Using the Neocities 3.1 simulation to study and measure team cognition

Hamilton, Katherine; Mancuso, Vincent; Minotra, Dev; Hoult, Rachel; Mohammed, Susan; Parr, Alissa; Dubey, Gaurav; McMillan, Eric; McNeese, Michael D.

doi:10.1037/e578652012-034

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the conclusion of each scenario, the team was given an overall score as well as feedback on each of the events during the simulation. For further details on the NeoCITIES 3.0 task and its use in studying team cognition, please refer to Hellar and McNeese (2010) and Hamilton and colleagues (2010).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skilled and Unaware: The Interactive Effects of Team Cognition, Team Metacognition, and Task Confidence on Team Performance

Hamilton

Mancuso

Mohammed

et al. 2017

Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skilled and Unaware: The Interactive Effects of Team Cognition, Team Metacognition, and Task Confidence on Team Performance

Hamilton

Mancuso

Mohammed

et al. 2017

Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Scaled worlds have been shown to be useful tools in studying various aspects of team cognition (Hamilton, et al, 2010), as well as other aspects of cognition such as information overload (Hellar & McNeese, 2010), or hidden knowledge profiles (McNeese, et al, 2006).…”

Section: Knowledge Structures In Teamnetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A scaled world can be a useful tool that allows a researcher to trim away the complexity of a real-world environment for the purpose of conducting experimental research, but maintain generalizability and ecological validity (Ehret, Gray, & Kirschenbaum, 2000). Scaled worlds have been shown to be useful tools in studying various aspects of team cognition (Hamilton, et al, 2010), as well as other aspects of cognition such as information overload (Hellar & McNeese, 2010), or hidden knowledge profiles (McNeese, et al, 2006).…”

Section: Knowledge Structures In Teamnetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The NETS platform is the successor to the NeoCITIES simulation (Hamilton, et al, 2010;Hellar & McNeese, 2010;McNeese, et al, 2005), and was designed based on interviews and observations of cyber security experts (Tyworth, Giacobe, Mancuso, & Dancy, 2012). The NETS platform was previously used to study intrusion detection analyst's situation awareness and decision-making processes (idsNETS, (Mancuso, Minotra, Giacobe, McNeese, & Tyworth, 2012)).…”

Section: Teamnets Simulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Integrated and Differentiated Team Knowledge Structures on Distributed Team Cognition

Mancuso

McNeese

2012

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes an experiment to study the effects of varying knowledge structures on distributed team cognition. Using the teamNETS simulation, integrated and differentiated knowledge structures were manipulated by varying the reference materials the participants received during training. While the two knowledge structures had no direct effects on team performance, other results were found for their collaborative processes and team perceptions. Specifically the results showed that teams with differentiated structures worked more independently of each other, simply coordinated their actions and minimal communication, while teams with integrated structures worked more interdependently with a much tighter collaboration and frequent communication.

show abstract

“…Accordingly, there is a long tradition in the team cognition literature regarding TMM measurement (for a detailed review, see Mohammed et al, 2017), and some promising studies measuring TSMs (e.g. Hamilton et al, 2010). TMMs and TSMs can be interrelated through polynomial regression (Rico et al, 2019).…”

Section: The Road Ahead: What We Do Not Know About Team Adaptationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Team adaptation and the changing nature of work: Lessons from practice, evidence from research, and challenges for the road ahead

Rico

Gibson

Sánchez-Manzanares

et al. 2020

Australian Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the fabric of modern organizations, teams provide capacity to handle the ongoing adaptation demanded by contexts that characterize the future of work. While scholars have studied how team composition and structural characteristics facilitate team adaptation, both research and practice will benefit from also explicating the process of adapting—how a team’s active coping determines team adaptation over time. To move in this direction, we integrate perspectives on team adaptation which emphasize how teams understand complex environments and combine coordination processes to reach adaptive outcomes. This clarifies when, why, and how teams adapt, yielding performance benefits for organizations. Our goal is to offer evidence-based insights and theoretical reasoning to foster future research explaining the team adaptation–performance connection in current complex and changing work environments. JEL classification: L2

show abstract

Using the Neocities 3.1 simulation to study and measure team cognition

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Skilled and Unaware: The Interactive Effects of Team Cognition, Team Metacognition, and Task Confidence on Team Performance

Skilled and Unaware: The Interactive Effects of Team Cognition, Team Metacognition, and Task Confidence on Team Performance

Effects of Integrated and Differentiated Team Knowledge Structures on Distributed Team Cognition

Team adaptation and the changing nature of work: Lessons from practice, evidence from research, and challenges for the road ahead

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About