↓ Skip to main content

Team Task Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Human Factors, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Team Task Analysis
Published in
Human Factors, March 2012
DOI 10.1177/0018720811435234
Pubmed ID
Authors

Winfred Arthur, Ryan M. Glaze, Alok Bhupatkar, Anton J. Villado, Winston Bennett, Leah J. Rowe

Abstract

As a constructive replication and extension of Arthur, Edwards, Bell, Villado, and Bennett (2005), the objective of the current study was to further investigate the efficacy of team relatedness and team workflow ratings (along with their composite) as metrics of interdependence. Although an analysis of task and job interdependence has important implications and uses in domains such as job design, selection, and training, the job analysis literature has been slow to develop an effective method to identify team-based tasks and jobs. To achieve the study's objectives, 140 F-16 fighter pilots (35 four-person teams) rated 34 task and activity statements in terms of their team relatedness and team workflow. The results indicated that team relatedness and team workflow effectively differentiated between tasks with varying levels of interdependency (as identified by instructor pilots who served as subject matter experts) within the same job. In addition, teams that accurately perceived the level of interdependency performed better on a four-ship F-16 flight-training program than those that did not. Team relatedness and team workflow ratings can effectively differentiate between tasks with varying levels of interdependency. Like traditional individual task or job analysis, this information can serve as the basis for specified human resource functions and interventions, and as diagnostic indicators as well.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 39 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 38%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 15%
Student > Master 5 13%
Professor 4 10%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 38%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 20%
Engineering 4 10%
Computer Science 3 8%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 2 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 September 2016.
All research outputs
#1,861,904
of 8,430,317 outputs
Outputs from Human Factors
#170
of 796 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,588
of 252,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Factors
#7
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,430,317 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 796 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 252,905 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.