You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Understanding and Modeling Teams As Dynamical Systems
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01053 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jamie C. Gorman, Terri A. Dunbar, David Grimm, Christina L. Gipson |
| Abstract |
By its very nature, much of teamwork is distributed across, and not stored within, interdependent people working toward a common goal. In this light, we advocate a systems perspective on teamwork that is based on general coordination principles that are not limited to cognitive, motor, and physiological levels of explanation within the individual. In this article, we present a framework for understanding and modeling teams as dynamical systems and review our empirical findings on teams as dynamical systems. We proceed by (a) considering the question of why study teams as dynamical systems, (b) considering the meaning of dynamical systems concepts (attractors; perturbation; synchronization; fractals) in the context of teams, (c) describe empirical studies of team coordination dynamics at the perceptual-motor, cognitive-behavioral, and cognitive-neurophysiological levels of analysis, and (d) consider the theoretical and practical implications of this approach, including new kinds of explanations of human performance and real-time analysis and performance modeling. Throughout our discussion of the topics we consider how to describe teamwork using equations and/or modeling techniques that describe the dynamics. Finally, we consider what dynamical equations and models do and do not tell us about human performance in teams and suggest future research directions in this area. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 17% |
| United States | 3 | 13% |
| Finland | 2 | 9% |
| Australia | 2 | 9% |
| Ireland | 1 | 4% |
| Sweden | 1 | 4% |
| Italy | 1 | 4% |
| Comoros | 1 | 4% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 70% |
| Scientists | 6 | 26% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 133 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 14% |
| Researcher | 17 | 13% |
| Professor | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 37 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 31 | 23% |
| Sports and Recreations | 14 | 11% |
| Engineering | 11 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 23 | 17% |
| Unknown | 41 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 March 2023.
All research outputs
#2,721,874
of 25,559,053 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,369
of 34,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,530
of 325,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#139
of 582 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,559,053 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,647 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,234 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 582 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.