The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Naturalistic Decision Making
Abstract
Objective: This article describes the origins and contributions of the naturalistic decision making (NDM) research approach. Background: NDM research emerged in the 1980s to study how people make decisions in real-world settings. Method: The findings and methods used by NDM researchers are presented along with their implications. Results: The NDM framework emphasizes the role of experience in enabling people to rapidly categorize situations to make effective decisions. Conclusion: The NDM focus on field settings and its interest in complex conditions provide insights for human factors practitioners about ways to improve performance. Application: The NDM approach has been used to improve performance through revisions of military doctrine, training that is focused on decision requirements, and the development of information technologies to support decision making and related cognitive functions.
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
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
(1982) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477 · Cited by 8,240
Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/000282803322655392 · Cited by 5,377
Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629 · Cited by 5,137
Rasmussen, J. (1983) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/tsmc.1983.6313160 · Cited by 3,434
Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious
Epstein, S. (1994) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.49.8.709 · Cited by 2,883 · cited 1×
“This blend corresponds to the System1(fast and unconscious)/System 2 (slow and deliberate) account of cognition put forward by Kahneman (2003), Epstein (1994), and others (for an overview, see Evans, 2008).”
MethodMedical Problem Solving: An Analysis of Clinical Reasoning
Elstein, A. S., Shulman, L. S., & Sprafka, S. A. (1978) · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674189089 · Cited by 1,377
Cited by
Is there a “Big Five” in Teamwork?
Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/1046496405277134 · Cited by 1,930
The science of training: a decade of progress
Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2001) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.471 · Cited by 1,703
The impact of sleep deprivation on decision making: A review.
Harrison, Y., & Horne, J. A. (2000) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.6.3.236 · Cited by 1,238
The Science of Training and Development in Organizations: What Matters in Practice
Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Kraiger, K., & Smith-Jentsch, K. A. (2012) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612436661 · Cited by 1,104
Programmatic assessment: From assessment of learning to assessment for learning
Schuwirth, L. W. T., & Van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2011) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2011.565828 · Cited by 902
Metadata
- Authors
- Klein, G.
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 456-460
- ISSN
- 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-8181
- OpenAlex
- W2169613734
- Cited by
- 2,231
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 143.34
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Naturalistic Decision Making. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1518/001872008x288385
- The paper
- Klein, G. (2008). Naturalistic Decision Making. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008x288385
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.
