Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 364

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Does Crew Resource Management Training Work? An Update, an Extension, and Some Critical Needs

Open access
Salas, Eduardo, Wilson, Katherine A., Burke, C. Shawn, Wightman, Dennis C.·2006·Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

Abstract

Objective: This review provides the state of crew resource management (CRM) training evaluations since the E. Salas, C. S. Burke, C. A. Bowers, and K. A. Wilson (2001) review and extends it to areas beyond aviation cockpits. Some critical evaluation needs in CRM training are also covered. Background: Because of the purported success of CRM training in aviation, other high-consequence domains have begun to implement CRM training for their workforces. However, the true impact of CRM training in aviation and these other domains has yet to be determined. Method: Using D. L. Kirkpatrick's (1976) framework for evaluating training (i.e., reactions, learning, behavior, and organizational impact), we reviewed 28 published accounts of CRM training to determine its effectiveness within aviation, medicine, offshore oil production and maintenance, shipping/maritime, and nuclear power domains. Results: Findings indicate that CRM training generally produced positive reactions from trainees; however, the impact of training on learning and behavioral changes suggest mixed results across and within domains. Furthermore, and as was found by Salas, Burke, et al. in 2001, we cannot ascertain whether CRM has had an impact on the organization's bottom line (i.e., safety). Conclusion: Based on the results, there are several critical needs that the CRM training community must address before CRM training can have the desired impact on safety: a mandate, access to data, and resources. Application: As CRM training expands to organizations beyond aviation, it is critical that its impact be understood such that it can be improved and achieve the intended results.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1518/001872006777724444

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 364

Metadata

Authors
Salas, E., Wilson, K. A., Burke, C. S., & Wightman, D. C.
Venue
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Published
2006-06
Volume
48
Issue
2
Pages
392-412
ISSN
  • 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-8181
OpenAlex
W2103113141
Cited by
364
References
1
FWCI
20.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Does Crew Resource Management Training Work? An Update, an Extension, and Some Critical Needs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1518/001872006777724444
The paper
Salas, E., Wilson, K. A., Burke, C. S., & Wightman, D. C. (2006). Does Crew Resource Management Training Work? An Update, an Extension, and Some Critical Needs. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872006777724444

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.