Eugene Aidman

When individuals collaborate, they often rely on momentary estimates of their own and their partner’s confidence (decision confidence) to guide collective decisions and achieve their goals. Through interaction, these confidence estimates tend to align over time. This process is known as confidence matching. More stable, dispositional trait confidence is also emerging as a key factor shaping the dynamics and outcomes of collaborative action. We examined how trait confidence and type of communication impact the accuracy of dyadic decisions, decision confidence, and the dynamics of decision confidence, including confidence matching. In this study, 210 participants completed general knowledge tests individually and collaboratively, forming 105 dyads. The tests were completed under three communication conditions: isolated (no interaction), passive (viewing the partner’s response and numeric confidence rating), and active (verbal discussion). Participants assessed as high-trait or low-trait confidence (controlling for cognitive ability) were allocated to three types of dyads: low-trait (two low-trait members), mixed-trait (one low-trait and one high member), or high-trait (two high-trait members) confidence dyads.Trait confidence moderated decision accuracy and decision confidence gains: dyads with mixed-trait or high-trait confidence showed greater decision accuracy improvements in the active than the passive communication condition compared to their individual decisions. Whereas low-trait confidence dyads benefited equally from active and passive communication. Collaboration increased decision confidence overall, especially for high-trait confidence dyads under active communication. Confidence matching occurred rapidly in both passive and active communication but predicted decision accuracy gains only in the passive condition where participants had limited social information. Although active verbal communication led to the greatest overall decision accuracy, these gains were not driven by confidence matching. Our findings highlight the critical role of trait confidence in shaping collaborative outcomes in dyads and extend previous research by showing that confidence matching occurs naturally during verbal communication.

A collective intelligence factor (CI) was introduced by prior research to characterize the cognitive ability of groups. Surprisingly, individual intelligence did not predict CI. Instead, it correlated with individual social sensitivity, the equality of conversational turn-taking and the proportion of females in a group. However, these findings may depend on the type of tasks completed by groups. Our study re-examined these relationships by (1) testing the robustness of the CI factor in dyads using well-structured tasks guided by the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model of intelligence; (2) exploring the relationship between dyadic CI and metacognitive confidence, which is known to influence group processes and outcomes; and (3) identifying the psychological characteristics of distinct dyad types using Latent Profile Analysis.We measured CI in 105 undergraduate dyads using three group tasks aligned with the broad abilities of the CHC model. Individual intelligence was assessed using Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices. We also measured social sensitivity, proportion of females, equality of turn taking, working memory, and personality.Results indicated that individual intelligence and confidence were the strongest predictors of dyadic CI for well-structured tasks, contrasting with previous findings emphasizing social factors. While we replicated the relationship with social sensitivity, we did not replicate the findings for equality of turn taking or gender composition. Latent Profile Analysis identified three psychological profiles: dyads performing consistently high individually and collectively, those performing consistently low, and those performing better collectively than individually. Our ‘smarter’ dyads consisted of intelligent and confident individuals with higher social sensitivity.These findings suggest that, in dyads performing well-structured tasks, individual cognitive abilities and confidence play significant roles in CI. This challenges the emphasis on social factors and underscores the importance of task selection.

Workplace stress and burnout are known as major contributors to deficits in cognitive functioning, including memory, attention, and executive functioning, leading to impairments in both well-being and performance. Our prior work showed a brief multi-modal physical and cognitive fitness (CF) training capable of improving the mood and resilience of both corporate employees and military personnel. Building on this evidence and on recent findings from a systematic review of hardiness in the workplace, our current study examined the effects of the refined multi-modal training program on multiple fitness and wellbeing outcomes among corporate professionals employed in high-pressure jobs, with a particular focus on psychological hardiness, cognitive performance, and overall well-being. The intervention resulted in significant improvements in inhibitory control (a key aspect of CF) and measures of wellbeing (mood, gratitude and perceived stress), as well as resilience and all three components of psychological hardiness (control, challenge and commitment) among participants who completed the program. Our findings confirm that hardiness is a modifiable construct associated with a broad range of beneficial workplace outcomes. The intervention produced no improvements in working memory, suggesting that this element of CF may be less trainable—or require different training regimes to succeed.

