Advertisement

Knowledge Elicitation Methods for Developing Insights into Team Cognition During Team Sports

  • Nathan J. McNeese
  • Nancy J. Cooke
  • Rob Gray
  • Michael Fedele
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 496)

Abstract

Team cognition is beginning to be realized as an important facet of team sports. As we continue to articulate the role of team cognition during team sports, we need to understand how to measure team cognition. In this paper, we present multiple knowledge elicitation methods to measure team cognition. We also propose new elicitation methods that account for the dynamic nature of team sports.

Keywords

Team cognition Knowledge elicitation Team sports 

References

  1. 1.
    McNeese, N., Cooke, N., Fedele, M., Gray, R.: Theoretical and methodical approaches to studying team cognition in sports. In: 6th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics and the Affiliated Conferences. Applied Human Factors & Ergonomics, pp. 1211–1218. Las Vegas, Nevada (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cooke, N.J., Gorman, J.C., Myers, C.W., Duran, J.L.: Interactive team cognition. Cogn. Sci. 37, 255–285 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Salas, E., Cooke, N.J., Rosen, M.A.: On teams, teamwork, and team performance: discoveries and developments. Human Factors J. Human Factors Ergon. Soc. 50(3), 540–541 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cooke, N.J.: Varieties of knowledge elicitation techniques. Int. J. Human-Comput. Stud. 41(6), 801–849 (1994) (Elsevier)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rybing, J., Nilsson, H., Jonson, C., Bang, M.: Studying distributed cognition of simulation-based team training with DiCoT. Ergonomics 1–38 (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cuevas, H.M., Fiore, S.M., Caldwell, B.S., Strater, L.: Augmenting team cognition in human-automation teams performing in complex operational environments. Aviat. Space Environ. Med. 78(5), B63–B70 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andres, H.P.: Team cognition using collaborative technology: a behavioral analysis. J. Manag. Psychol. 28(1) (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Salas, E., Converse, S.: Shared mental models in expert team decision making. In: Castellan Jr., N.J. (ed.) Individual and Group Decision Making: Current Issues, pp. 221–245. Erlbaum, New Jersey (1993)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Klimoski, R., Mohammed, S.: Team mental model: construct or metaphor? J. Manag. 20(2), 403–437 (1994). doi: 10.1016/0149-2063(94)90021-3 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mohammed, S., Dumville, B.C.: Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. J. Organ. Behav. 22, 89–106 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mathieu, J.E., Goodwin, G.F., Heffner, T.S., Salas, E., Cannon-Bowers, J.A.: The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 85(2), 273–283 (2000). doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.273 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W., Segers, M., Woltjer, G., Kirschner, P.: Team learning: building shared mental models. Instr. Sci. 39(3), 283–301 (2011). doi: 10.1007/s11251-010-9128-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reimer, T., Park, E.S., Hinsz, V.B.: Shared and coordinated cognition in competitive and dynamic task environments: An information-processing perspective for team sports. Int. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 4, 376–400 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eccles, D.W., Tenenbaum, G.: A social-cognitive perspective on team functioning in sport. In: Tenenbaum, G., Eklund, R. (eds.) Handbook of Sport Psychology (3rd edn.), pp. 264–283. Wiley, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Giske, R., Rodahl, S.E., Høigaard, R.: Shared mental task models in elite ice hockey and handball teams: does it exist and how does the coach intervene to make an impact? J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 27(1), 20–34 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bourbousson, J., Poizat, G., Saury, J., Sève, C.: Temporal aspects of team cognition: a case study on concerns sharing within basketball. J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 24(2), 224–241 (2012). doi: 10.1080/10413200.2011.630059 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cooke, N.: Team cognition as interaction. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 24(6), 415–419 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chemero, A., Ebrary, I.: Radical embodied cognitive science. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nardi, B.: Context and consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Silva, P., Garganta, J., Araújo, D., Davids, K., Aguiar, P.: Shared knowledge or shared affordances? insights from an ecological dynamics approach to team coordination in sports. Sports Med. 43(9), 765–772 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mohammed, S., Ferzandi, L., Hamilton, K.: Metaphor no more: a 15-year review of the team mental model construct. J. Manag. (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    McNeese, N., Reddy, M., Friedenberg, E.: Team mental models within collaborative information seeking. In: 2014 Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomic Society, pp. 335–339. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Chicago, IL (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    McNeese, N., Reddy, M.: Articulating and understanding the development of a team mental model in a distributed medium. In: 2015 Annual Meeting of Human Factors and Ergonomic Society, pp. 240–244. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Los Angeles, CA (2015)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cooke, N.J., Salas, E., Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Stout, R.J.: Measuring team knowledge. Human Factors J. Human Factors Ergon. Soc. 42(1), 151–173 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Novak, J.D., Cañas, A.J.: The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct them. Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition (2006)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pedersen, H.K., Cooke, N.J.: From battle plans to football plays: extending military team cognition to football. Int. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 4, 422–446 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cooke, N.J., Gorman, J.C.: Interaction-based measures of cognitive systems. J. Cogn. Eng. Decis. Making Spec. Sect. Integrating Cogn. Eng. Syst. Eng. Process Opportunities Challenges Emerg. Approaches 3, 27–46 (2009)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Araujo, D., Silva, P., Davids, K.: Capturing group tactical behaviors in expert team players. In: Baker, J., Farrow, D. (ed.) (2015). Routledge Handbook of Sport Expertise, pp. 209–220. (2014)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    DeChurch, L.A., Marks, M.A.: Leadership in multiteam systems. J. Appl. Psychol. 91, 311–329 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Abernethy, B., Russell, D.G.: Advance cue utilization by skilled cricket batsmen. Aust. J. Sci. Med. Sport 16, 2–10 (1984)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Muller, S., Abernethy, B.: Expert anticipatory skill in striking sports: a review in model. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 83, 175–187 (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Martell, S.G., Vickers, J.N.: Gaze characteristics of elite and near-elite athletes in ice hockey defensive tactics. Hum. Mov. Sci. 22, 689–712 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Savelsbergh, G., Williams, A.M., Van der Kamp, J., Ward, P.: Visual search, anticipation and expertise in soccer goalkeepers. J. Sports Sci. 20, 279–287 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    LeCouteur, A., Feo, R.: Real-time communication during play: analysis of team-mates’ talk and interaction. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 12, 124–134 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kraus, M.W., Huang, C., Keltner, D.: Tactile communication, cooperation, and performance: an ethological study of the NBA. Emotion 10, 745–749 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lausic, D., Tenenbaum, G., Eccles, D., Jeong, A., Johnson, T.: Intrateam communication and performance in doubles tennis. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 80, 281–290 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zourbanos, N., Tzioumakis, Y., Araújo, D., Kalaroglou, S., Hatzigeorgiadis, A., Papaioannou, A., Theodorakis, Y.: The intricacies of verbalizations, gestures, and game outcome using sequential analysis. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 18, 32–41 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nathan J. McNeese
    • 1
  • Nancy J. Cooke
    • 1
  • Rob Gray
    • 1
  • Michael Fedele
    • 1
  1. 1.The Polytechnic SchoolArizona State UniversityMesaUSA

Personalised recommendations