The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring team situation awareness in decentralized command and control environments
Abstract
Decentralized command and control settings like those found in the military are rife with complexity and change. These settings typically involve dozens, if not hundreds to thousands, of heterogeneous players coordinating in a distributed fashion in a dynamically networked battlefield laden with sensor data, intelligence reports, communications, and plans emanating from many different perspectives. Consider the concept of team situation awareness in this setting. What does it mean for a team to be aware of a situation or, more importantly, of a critical change in a situation? Is it sufficient or necessary for all individuals on the team to be independently aware? Or is there some more holistic awareness that emerges as team members interact? We re-examine the concept of team situation awareness in decentralized systems beyond an individual-oriented knowledge-based construct by considering it as a team interaction-based phenomenon. A theoretical framework for a process-based measure called 'coordinated awareness of situations by teams' is outlined.
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
Teams in Organizations: From Input-Process-Output Models to IMOI Models
Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070250 · Cited by 2,273
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
Cooke, N. J., Gorman, J. C., Myers, C. W., & Duran, J. L. (2013) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12009 · Cited by 522
Self-citationTeaming With a Synthetic Teammate: Insights into Human-Autonomy Teaming
McNeese, N. J., Demir, M., Cooke, N. J., & Myers, C. (2018) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720817743223 · Cited by 380
Self-citationThe science of teams in the military: Contributions from over 60 years of research.
Goodwin, G. F., Blacksmith, N., & Coats, M. R. (2018) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/amp0000259 · Cited by 115
The Impact of Training on Human–Autonomy Team Communications and Trust Calibration
Johnson, C. J., Demir, M., McNeese, N. J., Gorman, J. C., Wolff, A. T., & Cooke, N. J. (2023) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/00187208211047323 · Cited by 68
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Gorman, J. C., Cooke, N. J., & Winner, J. L.
- Venue
- Ergonomics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-10-10
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 12-13
- Pages
- 1312-1325
- ISSN
- 0014-0139 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-5847
- OpenAlex
- W2018250373
- Cited by
- 295
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 29.72
- Type
- journal article
- 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
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.