Emotions significantly impact decision‐making, teamwork, stress management, and resilience in high‐pressure occupations such as the military, emergency services and competitive sports, making effective emotion regulation (ER) essential to performance and mental health. However, there are considerable knowledge gaps about ER in active‐service military populations, particularly regarding the measures used to quantify ER, the variables studied, and identified relationships. Synthesising this literature is critical to progressing the ER research toward realistic solutions to enhancing performance and mental health in this population. This systematic review aimed to explore measurement tools, the variables examined alongside ER, and the relationship between ER and performance and military variables in active‐service military personnel. Preregistered (PROSPERO; CRD42023358657) and adhering to PRISMA guidelines, this review focused on English peer‐reviewed publications on ER or coping strategies in active‐service military populations without date restrictions. Scopus, Web of Science, Military database, Medline and PsycINFO were last searched on 12/10/2022. Two reviewers screened studies, conducted data extraction and risk of bias assessment. A tabular synthesis method was used to systematically organise study details, ER measures, strategies, performance and military variables, outcomes, and quality. The literature search yielded 5780 studies, 46 of which were deemed relevant. The review identified 17 measurement tools, with the Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced Inventory (COPE) and Emotion Regulation Questionnaire being the most used. Psychological factors such as personality, resilience, and stress were most frequently examined (54%), while performance variables were studied in 3 (6.5%) and military variables in 6 (13%) of the source studies. Of the 10 performance and military variables examined, 50% were identified as being at high risk of bias, 30% moderate risk and 20% low risk. This review highlights a scarcity of published research on ER and performance and military variables in active‐service military members. Overall, studies suggest that ER may be associated with performance and military variables in varying contexts and capacity. The review examines the implications of these relationships in detail. However, these studies vary in quality, the measurement tools used, and the variables assessed alongside ER, making synthesis challenging. The high risk of bias identified suggests that the relationships with ER should be interpreted with caution. This review suggests a link between ER and performance and military outcomes, however further research is needed to understand this nuanced relationship in the military context.

Foreign information operations on social media platforms pose significant risks to democratic societies. With the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI), this threat is likely to intensify, potentially overwhelming human defenders. To achieve the necessary scale and tempo to defend against these threats, utilizing AI as part of the solution seems inevitable. Although there has been a significant debate on AI in Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS), it is equally likely that AI will be widely used in information operations for defensive and offensive objectives. Similar to LAWS, AI-driven information operations occupy a highly sensitive moral domain where removing human involvement in the tactical decision making process raises ethical concerns. Although AI has yet to revolutionize the field, a solid ethical stance is urgently needed on how AI can be responsibly used to defend against information operations on social media platforms. This paper proposes possible AI-enabled countermeasures against cognitive warfare and argues how they can be developed in a responsible way, such that meaningful human control is preserved.

Shift work, long work hours, and operational tasks contribute to sleep and circadian disruption in defence personnel, with profound impacts on cognition. To address this, a digital technology, the SleepSync app, was designed for use in defence. A pre-post design study was undertaken to examine whether four weeks app use improved sleep and cognitive fitness (high performance neurocognition) in a cohort of shift workers from the Royal Australian Air Force. In total, 13 of approximately 20 shift-working personnel from one base volunteered for the study. Sleep outcomes were assessed using the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), Sleep Disturbance and Sleep-Related Impairment Scales, the Glasgow Sleep Effort Scale, the Sleep Hygiene Index, and mental health was assessed using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21. Sustained attention was measured using the 3-min Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) and controlled response using the NBack. Results showed significant improvements in insomnia (ISI scores 10.31 at baseline and 7.50 after app use), sleep-related impairments (SRI T-scores 53.03 at baseline to 46.75 post-app use), and healthy sleep practices (SHI scores 21.61 at baseline to 18.83 post-app use; all p < 0.001). Trends for improvement were recorded for depression. NBack incorrect responses reduced significantly (9.36 at baseline; reduced by −3.87 at last week of app use, p < 0.001), but no other objective measures improved. These findings suggest that SleepSync may improve sleep and positively enhance cognitive fitness but warrants further investigation in large samples. Randomised control trials with other cohorts of defence personnel are needed to confirm the utility of this intervention in defence settings.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/46368.].