Building a transdisciplinary expert consensus on the cognitive drivers of performance under pressure: An international multi-panel Delphi study.

Introduction: The ability to perform optimally under pressure is critical across many occupations, including the military, first responders, and competitive sport. Despite recognition that such performance depends on a range of cognitive factors, how common these factors are across performance domains remains unclear. The current study sought to integrate existing knowledge in the performance field in the form of a transdisciplinary expert consensus on the cognitive mechanisms that underlie performance under pressure. Methods: International experts were recruited from four performance domains [(i) Defense; (ii) Competitive Sport; (iii) Civilian High-stakes; and (iv) Performance Neuroscience]. Experts rated constructs from the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework (and several expert-suggested constructs) across successive rounds, until all constructs reached consensus for inclusion or were eliminated. Finally, included constructs were ranked for their relative importance. Results: Sixty-eight experts completed the first Delphi round, with 94% of experts retained by the end of the Delphi process. The following 10 constructs reached consensus across all four panels (in order of overall ranking): (1) Attention; (2) Cognitive Control-Performance Monitoring; (3) Arousal and Regulatory Systems-Arousal; (4) Cognitive Control-Goal Selection, Updating, Representation, and Maintenance; (5) Cognitive Control-Response Selection and Inhibition/Suppression; (6) Working memory-Flexible Updating; (7) Working memory-Active Maintenance; (8) Perception and Understanding of Self-Self-knowledge; (9) Working memory-Interference Control, and (10) Expert-suggested-Shifting. Discussion: Our results identify a set of transdisciplinary neuroscience-informed constructs, validated through expert consensus. This expert consensus is critical to standardizing cognitive assessment and informing mechanism-targeted interventions in the broader field of human performance optimization.

A Team Training Field Research Study: Extending a Theory of Team Development.

Recent advances in the science of teams have provided much insight into the important attitudes (e.g., team cohesion and efficacy), cognitions (e.g., shared team cognition), and behaviors (e.g., teamwork communications) of high performing teams and how these competencies emerge as team members interact, and appropriate measurement methods for tracking development. Numerous training interventions have been found to effectively improve these competencies, and more recently have begun addressing the problem of team dynamics. Team science researchers have increasingly called for more field studies to better understand training and team development processes in the wild and to advance the theory of team development. In addition to the difficulty of gaining access to teams that operate in isolated, confined, and extreme environments (ICE), a major practical challenge for trainers of ICE teams whose schedules are already strained is the need to prioritize the most effective strategies to optimize the time available for implementation. To address these challenges, we describe an applied research experiment that developed and evaluated an integrated team training approach to improve Tactical Combat Casualty (TC3) skills in U.S. Army squads. Findings showed that employing effective team training best practices improved learning, team cognition, emergent team processes, and performance. We recommend future research should focus on understanding the types of training strategies needed to enable teams and team leaders to develop from novices to experts. Effectively modifying training to scale it to team expertise requires more research. More laboratory and field research is needed to further develop measures of team knowledge emergence for complex task domains, and include other potential emergent factors such as team leadership and resilience. Practical implications for research include developing automated tools and technologies needed to implement training and collect team data, and employ more sensitive indicators (e.g., behavioral markers) of team attitudes, cognitions and behaviors to model the dynamics of how they naturally change over time. These tools are critical to understanding the dynamics of team development and to implement interventions that more effectively support teams as they develop over time.

Different profiles of decision making and physiology under varying levels of stress in trained military personnel.

Decision making is one of the most vital processes we use every day, ranging from mundane decisions about what to eat to life-threatening choices such as how to avoid a car collision. Thus, the context in which our decisions are made is critical, and our physiology enables adaptive responses that account for how environmental stress influences our performance. The relationship between stress and decision making can additionally be affected by one's expertise in making decisions in high-threat environments, where experts can develop an adaptive response that mitigates the negative impacts of stress. In the present study, 26 male military personnel made friend/foe discriminations in an environment where we manipulated the level of stress. In the high-stress condition, participants received a shock when they incorrectly shot a friend or missed shooting a foe; in the low-stress condition, participants received a vibration for an incorrect decision. We characterized performance using signal detection theory to investigate whether a participant changed their decision criterion to avoid making an error. Results showed that under high-stress, participants made more false alarms, mistaking friends as foes, and this co-occurred with increased high frequency heart rate variability. Finally, we examined the relationship between decision making and physiology, and found that participants exhibited adaptive behavioral and physiological profiles under different stress levels. We interpret this adaptive profile as a marker of an expert's ingrained training that does not require top down control, suggesting a way that expert training in high-stress environments helps to buffer negative impacts of stress on performance.

Ready or not: enhancing operational effectiveness through use of readiness measures.

Current and future military operations require personnel to perform a multitude of mission tasks. Military personnel are required to execute these tasks, and to perform to high levels of expectation. Many of these tasks are complex and demand substantial cognitive readiness, which may optimize and enhance cognitive performance. Technologies are being developed to aid individual soldiers to successfully complete their missions; however, the proliferation of new technologies, coupled with the varying operational missions, make leveraging cognitive readiness a mandate for the achievement of military effectiveness and enhanced overall performance. It is important to have a militarily relevant psychological battery that can be used to assess each individual's cognitive capabilities and appraisals, factors that enhance military operational effectiveness. Assessing individual cognitive readiness becomes particularly important when researchers broaden their examinations of military effectiveness to assess team cognition, team behavior, and team effectiveness. We discuss the theoretical development and the components of the U.S. Army Research Laboratory's Readiness Assessment and Monitoring System (RAMS). Data from several studies are presented to illustrate the behavioral profiles of individuals in extreme operational environments. Data show how specific factors (e.g., personality, coping) contribute to performance in operational settings (e.g., command and control, chemical decontamination operations). Understanding the effect of cognitive readiness on overall military effectiveness not only has implications for selection, training, and system design, but also provides the basis for the proactive development and sustainment of optimal performance, both in individual soldiers, and in small teams or military