Teams with shared mental models synchronize more easily, while teams with inconsistent models suffer ineffective team processes¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Team members with shared mental models of objectives and processes more easily synchronize and adapt, whereas teams with inconsistencies in their models suffer absent or ineffective team processes. → J. D. Fletcher & Robert A. Sottilare 2018

Evidence¶

J. D. Fletcher & Robert A. Sottilare 2018¶

J. D. Fletcher & Robert A. Sottilare. (2018). Shared Mental Models in Support of Adaptive Instruction for Teams Using the GIFT Tutoring Architecture. Int J Artif Intell Educ 28:265–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0147-y

q2 · i? · review · r2

Narrative review of the team learning and performance literature (citing Cannon-Bowers et al. 1990, Espevik et al. 2011, Moore et al. 2015, Rouse and Morris 1986). The article reports this as an established literature finding with no effect sizes printed.

"Team members with shared mental models of objectives and processes more easily synchronize and adapt as they plan and execute their tasks whereas teams with inconsistencies in their models of the team suffer from absent and/or ineffective team processes"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• A shared epistemic object let a team with substantial off-task time (UrPo) still complete a successful co-invention — related
• The editorial reports that successful collaborative making teams resolved coordination challenges through intertwined social-discursive and materially mediated processes — related
• Team cognition predicts team performance: transactive memory systems (20%) and shared mental models (10%) explain significant variance, and situational awareness shows the largest relationship but rests on a small sample — related