Change search
Refine search result
1 - 1 of 1
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • 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
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Berggren, Peter
    et al.
    Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, Sweden.
    Johansson, Björn J E
    Swedish Defence Research Agency, Information and Aeronautical Systems, Linköping, Sweden.
    Baroutsi, Nicoletta
    Swedish Defence University, Department of Military Studies, Command & Control Studies Division.
    Assessing the quality of Shared Priorities in teams using content analysis in a microworld experiment2017In: Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, ISSN 1463-922X, E-ISSN 1464-536X, Vol. 18, no 2, p. 128-146Article in journal (Refereed)
    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.

1 - 1 of 1
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • 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