Team Knowledge Research: Emerging Trends and Critical Needs
Objective: This article provides a systematic review of the team knowledge literature and guidance for further research. Background: Recent research has called attention to the need for the improved study and understanding of team knowledge. Team knowledge refers to the higher level knowledge struct...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Human factors 2012-02, Vol.54 (1), p.84-111 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 111 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 84 |
container_title | Human factors |
container_volume | 54 |
creator | Wildman, Jessica L. Thayer, Amanda L. Pavlas, Davin Salas, Eduardo Stewart, John E. Howse, William R. |
description | Objective: This article provides a systematic review of the team knowledge literature and guidance for further research.
Background: Recent research has called attention to the need for the improved study and understanding of team knowledge. Team knowledge refers to the higher level knowledge structures that emerge from the interactions of individual team members.
Method: We conducted a systematic review of the team knowledge literature, focusing on empirical work that involves the measurement of team knowledge constructs. For each study, we extracted author degree area, study design type, study setting, participant type, task type, construct type, elicitation method, aggregation method, measurement timeline, and criterion domain.
Results: Our analyses demonstrate that many of the methodological characteristics of team knowledge research can be linked back to the academic training of the primary author and that there are considerable gaps in our knowledge with regard to the relationships between team knowledge constructs, the mediating mechanisms between team knowledge and performance, and relationships with criteria outside of team performance, among others. We also identify categories of team knowledge not yet examined based on an organizing framework derived from a synthesis of the literature.
Conclusion: There are clear opportunities for expansion in the study of team knowledge; the science of team knowledge would benefit from a more holistic theoretical approach.
Application: Human factors researchers are increasingly involved in the study of teams. This review and the resulting organizing framework provide researchers with a summary of team knowledge research over the past 10 years and directions for improving further research. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0018720811425365 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_927988089</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0018720811425365</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1019641204</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-f7cb38cf34a1fa834c32d1a20c80ac9688efb9370db8e12f7271d4b4ef0a92963</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90UtLAzEQB_Agiq3Vs56kIKKX1Zkku0mOUnxhQZB6XrLZpLbso266iN_erK0PCnrKYX4zyfxDyBHCBaIQlwAoBQWJyGnMkniL9DHmIpIocZv0u3LU1Xtkz_s5ACSKxbukRykHhRD3yeHE6nL4UNVvhc2ndvhkvdWNedknO04X3h6szwF5vrmejO6i8ePt_ehqHBkmYRk5YTImjWNco9OSccNojpqCkaCNSqS0LlNMQJ5Ji9QJKjDnGbcOtKIqYQNytpq7aOrX1vplWs68sUWhK1u3PlVUKClBqiDP_5UIqBKOFHigJxt0XrdNFfboFMaKMhkHBStlmtr7xrp00cxK3bwHlHbxppvxhpbj9eA2K23-3fCVZwCna6C90YVrdGVm_seFzxHw6aKV83pqf7_uj4s_ADR7inI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1011592385</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Team Knowledge Research: Emerging Trends and Critical Needs</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><creator>Wildman, Jessica L. ; Thayer, Amanda L. ; Pavlas, Davin ; Salas, Eduardo ; Stewart, John E. ; Howse, William R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Wildman, Jessica L. ; Thayer, Amanda L. ; Pavlas, Davin ; Salas, Eduardo ; Stewart, John E. ; Howse, William R.</creatorcontrib><description>Objective: This article provides a systematic review of the team knowledge literature and guidance for further research.
Background: Recent research has called attention to the need for the improved study and understanding of team knowledge. Team knowledge refers to the higher level knowledge structures that emerge from the interactions of individual team members.
Method: We conducted a systematic review of the team knowledge literature, focusing on empirical work that involves the measurement of team knowledge constructs. For each study, we extracted author degree area, study design type, study setting, participant type, task type, construct type, elicitation method, aggregation method, measurement timeline, and criterion domain.
Results: Our analyses demonstrate that many of the methodological characteristics of team knowledge research can be linked back to the academic training of the primary author and that there are considerable gaps in our knowledge with regard to the relationships between team knowledge constructs, the mediating mechanisms between team knowledge and performance, and relationships with criteria outside of team performance, among others. We also identify categories of team knowledge not yet examined based on an organizing framework derived from a synthesis of the literature.
