Team Situation Awareness, Cohesion, and Autonomic Synchrony

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the causal relationships among situation awareness (SA), cohesion, and autonomic synchrony (SE) within teams. SA is often a team effort and should be more accurate in better-functioning teams.

BACKGROUND

Cohesive teams perform better overall, although the relationship appears reciprocal; the relationship to SA has not been considered previously. SE is a collective neurocognitive activity that has been connected to team coordination, communication, and performance in some circumstances.

METHOD

In this experiment, 71 undergraduates, organized into 16 teams, played two matches of a first-person shooter computer game and completed self-report measures of cohesion and SA. SE was determined through time series analysis of electrodermal responses using the driver-empath framework.

RESULTS

Empaths and those who came from more synchronized teams reported less cohesion in the team. Granger causality regression showed reciprocal relations among SA, SE, and cohesion that were both positive and negative after controlling for match difficulty.

CONCLUSION

The cohesion-SA relationship is similar to the reciprocal cohesion-performance relationship. SE plays an important and independent role in both the social and cognitive aspects of team behavior. It is possible, furthermore, that individuals who are more attuned to their co-workers reported a more accurate, and less obliging, social situation.

APPLICATION

Results are applicable to situations requiring teamwork in a dynamic environment.

Team Situation Awareness, Cohesion, and Autonomic Synchrony 2: Group-level Effects and their Combined Influence on Team Performance

Situation awareness (SA) is a mental state that is instrumental to performance of complex dynamic tasks. SA within teams is thought to be supported by favorable social conditions within the team. The present study was organized in two parts: (a) causal relationships among SA, group cohesion, and autonomic synchrony, the latter being a fundamentally nonlinear process, and (b) the combined impact of the three variables on performance in a dynamic decisions task. Experimental conditions assessed changes in task difficulty, group size, and method of obtaining SA measures. Participants were 136 undergraduates organized into 32 teams of three to five members engaged in two matches of a first-person shooter computer game. They completed self-report measures of cohesion and SA. Synchrony was determined through time series analysis of electrodermal responses using the driver-empath framework. ANOVA results showed that cohesion and SA improved over the two matches, and SA was better in smaller groups during the second match. Synchrony was stronger in larger groups. Granger regression indicated no causal or circular relationship between SA and cohesion. Synchrony had a small positive effect on cohesion during the first match. SA had a strong negative impact on synchrony early on and dissipated afterwards. The best performing teams during the first match were those that: were larger, were measured for SA without pausing the simulation, were less synchronized, showed more accurate SA, and reported stronger cohesion. The study opens new questions concerning the role of synchrony in volatile situations and the role of automated team members operating alongside humans.