The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Advances in measuring team cognition.
Abstract
Teams have become an integral and essential social component in organizations. There is no doubt that there are more businesses, industries and agencies implementing team-based systems than ever before. Organizations believe that teams, teamwork and effective team functioning can provide a competitive edge. Teams are, after all, dispatched to tackle difficult and complex problems. Why? Organizations think teams hold the solution to many problems. The perception is that teams can manage stress; teams can adapt and be flexible; team can make better decisions, and teams can be more productive than individuals. So, teams are a popular commodity in organizations. While the evidence of the efficacy of teams remains open, social scientists have begun to provide much needed answers to this issue. In fact, the amount of research effort and resources aimed at understanding what comprises effective team performance is overwhelming. Military, human factors, social, cognitive and industrial/organizational psychologists have been studying teams for decades (see Levine & Moreland, 1990; Guzzo & Shea, 1992). And so progress has been made. We understand better what teams do, how they do it, why they do it and how we can improve what they do. We can
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
An introduction to latent semantic analysis
Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998) · Discourse Processes · doi:10.1080/01638539809545028 · Cited by 4,880
Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90004-2 · Cited by 4,479 · cited 2×
“expertise (e.g., Chase & Simon, 1973; Glaser & Chi, 1988), accounts of effective team”
Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind
Wegner, D. M. (1987) · Theories of Group Behavior · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4634-3_9 · Cited by 2,700
Measurement of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems
Endsley, M. R. (1995) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872095779049499 · Cited by 2,039
Cited by
Lai, H.-Y., Chen, C.-H., Khoo, L.-P., & Zheng, P. (2019) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2019.01.009 · Cited by 32
Rosen, M. A., & Dietz, A. S. (2017) · The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Team Working and Collaborative Processes · doi:10.1002/9781118909997.ch21 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Cooke, N. J., Salas, E., Kiekel, P. A., & Bell, B.
- Venue
- Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance.
- Publisher
- American Psychological Association
- Published
- 2004
- Pages
- 83-106
- OpenAlex
- W1828225547
- Cited by
- 249
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 20.21
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Advances in measuring team cognition. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/10690-005
- The paper
- Cooke, N. J., Salas, E., Kiekel, P. A., & Bell, B. (2004). Advances in measuring team cognition. Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance. https://doi.org/10.1037/10690-005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
