liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Assessing the quality of Shared Priorities in teams using content analysis in a microworld experiment
Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science, Human-Centered systems. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. (COIN)ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2771-2705
Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science, Human-Centered systems. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. (COIN)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8701-8689
Swedish Defence University, Department of Military Studies, Stockholm, Sweden.
2016 (English)In: Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, ISSN 1463-922X, E-ISSN 1464-536X, Vol. 18, no 2, 128-146 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective, easy to use, and easy to comprehend assessment methods for measuring shared understanding in teams are hard to find. This paper describes an experiment where a measure called Shared Priorities, which is based on ranking of self-generated strategic items, is assessed. Trained teams were compared to non-trained teams in a dynamic problem-solving task. The maturity of the participating teams was also assessed using a content analysis measure. The Shared Priorities measure was used alongside other well-documented measures of team awareness based on self-rating. Results show that the Shared Priorities measure correlates with task performance and could also distinguish between trained and non-trained teams. However, the Shared Priorities measure did not correlate with the other team measures (cf. CARS – Crew Awareness Rating Scale – and DATMA – Distributed Assessment of Team Mutual Awareness), suggesting that it captures a different quality of teamwork than the self-rating measures. Further, the Shared Priorities measure was found to be easily administered.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2016. Vol. 18, no 2, 128-146 p.
Keyword [en]
Shared Priorities, CARS, team, microworld, DATMA, shared understanding, mixed design MANOVA
National Category
Psychology (excluding Applied Psychology)
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-141761DOI: 10.1080/1463922X.2016.1159354ISI: 000396867100003Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84961210979OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-141761DiVA: diva2:1147381
Available from: 2017-10-05 Created: 2017-10-05 Last updated: 2017-10-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Berggren, PeterJohansson, Björn
By organisation
Human-Centered systemsFaculty of Arts and Sciences
In the same journal
Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science
Psychology (excluding Applied Psychology)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 6 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf