Improving the Measurement of Team Performance: The TARGETs Methodology

Fowlkes, Jennifer; Lane, Norman E.; Salas, Eduardo; Franz, Thomas R.; Oser, Randall L.

doi:10.1207/s15327876mp0601_3

Cited by 128 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, during periods of high workload (such as those experienced by trauma teams), teams will often communicate and coordinate implicitly, which is impossible for a simulation-based system to detect. A human observer, on the other hand, will be more able to make inferences from observing the behaviors to diagnose teamwork issues using checklists or observation forms (e.g., TARGETS) (see Fowlkes et al, 1994). It is recommended that training programs utilize several (at least two) observers or evaluators, who can more readily diagnose performance and provide strategies for improving future performance (Brannick et al, 1995).…”

Section: Performance Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design, Delivery, and Evaluation of Training Systems

Salas

Wilson

Priest

et al. 2006

Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics

Self Cite

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Performance Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design, Delivery, and Evaluation of Training Systems

Salas

Wilson

Priest

et al. 2006

Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics

Self Cite

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, existing difficulties in modeling expert performance in these settings leads one to the conclusion made by Salas, Cannon-Bowers, and their colleagues-pertaining to the importance of event-driven assessment of performance (Fowlkes, Lane, Salas, Franz, & Oser, 1994;Salas et al, 1997a,b,c). It is absolutely critical to develop scenarios with careful attention to research and training goals, individual and team-level constructs of performance, with well-defined manipulations, articulation of expected effects, and interpretations of behavioral responses to trigger events.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer-Based Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Cognitive Approach to Team Training and Performance Research

Regian¹,

Elliott²

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGEForm Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) AFRL SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S)Air DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTESAir Force Research Laboratory Technical Monitor: Dr. J. Wesley Regian, (210) 536-6812; DSN 240-6812 ABSTRACTThis paper describes progress related to a program of research in computer-based team training. We describe an approach to development of computer-based team training systems based on principles of cognitive skill acquisition and a functional conceptualization of teamwork. We consider individualized training technology and theory regarding individual skill acquisition and apply this approach to teamwork functions and team decision processes. First, we review principles of computer-based individual training previously established and validated in our lab. We then describe a functional taxonomy of teamwork demands, based on core aspects of teamwork with emphasis on dimensions relevant to training issues. Finally, we relate these teamwork dimensions to a taxonomy of cognitive task demands.

show abstract

“…Our comparison showed that for a real time assessment at the group scale, covering technical and non-technical skills, only 3 tools satisfy all of these criteria: TARGETs (Fowlkes et al, 1994;, LOSA (ICAO, 2002;Thomas et al, 2004), TEAM (Cooper et al, 2010). However, their principal drawbacks are that they are effective especially for small groups (6 people maximum) in a small space.…”

Section: What Tools Can Be Used To Observe a Crisis Unit?mentioning

confidence: 98%