Results 1 -
3 of
3
Modeling and Simulating Human Teamwork Behaviors Using Intelligent Agents
- In Journal of Physics of Life Reviews
, 2004
"... Among researchers in multi-agent systems there has been growing interest in using intelligent agents to model and simulate human teamwork behaviors. Teamwork modeling is important for training humans in gaining collaborative skills, for supporting humans in making critical decisions by proactively ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 4 (1 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Among researchers in multi-agent systems there has been growing interest in using intelligent agents to model and simulate human teamwork behaviors. Teamwork modeling is important for training humans in gaining collaborative skills, for supporting humans in making critical decisions by proactively gathering, fusing, and sharing information, and for building coherent teams with both humans and agents working effectively on intelligence-intensive problems. Teamwork modeling is also challenging because the research has spanned diverse disciplines from business management to cognitive science, human discourse, and distributed artificial intelligence. This article presents an extensive, but not exhaustive, list of work in the field, where the taxonomy is organized along two main dimensions: team social structure and social behaviors. Along the dimension of social structure, we consider agent-only teams and mixed human/agent teams. Along the dimension of social behaviors, we consider collaborative behaviors, communicative behaviors, helping behaviors, and the underpinning of effective teamwork--- shared mental models. The contribution of this article is that it presents an organizational framework for analyzing a variety of teamwork simulation systems and for further studying simulated teamwork behaviors.
The Significance of Task Significance: Job Performance Effects, Relational Mechanisms, and Boundary Conditions
"... Does task significance increase job performance? Correlational designs and confounded manipulations have prevented researchers from assessing the causal impact of task significance on job performance. To address this gap, 3 field experiments examined the performance effects, relational mechanisms, a ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
Does task significance increase job performance? Correlational designs and confounded manipulations have prevented researchers from assessing the causal impact of task significance on job performance. To address this gap, 3 field experiments examined the performance effects, relational mechanisms, and boundary conditions of task significance. In Experiment 1, fundraising callers who received a task significance intervention increased their levels of job performance relative to callers in 2 other conditions and to their own prior performance. In Experiment 2, task significance increased the job dedication and helping behavior of lifeguards, and these effects were mediated by increases in perceptions of social impact and social worth. In Experiment 3, conscientiousness and prosocial values moderated the effects of task significance on the performance of new fundraising callers. The results provide fresh insights into the effects, relational mechanisms, and boundary conditions of task significance, offering noteworthy implications for theory, research, and practice on job design, social information processing, and work motivation and performance.
Psychological Safety, Trust, and Learning in Organizations: A Group-level Lens
, 2003
"... This paper discusses psychological safety and distinguishes it from the related construct of interpersonal trust. Trust is the expectation that others ' future actions will be favorable to one's interests; psychological safety refers to a climate in which people are comfortable being (and expressing ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
This paper discusses psychological safety and distinguishes it from the related construct of interpersonal trust. Trust is the expectation that others ' future actions will be favorable to one's interests; psychological safety refers to a climate in which people are comfortable being (and expressing) themselves. Although both constructs involve a willingness to be vulnerable to others ' actions, they are conceptually and theoretically distinct. In particular, psychological safety is centrally tied to learning behavior, while trust lowers transactions costs and reduces the need to monitor behavior. This paper proposes a model of antecedents and consequences of psychological safety in work teams and emphasizes the centrality of psychological safety for learning behavior. Drawing from field research in a variety of organizational settings, I describe different approaches to studying and measuring psychological safety in teams. I conclude with implications of this work including limitations of psychological safety in practice and suggestions areas for future research. 1 There's much greater openness on this team—it's intangible.- Marketing member, new product development team, manufacturing company [In this team] people are put down for being different...- Accountant, publications team, manufacturing company Mistakes [in this unit] are serious, because of the toxicity of the drugs—so you’re never afraid to tell the nurse manager.- Nurse, Team A, Memorial Hospital [The team leader] treats you as guilty if you make a mistake... I was called into her office and made to feel like a two-year old... You get put on trial...- Nurse, Team B, Memorial Hospital

