Skip to main content
Log in

Team-based complex problem solving: a collective cognition perspective

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Today, much problem solving is performed by teams, rather than individuals. The complexity of these problems has exceeded the cognitive capacity of any individual and requires a team of members to solve them. The success of solving these complex problems not only relies on individual team members who possess different but complementary expertise, but more importantly, their collective problem solving ability. To better conceptualize large scale complex problem solving, an understanding of collective cognitive components and processes during team-based complex problem solving is necessary. This paper offers a conceptual discussion about complex problem solving from a collective cognition perspective. The types of cognitive processing and cognitive components of team-based problem solving (TBPS) as well as the cognitive states of collective emergent cognitive states and the interactive mechanisms will be discussed. Also, implications from the model for assessing TBPS performance and suggestions for future research will be offered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akkerman, S., Van den Bossche, P., Admiraal, W., Gijselaers, W., Segers, M., Simons, R. J., et al. (2007). Reconsidering group cognition: From conceptual confusion to a boundary area between cognitive and socio-cultural perspectives? Educational Research Review, 2, 39–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20, 481–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. E., Jenkins, F., Persky, H., & Weiss, A. (2003). Assessing complex problem solving performances. Assessment in Education, 10(3), 347–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bierhals, R., Schuster, I., Kohler, P., & Badke-Schaub, P. (2007). Shared mental models: Linking team cognition and performance. CoDesign, 3(1), 75–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3), 369–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., & Stein, B. S. (1984). The IDEAL problem solver. New York: W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Salas, E. (2001). Reflections on shared cognition. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 195–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (1997). Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19(6), 2–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. G., Lotan, R. A., Abram, P. L., Scarloss, B. A., & Schultz, S. E. (2002). Can groups learn? Teachers College Record, 104(6), 1045–1068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (2003). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, N. J., Gorman, J. C., & Winner, J. L. (2007). Team cognition. In F. T. Durso, R. S. Nickerson, S. T. Dumais, S. Lewandowsky, & T. J. Perfect (Eds.), Handbook of applied cognition (2nd ed., pp. 239–268). West Sussex, England: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, N. J., Salas, E., Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Stout, R. (2000). Measuring team knowledge. Human Factors, 42, 151–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, N. J., Salas, E., Kiekel, P. A., & Bell, B. (2004). Advances in measuring team cognition. In E. Salas & S. M. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 83–106). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, N.J., Stout, R., & Salas, E. (1997). Broadening the measurement of situation awareness through cognitive engineering methods. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41 th Annual Meeting (pp. 215–219). Santa Monica, CA.

  • Curseu, P. L., & Rus, D. (2005). The cognitive complexity of groups: A critical look at team cognition research. Cognitie Creier Comportament, 9(4), 681–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curşeu, P., Schalk, R., & Schruijer, S. (2010). The use of cognitive mapping in eliciting and evaluating group cognitions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(5), 1258–1291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeChurch, L. A., & Mesmer-Magnus, J. R. (2010). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 32–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derry, S. J. (1989). Strategy and expertise in solving word problems. In C. B. McCormick, G. Miller, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Cognitive strategy research: From basic research to educational applications (pp. 269–302). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170–198). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, K. (1998). Problem solving. In W. Bechtel & G. Graham (Eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 289–298). London: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endsley, M. R., & Robertson, M. M. (2000). Situation awareness in aircraft maintenance teams. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 26, 301–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiore, S. M., Cuevas, H. M., Scielzo, S., & Salas, E. (2002). Training individuals for distributed teams: Problem solving assessment for distributed mission research. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 729–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiore, S. M., & Salas, E. (2004). Why we need team cognition. In E. Salas & S. M. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 235–248). Washington, DC: American Psychology Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hinsz, V. B., Vollrath, D. A., & Tindale, R. S. (1997). The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 43–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. (1995a). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. (1995b). How a cockpit remember its speed. Cognitive Science, 19, 265–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, H., & Chi, M. T. H. (2007). Knowledge convergence and collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 35, 287–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design model for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., & Hung, W. (2008). All problems are not equal: Implications for PBL. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 2(2), 6–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kearney, E., Gebert, D., & Voelpel, S. C. (2009). When and how diversity benefits teams: The importance of team members’ need for cognition. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 581–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klimoski, R., & Mohammed, S. (1994). Team mental model: Construct or metaphor? Journal of Management, 20, 403–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., et al. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting learning by design into practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 495–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, 77–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, K. (2004). Knowledge and performance in knowledge-worker teams: A longitudinal study of transactive memory systems. Management Science, 50(11), 1519–1533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, K., Belliveau, M., Herndon, B., & Keller, J. (2007). Group cognition, membership change, and performance: Investigating the benefits and detriments of collective knowledge. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103, 159–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacMillan, J., Entin, E. E., & Serfaty, D. (2004). Communications overhead: The hidden cost of team cognition. In E. Salas & S. M. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 61–82). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