Conclusion: There are clear opportunities for expansion in the study of team knowledge; the science of team knowledge would benefit from a more holistic theoretical approach.
Application: Human factors researchers are increasingly involved in the study of teams. This review and the resulting organizing framework provide researchers with a summary of team knowledge research over the past 10 years and directions for improving further research.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0018-7208</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1547-8181</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0018720811425365</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22409105</identifier><identifier>CODEN: HUFAA6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Agglomeration ; Biological and medical sciences ; Categories ; Cognition ; Construction ; Cooperative Behavior ; Criteria ; Focusing ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Group dynamics ; Group Processes ; Human factors ; Human factors research ; Humans ; Interprofessional Relations ; Knowledge ; Memory ; Occupational psychology ; Organization and management. Professional relation ; Organizing ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Research - trends ; Research Design ; Research methodology ; Space life sciences ; Systematic review ; Tasks ; Teams</subject><ispartof>Human factors, 2012-02, Vol.54 (1), p.84-111</ispartof><rights>2012 Human Factors and Ergonomics Society</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Feb 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-f7cb38cf34a1fa834c32d1a20c80ac9688efb9370db8e12f7271d4b4ef0a92963</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0018720811425365$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0018720811425365$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=25477005$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22409105$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wildman, Jessica L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thayer, Amanda L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pavlas, Davin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salas, Eduardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stewart, John E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Howse, William R.</creatorcontrib><title>Team Knowledge Research: Emerging Trends and Critical Needs</title><title>Human factors</title><addtitle>Hum Factors</addtitle><description>Objective: This article provides a systematic review of the team knowledge literature and guidance for further research.
Background: Recent research has called attention to the need for the improved study and understanding of team knowledge. Team knowledge refers to the higher level knowledge structures that emerge from the interactions of individual team members.
Method: We conducted a systematic review of the team knowledge literature, focusing on empirical work that involves the measurement of team knowledge constructs. For each study, we extracted author degree area, study design type, study setting, participant type, task type, construct type, elicitation method, aggregation method, measurement timeline, and criterion domain.
Results: Our analyses demonstrate that many of the methodological characteristics of team knowledge research can be linked back to the academic training of the primary author and that there are considerable gaps in our knowledge with regard to the relationships between team knowledge constructs, the mediating mechanisms between team knowledge and performance, and relationships with criteria outside of team performance, among others. We also identify categories of team knowledge not yet examined based on an organizing framework derived from a synthesis of the literature.
Conclusion: There are clear opportunities for expansion in the study of team knowledge; the science of team knowledge would benefit from a more holistic theoretical approach.
Application: Human factors researchers are increasingly involved in the study of teams. This review and the resulting organizing framework provide researchers with a summary of team knowledge research over the past 10 years and directions for improving further research.</description><subject>Agglomeration</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Categories</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Construction</subject><subject>Cooperative Behavior</subject><subject>Criteria</subject><subject>Focusing</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Group dynamics</subject><subject>Group Processes</subject><subject>Human factors</subject><subject>Human factors research</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Interprofessional Relations</subject><subject>Knowledge</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Occupational psychology</subject><subject>Organization and management. Professional relation</subject><subject>Organizing</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Research - trends</subject><subject>Research Design</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>Space life sciences</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Tasks</subject><subject>Teams</subject><issn>0018-7208</issn><issn>1547-8181</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp90UtLAzEQB_Agiq3Vs56kIKKX1Zkku0mOUnxhQZB6XrLZpLbso266iN_erK0PCnrKYX4zyfxDyBHCBaIQlwAoBQWJyGnMkniL9DHmIpIocZv0u3LU1Xtkz_s5ACSKxbukRykHhRD3yeHE6nL4UNVvhc2ndvhkvdWNedknO04X3h6szwF5vrmejO6i8ePt_ehqHBkmYRk5YTImjWNco9OSccNojpqCkaCNSqS0LlNMQJ5Ji9QJKjDnGbcOtKIqYQNytpq7aOrX1vplWs68sUWhK1u3PlVUKClBqiDP_5UIqBKOFHigJxt0XrdNFfboFMaKMhkHBStlmtr7xrp00cxK3bwHlHbxppvxhpbj9eA2K23-3fCVZwCna6C90YVrdGVm_seFzxHw6aKV83pqf7_uj4s_ADR7inI</recordid><startdate>20120201</startdate><enddate>20120201</enddate><creator>Wildman, Jessica L.</creator><creator>Thayer, Amanda L.</creator><creator>Pavlas, Davin</creator><creator>Salas, Eduardo</creator><creator>Stewart, John E.