Investigating naturalistic decision making in a simulated microworld: What questions should we ask?

Elliott, Taryn; Welsh, Matt hew; lbeck, Ted Nette; Mills, Vanessa

doi:10.3758/bf03192985

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The NFC has demonstrated good reliability at 0.70 (Omodei et al, 2001). Performance scores on the NFC have shown significant correlation with the core perceptual-cognitive characteristics of naturalistic decision making; namely, speed, accuracy, efficiency and planning (ranging from r =0.75, p <.01 for proactive planning to r =0.36, p <.05 for the percentage of time the closest appliance was allocated first; Elliot, Welsh, Nettelbeck, & Mills, 2007). A performance score is produced by the program, which is calculated adding every safe cell (i.e., unburned).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting real-time adaptive performance in a dynamic decision-making context

Good¹

2014

Journal of Management & Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals in organizations must frequently enact a series of ongoing decisions in real-time dynamic contexts. Despite the increasing need for individuals to manage dynamic decision-making demands, we still understand little about individual differences impacting performance in these environments. This paper proposes a new construct applicable to adaptation in such real-time dynamic environments. Cognitive agility is a formative construct measuring the individual capacity to exhibit cognitive flexibility, cognitive openness and focused attention. This study predicts that cognitive agility will impact adaptive performance in a real-time dynamic decision-making microworld computer game called the Networked Fire Chief; a simulation developed to study and train Australian fire fighters. Cognitive agility, operationalized through three distinct methods (performance measures, self-reports and external-rater reports), explained unique variance beyond measures of general intelligence on the total score of adaptive performance in the microworld.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting real-time adaptive performance in a dynamic decision-making context

Good¹

2014

Journal of Management & Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Often microworlds have been used to study different aspects of teamwork, decision-making, and command and control (cf. Cooke & Gorman, 2013;Elliott et al, 2007;Fullagar & Egleston, 2008;Howie & Vicente, 1998;Sapateiro et al, 2010;Granlund et al, 2001;Johansson et al, 2003;Kylesten & Nählinder, 2011;Lindgren & Smith, 2006;Svenmarck, 1998;Gustavsson & Bäccman, 2006).…”

Section: Microworldsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Shared Strategic Understanding

Berggren¹

2016

Linköping Studies in Arts and Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cover illustration © Eric Palmquist/Bildupphovsrätt 2016 Tous pour un, un pour tous Les trois mousquetaires (1844) by Alexandre DumasPå ärans och hjältarnas språk:En för alla, och alla för en. AbstractThis thesis describes the development of an instrument for assessing shared understanding in teams. The purpose was to develop an instrument that would be usable, understandable, objective, flexible and self-explanatory. Teams working in naturalistic settings are expected to have a shared understanding of common goals and how to achieve these. The problem investigated in this thesis is that current techniques and instruments for assessing shared understanding in teams generally suffer from one or more of the following drawbacks, namely that they are expensive, difficult to use, time-consuming, requiring expertise, and are often based on subjective perceptions. Departing from existing theory in team cognition techniques and theories, the research questions posed in this thesis are: 1) How can shared understanding be measured without the disadvantages of existing methods? 2) How can shared understanding be assessed without the bias of self-ratings and/or assessments by experts/observers? 3) Can team performance be better understood by the outcomes of an instrument that measures shared understanding?These research questions are answered through six studies that are presented in this thesis. Over the six studies an instrument was iterated and subsequently developed, called the shared priorities instrument. When using this instrument, team members are instructed to generate items and rank these in order of importance. By comparing these rank orders from different participants, a team measure of shared understanding can be calculated. The advantages of this instrument compared to earlier measures are that it is less expensive, easier to use, less time-consuming, does not require subject matter expertise, and that the instrument is distanced from subjective perceptions.Furthermore, the final study provides results where outcomes from the shared priorities instrument correlate with performance, supporting earlier research connecting shared understanding in teams with team performance. A structural equation model, a result of the final study, shows that the instrument is both valid and reliable.

show abstract

“…In line with the focus on “real” situations, field studies are the major empirical methodology used by researchers in naturalistic decision making. The one exception we found is Elliott, Welsh, Nettelbeck, and Mills (2007) who explored how computers-based simulation experiments can be used following a naturalistic decision making approach.…”

Section: Theory: Stock-flow Failures and Responses To Claims From Natmentioning

confidence: 99%