  • Norman, G. R., & Schmidt, H. G. (1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 67(9), 557–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nosek, J. T. (2004). Group cognition as a basis for supporting group knowledge creation and sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(4), 54–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pea, R. D. (2003). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In Saloman (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 47–87). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearsall, M., Ellis, A., & Bell, B. (2010). Building the infrastructure: The effects of role identification behaviors on team cognition development and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 192–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peltokorpi, V. (2008). Transactive memory systems. Review of General Psychology, 12(4), 378–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N. (2003). Person-plus: A distributed view of thinking and learning. In Saloman (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 88–110). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rentsch, J. R., Small, E. E., & Hanges, P. J. (2008). Cognitions in organizations and teams: What is the meaning of cognitive similarity? In B. Smith (Ed.), The people make the place: Exploring dynamic linkages between individuals and organizations. New York, NY: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnik, L., Levine, J., & Teasley, S. D. (Eds.). (1991). Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rips, L. J. (1998). Reasoning. In W. Bechtel & G. Graham (Eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 299–305). London: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salas, E., Dickinson, T. L., Converse, S. A., & Tannenbaum, S. I. (1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training. In R. W. Swezey & E. Salas (Eds.), Teams: Their training and performance (pp. 3–29). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salas, E., & Fiore, S. M. (2004). Why team cognition: An overview. In E. Salas & S. M. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 3–8). Washington, DC: American Psychology Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Salas, E., Prince, C., Baker, D. P., & Shrestha, L. (1995). Situation awareness in team performance: Implications for measurement and training. Human Factors, 37(1), 123–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savelsbergh, C., van der Heijden, B., & Poell, R. (2009). The development and empirical validation of a multidimensional measurement instrument for team learning behaviors. Small Group Research, 40(5), 578–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, H. G. (1983). Problem-based learning: Rationale and description. Medical Education, 17, 11–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skyttner, L. (2001). General systems theory: Ideas & applications. London: World Scientific.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, R. J., Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Salas, E., & Milanovich, D. M. (1999). Planning, shared mental models, and coordinated performance: An empirical link is established. Human Factors, 41, 61–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney, L. B., & Sterman, J. D. (2000). Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory. System Dynamics Review, 16(4), 249–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Bertalanffy, L. (1969). General system theory: Foundations, development, application revised. New York: George Braziller.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W., Segers, M., Woltjer, G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2011). Team learning: Building shared mental models. Instructional Science, 39, 283–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vye, N. J., Goldman, S. R., Voss, J. F., Hmelo, C., & Williams, S. (1997). Complex mathematical problem solving by individuals and dyads. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), 435–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waller, M. J., Gupta, N., & Giambatista, R. C. (2004). Effects of adaptive behaviors and shared mental models on control crew performance. Management Science, 50, 1534–1544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegner, D. M. (1987). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In B. Mullen & G. R. Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group behavior (pp. 185–208). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, P. K. (1983). Inquiring systems and problem structure: Implications for cognitive development. Human Development, 26, 249–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Woei Hung.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hung, W. Team-based complex problem solving: a collective cognition perspective. Education Tech Research Dev 61, 365–384 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9296-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9296-3

Keywords

Navigation