</creator><creator>Howse, William R.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Human Factors and Ergonomics Society</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120201</creationdate><title>Team Knowledge Research</title><author>Wildman, Jessica L. ; Thayer, Amanda L. ; Pavlas, Davin ; Salas, Eduardo ; Stewart, John E. ; Howse, William R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-f7cb38cf34a1fa834c32d1a20c80ac9688efb9370db8e12f7271d4b4ef0a92963</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Agglomeration</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Categories</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Construction</topic><topic>Cooperative Behavior</topic><topic>Criteria</topic><topic>Focusing</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Group dynamics</topic><topic>Group Processes</topic><topic>Human factors</topic><topic>Human factors research</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Interprofessional Relations</topic><topic>Knowledge</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Occupational psychology</topic><topic>Organization and management. Professional relation</topic><topic>Organizing</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Research - trends</topic><topic>Research Design</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>Space life sciences</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Tasks</topic><topic>Teams</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wildman, Jessica L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thayer, Amanda L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pavlas, Davin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salas, Eduardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stewart, John E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Howse, William R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Human factors</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wildman, Jessica L.</au><au>Thayer, Amanda L.</au><au>Pavlas, Davin</au><au>Salas, Eduardo</au><au>Stewart, John E.</au><au>Howse, William R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Team Knowledge Research: Emerging Trends and Critical Needs</atitle><jtitle>Human factors</jtitle><addtitle>Hum Factors</addtitle><date>2012-02-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>54</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>84</spage><epage>111</epage><pages>84-111</pages><issn>0018-7208</issn><eissn>1547-8181</eissn><coden>HUFAA6</coden><abstract>Objective: This article provides a systematic review of the team knowledge literature and guidance for further research.
Background: Recent research has called attention to the need for the improved study and understanding of team knowledge. Team knowledge refers to the higher level knowledge structures that emerge from the interactions of individual team members.
Method: We conducted a systematic review of the team knowledge literature, focusing on empirical work that involves the measurement of team knowledge constructs. For each study, we extracted author degree area, study design type, study setting, participant type, task type, construct type, elicitation method, aggregation method, measurement timeline, and criterion domain.
Results: Our analyses demonstrate that many of the methodological characteristics of team knowledge research can be linked back to the academic training of the primary author and that there are considerable gaps in our knowledge with regard to the relationships between team knowledge constructs, the mediating mechanisms between team knowledge and performance, and relationships with criteria outside of team performance, among others. We also identify categories of team knowledge not yet examined based on an organizing framework derived from a synthesis of the literature.
Conclusion: There are clear opportunities for expansion in the study of team knowledge; the science of team knowledge would benefit from a more holistic theoretical approach.
Application: Human factors researchers are increasingly involved in the study of teams. This review and the resulting organizing framework provide researchers with a summary of team knowledge research over the past 10 years and directions for improving further research.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>22409105</pmid><doi>10.1177/0018720811425365</doi><tpages>28</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0018-7208 |
ispartof | Human factors, 2012-02, Vol.54 (1), p.84-111 |
issn | 0018-7208 1547-8181 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_927988089 |
source | MEDLINE; SAGE Complete |
subjects | Agglomeration Biological and medical sciences Categories Cognition Construction Cooperative Behavior Criteria Focusing Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Group dynamics Group Processes Human factors Human factors research Humans Interprofessional Relations Knowledge Memory Occupational psychology Organization and management. Professional relation Organizing Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Research - trends Research Design Research methodology Space life sciences Systematic review Tasks Teams |
title | Team Knowledge Research: Emerging Trends and Critical Needs |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T22%3A45%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Team%20Knowledge%20Research:%20Emerging%20Trends%20and%20Critical%20Needs&rft.jtitle=Human%20factors&rft.au=Wildman,%20Jessica%20L.&rft.date=2012-02-01&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=84&rft.epage=111&rft.pages=84-111&rft.issn=0018-7208&rft.eissn=1547-8181&rft.coden=HUFAA6&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0018720811425365&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1019641204%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1011592385&rft_id=info:pmid/22409105&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0018720811425365&rfr_iscdi=true |