ABSTRACT
The notion that team performance is affected by members’ cognitive representations of their tasks, roles, teammates, and equipment underlies much of the team research conducted since the 1990s. Moreover, empirical studies have demonstrated general support for this notion. Recent theories regarding team cognition (many described in this volume) delve into complexities such as when, how, and for whom specific dimensions of team cognition should be most important. In this commentary, I highlight several measurement and design issues that I feel are important for future researchers to address so that our empirical research on team cognition can keep pace with our theories. In this regard, the devil is truly in the details. The manner in which team cognition is measured from study to study varies in myriad ways, and these differences are too often glossed over or oversimplified.
