development of NeoCITIES. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual meeting, 631–634.
13.
KozlowskiS. W. J.BellB. S. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. In BormanW. C.IlgenD. R.KlimoskiR. J. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: industrial and organizational psychology, Vol. 12 (pp. 333–375). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
14.
LetskyM.WarnerN. W. (2008). Macrocognition in teams. In LetskyM.WarnerN.FioreS. M.SmithC. (Eds.). Macrocognition in Teams: Theories and Methodologies, (pp. 1–14) London: Ashgate Publishers.
15.
MarksM. A.ZaccaroS. J.MathieuJ. E. (2000). Performance implications of leader briefings and team-interaction training for team adaptation to novel environments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 971–986.
16.
MathieuJ. E.HeffnerT. S.GoodwinG. F.SalasE.Cannon-BowersJ. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 273–283.
17.
MathieuJ. E.MarksM. A.ZaccaroS. J. (2001). Multi-team systems. In AndersonN.OnesD.SinangilH. K.ViswesvaranC. (Eds.), International Handbook of Work and Organizational Psychology (pp. 289–313).
18.
McNeeseM.BainsP.BrewerI.BrownC.ConnorsE.JeffersonT. (2005). The NeoCITIES simulation: Understanding the design and experimental methodology used to develop a team emergency management simulation. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 49th Annual meeting, 591–594.
19.
Mesmer-MagnusJ. R.DeChurchL. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535–546.
20.
MohammedS.DumvilleB. C. (2001). Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 89–106.
21.
MohammedS.FerzandiL.HamiltonK. (2010). Metaphor no more: A 15 year review of the team mental model construct. Journal of Management, 36, 876–910.
22.
SalasE.WildmanJ. L. (2009). Ten critical research questions: The need for new and deeper explorations. In SalasE.GoodwinG. F.BurkeC. S. (Eds.). Team effectiveness in complex organizations: Cross-disciplinary perspectives and approaches. The organizational frontiers series. (pp. 525–546). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
23.
SalmonP. M.StantonN. A.WalkerG. H.GreenD. (2006). Situation awareness measurement: A review of applicability for C4i environments. Applied Ergonomics, 37, 225–238.
24.
SarterN. B.WoodsD. D. (1991). Situation awareness: A critical but ill-defined phenomenon. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 1(1), 45–57.
25.
StewartD. D.StasserG. (1998). The sampling of critical, unshared information in decision-making groups: The role of an informed minority. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 95–113.
26.
WellensA.ErgenerD. (1988). The C.I.T.I.E.S. game: A computer-based situation assessment task for studying distributed decision making. Simulation & Gaming, 19, 304–327.
27.
WittenbaumG. M.HollingsheadA. B.BoteroI. C. (2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71, 286–310.
