The perceptions that team members have of each other's capabilities and the accuracy of those perceptions are very important in determining how well a team will perform. This paper describes a method for assessing, and the consequences of, team members' confidence in the capabilities of their peers. The mutual judgments of confidence are derived from knowledge each team member has of the capabilities of others to perform their respective tasks and to coordinate their actions with those of other team members. Implications of the accuracy of this knowledge and its impact on collective team training and performance are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlexanderL. T.CooperlandA. S. (1965). System training and research in team behavior (TM-2581). Santa Monica, CA: System Development Corporation.
2.
BakerC. V.SalasE.Cannon-BowersJ. A.SpectorP. (1992). The effects of inter-positional uncertainty and workload on teamwork and task performance. Paper presented at The Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Montreal, Canada.
3.
BanduraA. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
4.
BanduraA. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147.
5.
ConverseS. A.Cannon-BowersJ. A.SalasE. (1991). Team member shared mental models: A theory and some methodological issues. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting (pp. 1471–1421). Santa Monica CA: Human Factors Society.
6.
DarleyJ. M.GoethalsG. R. (1980). People's analysis of the causes of ability linked performances. In BerkowitzL., (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology: (Vol 130).New York: Academic Press.
7.
DyerJ. (1984). Team research and training: A state-of-the-art review. In MucklerF. A. (Ed.), Human factors review: 1984 (pp. 285–383). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
8.
GarbH. N. (1986). The appropriateness of confidence ratings in clinical judgement. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42, 190–197.
9.
GouldD.WeissM. (1981). The effects of model similarity and model talk on self-efficacy and muscular endurance. Journal of Sport Psychology, 3, 17–29.
10.
HuffJ. W.ChristR. E. (in preparation). The collective training of multiple team organizational units: Results of a review of the literature.Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
11.
HuntD. P. (1982). A consideration of the motor component and of the speed and accuracy of self-assessment responding. (Contract No. 903–80-C-0276) Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
12.
HuntD. P. (1991). Human Self Assessment Technology: A Tool for Education and Training. Las Cruces, NM: Human Performance Enhancement Inc.
13.
HuntD. P.FurustigH. (1989). Being informed, being misinformed and disinformation: A human learning and decision making approach (Tech. Report PM56:283, 1989-04-21). Karlstad, Sweden: Institution 56 Manniska Maskin System.
14.
HuntD. P.SamsM. R., (1989). Human self-assessment process theory: An eight factor model of human performance and learning; and everyman's causation. In DornicS.LundgrenG. (Eds.), Psychophysics in action (pp. 41–53). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
15.
JohnsonD. M. (1939). Confidence and speed in the two-category judgement. Archives of Psychology, 34, 1–51.
16.
JonesE. E.RockL.ShaverK. G.GoethalsG. R.WardL. M. (1968). Pattern performance and ability attribution: An unexpected primacy effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 317–341.
17.
LichensteinS.FischoffB. (1980). Training for calibration. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 26, 149–171.
18.
LindsayR. C.WellsG. L.O'ConnorF. J. (1989). Mock-Juror belief in accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses. Law and Human Behavior, 13(3), 333–339.
19.
LockeE. A.LathamG. P. (1990). A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
20.
ModrickJ. A. (1986). Team performance and training. In ZeidnerJ. (Ed.), Human productivity enhancement: Organizations, personnel, and decision making (pp. 130–166). New York: Praeger.
21.
MorganB. B.Jr.GlickmanA. S.WoodardE. A.BlaiwesA. S.SalasE. (1986). Measurement of team behaviors in a navy environment (Tech. Report 86–014). Orlando, FL: Naval Training Systems Center.
22.
NuttinJ. (1968). Reward and Punishment in Human Learning: Elements of a Behavior Theory.New York: Academic Press.
23.
PierrelR.MurrayK. S. (1963). Some relationships between comparative judgement, confidence and decision-time in weight lifting. American Journal of Psychology, 76, 28–38.
24.
SharpG. L.CutlerB. L.PenrodS. D. (1988). Performance feedback improves the resolution of confidence judgements. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 42, 271–283.
25.
ShufordE. H.AlbertA.MassengillH. E. (1966). Admissible probability measurement procedures. Psychometrika, 31(2), 125–145.
26.
SiskelK.FlexmanR. (1962). Study of the effectiveness of a flight simulator for training complex aircrew skills. Bell Aeronautics.
27.
SpinkK. S. (1990). Collective efficacy in the sport setting. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 21, 380–395.
