OBJECTIVE: We report an experiment in which three training approaches are compared with the goal of training adaptive teams. BACKGROUND: Cross-training is an established method in which team members are trained with the goal of building shared knowledge. Perturbation training is a new method in which team interactions are constrained to provide new coordination experiences during task acquisition. These two approaches, and a more traditional procedural approach, are compared. METHOD: Assigned to three training conditions were 26 teams. Teams flew nine simulated uninhabited air vehicle missions; three were critical tests of the team's ability to adapt to novel situations. Team performance, response time to novel events, and shared knowledge were measured. RESULTS: Perturbation-trained teams significantly outperformed teams in the other conditions in two out of three critical test missions. Cross-training resulted in significant increases in shared teamwork knowledge and highest mean performance in one critical test. Procedural training led to the least adaptive teams. CONCLUSION:Perturbation training allows teams to match coordination variability during training to demands for coordination variability during posttraining performance. Although cross-training has adaptive benefits, it is suggested that process-oriented approaches, such as perturbation training, can lead to more adaptive teams. APPLICATION: Perturbation training is amenable to simulation-based training, where perturbations provide interaction experiences that teams can transfer to novel, real-world situations.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: We report an experiment in which three training approaches are compared with the goal of training adaptive teams. BACKGROUND: Cross-training is an established method in which team members are trained with the goal of building shared knowledge. Perturbation training is a new method in which team interactions are constrained to provide new coordination experiences during task acquisition. These two approaches, and a more traditional procedural approach, are compared. METHOD: Assigned to three training conditions were 26 teams. Teams flew nine simulated uninhabited air vehicle missions; three were critical tests of the team's ability to adapt to novel situations. Team performance, response time to novel events, and shared knowledge were measured. RESULTS: Perturbation-trained teams significantly outperformed teams in the other conditions in two out of three critical test missions. Cross-training resulted in significant increases in shared teamwork knowledge and highest mean performance in one critical test. Procedural training led to the least adaptive teams. CONCLUSION: Perturbation training allows teams to match coordination variability during training to demands for coordination variability during posttraining performance. Although cross-training has adaptive benefits, it is suggested that process-oriented approaches, such as perturbation training, can lead to more adaptive teams. APPLICATION: Perturbation training is amenable to simulation-based training, where perturbations provide interaction experiences that teams can transfer to novel, real-world situations.
Authors: Patrick Nalepka; Maurice Lamb; Rachel W Kallen; Kevin Shockley; Anthony Chemero; Elliot Saltzman; Michael J Richardson Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2019-01-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Jette Led Sørensen; Laura Emdal Navne; Helle Max Martin; Bent Ottesen; Charlotte Krebs Albrecthsen; Berit Woetmann Pedersen; Hanne Kjærgaard; Cees van der Vleuten Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 2.692