The U.S. Army i s r a p i d l y expanding i t s use of computer s i m u l a t i o n s t o p r o v i d e command and c o n t r o l However, l i t t l e is known about t h e impact t r a i n i n g f o r b a t t a l i o n through corps l e v e l command groups. t h a t t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e s e s i m u l a t i o n s have on t h e command g r o u p ' s performance. t h i s e f f o r t was t o determine t h e e f f e c t of b a t t l e s i m u l a t i o n system and s c e n a r i o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s on measures of command group performance. Using a f r a c t i o n a l f a c t o r i a l d e s i g n , f i v e b a t t a l i o n command groups were t r a i n e d i n f o u r c o n t r o l l e d , one-day, e x e r c i s e s . Each e x e r c i s e included a p a r t i c u l a r comb i n a t i o n of f i v e system and s c e n a r i o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s e l e c t e d f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n : weather, t e r r a i n , communication, m i s s i o n , and combat r a t i o . Two f r e q u e n t l y used types of command group performance measures were obtained: ( p r o c e s s ) , and (2) b a t t l e f i e l d outcomes (product) generated by t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of t h e command group w i t h t h e computer-simulated environment. a r i o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s had a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on simulated b a t t l e f i e l d outcomes, b u t no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on r a t i n g s of command group performance. r a t i n g s and s i m u l a t i o n outcomes w a s observed. The v a r i a t i o n s i n system and s c e n a r i o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s may have i n f l u e n c e d t h e s i m u l a t i o n outcomes bv a l t e r i n g t h e simulated environment without a f f e c t i n g The purpose of (1) observer r a t i n g s of how w e l l command and c o n t r o l b e h a v i o r s were performed Analysis of t h e r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e system and scen-
