Macrocognition

Klein, Gary; Ross, Karol G.; Moon, Brian; Klein, D.E.; Hoffman, Robert R.; Hollnagel, E.

doi:10.1109/mis.2003.1200735

Cited by 262 publications

(217 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

212

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the transferability of models of human cognition derived through laboratory experiments in a complex and dynamic setting is being questioned, as are the assumptions researchers make on human abilities and limitations as a result of them (Hoffman and Woods 2000;Klein et al 2003). Examples include studies that show how domain experts satisfy options rather than optimise them (Klein and Calderwood 1991;Zsambok and Klein 1997) and how people not only seek to confirm their hypothesis (commonly referred to as confirmation bias) but also seek to disconfirm their hypothesis (Pliske et al 2004).…”

Section: Sensemaking and The Re-framing Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies in sensemaking, macrocognition and cognitive systems engineering are further examples of research efforts in better understanding human-technology work systems in complex and dynamic settings. The study of sensemaking is a central function of macrocognition, that is, the study of how people make sense in a real-world setting (Hoffman and Mcneese 2009;Klein et al 2003;Malakis and Kontogiannis 2013). Underlying the development of studying macrocognitive functions in human-technical systems is the research field of cognitive systems engineering (CSE), which emerged in the early 80 s Woods 1983, 2005;Woods and Hollnagel 2006).…”

Section: Sensemaking and The Re-framing Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two main loops for each crew member describe the retrospective and prospective processes of the re-framing process which together serve the purpose of ascribing both meaning and action (Weick et al 2005). Red arrows for both PF and PM (jointly, concurrently and in an iterative and cyclic manner) represent functions and processes (as described by (Klein et al, 2003)). Yellow arrows describe aircraft processes and external events and disturbances.…”

Section: The Crew-aircraft Sensemaking Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Sensemaking following surprise in the cockpit—a re-framing problem

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Re-framing is the process by which a person ''fills the gap'' between what is expected and what has been observed, that is, to try and make sense of what is going on following a surprise. It is an active and adaptive process guided by expectations, which are based on knowledge and experience. In this article, surprise situations in cockpit operations are examined by investigating the re-framing process. The results show difficulties that pilots have in re-framing following surprise, including the identification of subtle cues and managing uncertainties regarding automated systems, coping with multiple goals, tasks and narrow time frames and identifying an appropriate action. A crew-aircraft sensemaking model is presented, outlining core concepts of re-framing processes and sensemaking activities. Based on the findings, three critical areas are identified that deserve further attention to improve pilot abilities to cope with unexpected events; (1) identification of what enables and obstructs re-framing, (2) training to build frames and develop re-framing strategies and (3) control strategies as part of the reframing process.

show abstract

Section: Sensemaking and The Re-framing Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sensemaking and The Re-framing Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Crew-aircraft Sensemaking Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sensemaking following surprise in the cockpit—a re-framing problem

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A CTA captures the knowledge and high level cognitive functions and processes that underlie individual and collaborative performance in natural settings (Crandall, Klein, and Hoffman, 2006;Klein et al, 2003). Examples of high level cognitive functions and processes include monitoring and detection, sense making, forming expectations, managing attention, planning, prioritizing and adapting plans as situations evolve.…”

Section: Cognitive Functions and Processes Underlying Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Technology Implications of a Cognitive Task Analysis for Locomotive Engineers

Roth¹,

Multer²

2007

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although the basic format of the work product may be known in the earliest stages, the production of a sound recording involves emergent and contingent properties (as in Simon 1973 and comparable to Klein et al 2003). In other words, music production proceeds towards the creation of a recorded artefact with scant information about the features that will characterize the final product.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Naturalistic artistic decision-making and metacognition in the music studio

Lefford

Thompson

2018

Cogn Tech Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Professional artistic contexts, such as studio-based music production, are rarely investigated in naturalistic decision-making (NDM) research, though creative work is characterised by uncertainty, risk, a lack of clearly definable goals, and in the case of music production, a complex socio-technical working environment that brings together a diverse group of specialized collaborators. This study investigates NDM in the music production studio. In music production, there is a professional role explicitly tasked with taking decisions-the (record) producer. The producer, as a creative collaborator, is differentiated as a problem-solver, solution creator and goal setter. This investigation looks at the producer's metacognitive abilities for reflecting on the nature of problems and decisions. An important challenge for this study is to develop methods for observing decision-making without unrealistically reducing the amount of uncertainty around outcomes or creative intention within a studio production. In the face of that, a method is proposed that combines socio-cultural musicology and cognitive approaches and uses ethnographic data. Preliminary findings shed light on how the producer in this study self-manages his decisions and his interactions with, and in response to, the production environment; how decisions and actions sustain collaboration; how experience is utilized to identify scenarios and choose actions; and the kinds of strategies employed and their expected outcomes. Findings provide evidence that exercising producing skills and performing production tasks involve metacognitive reflection.

show abstract

Macrocognition

Cited by 262 publications

References 8 publications

Sensemaking following surprise in the cockpit—a re-framing problem

Sensemaking following surprise in the cockpit—a re-framing problem

Technology Implications of a Cognitive Task Analysis for Locomotive Engineers

Naturalistic artistic decision-making and metacognition in the music studio

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About