Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 775

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Does Team Training Improve Team Performance? A Meta-Analysis

Open access
Salas, Eduardo, DiazGranados, Deborah, Klein, Cameron, Burke, C. Shawn, Stagl, Kevin C., Goodwin, Gerald F., Halpin, Stanley M.·2008·Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

Abstract

Objective: This research effort leveraged the science of training to guide a taxonomic integration and a series of meta-analyses to gauge the effectiveness and boundary conditions of team training interventions for enhancing team outcomes. Background: Disparate effect sizes across primary studies have made it difficult to determine the true strength of the relationships between team training techniques and team outcomes. Method: Several meta-analytic integrations were conducted to examine the relationships between team training interventions and team functioning. Specifically, we assessed the relative effectiveness of these interventions on team cognitive, affective, process, and performance outcomes. Training content, team membership stability, and team size were investigated as potential moderators of the relationship between team training and outcomes. In total, the database consisted of 93 effect sizes representing 2,650 teams. Results: The results suggested that moderate, positive relationships exist between team training interventions and each of the outcome types. The findings of moderator analyses indicated that training content, team membership stability, and team size moderate the effectiveness of these interventions. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that team training interventions are a viable approach organizations can take in order to enhance team outcomes. They are useful for improving cognitive outcomes, affective outcomes, teamwork processes, and performance outcomes. Moreover, results suggest that training content, team membership stability, and team size moderate the effectiveness of team training interventions. Application: Applications of the results from this research are numerous. Those who design and administer training can benefit from these findings in order to improve the effectiveness of their team training interventions.

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 · 10.1518/001872008x375009

Cites

14 of 14 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

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 775

Metadata

Authors
Salas, E., DiazGranados, D., Klein, C., Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Goodwin, G. F., & Halpin, S. M.
Venue
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Published
2008-12
Volume
50
Issue
6
Pages
903-933
ISSN
  • 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-8181
OpenAlex
W1992711317
Cited by
775
References
14
FWCI
4.43
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 Team Training Improve Team Performance? A Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1518/001872008x375009
The paper
Salas, E., DiazGranados, D., Klein, C., Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Goodwin, G. F., & Halpin, S. M. (2008). Does Team Training Improve Team Performance? A Meta-Analysis. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008x375009

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.