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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Team Task Analysis: Identifying Tasks and Jobs That Are Team Based
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Factors, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1518/001872005774860087 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Winfred Arthur, Bryan D. Edwards, Suzanne T. Bell, Anton J. Villado, Winston Bennett |
| Abstract |
This paper presents initial information on the development and validation of three team task analysis scales. These scales were designed to quantitatively assess the extent to which a group of tasks or a job is team based. During a 2-week period, 52 male students working in 4-person teams were trained to perform a complex highly interdependent computer-simulated combat mission consisting of both individual- and team-based tasks. Our results indicated that the scales demonstrated high levels of interrater agreement. In addition, the scales differentiated between tasks that were predetermined to be individual versus team based. Finally, the results indicated that job-level ratings of team workflow were more strongly related to team performance than were aggregated task-level ratings of team-relatedness or team workflow. These results suggest that the scales presented here are an effective means of quantifying the extent to which tasks or jobs are team based. A research and practical implication of our findings is that the team task analysis scales could serve as criterion measures in the evaluation of team training interventions or predictors of team performance. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 3% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 134 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 31 | 21% |
| Unknown | 18 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 41 | 28% |
| Engineering | 22 | 15% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 21 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 10% |
| Unknown | 22 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 January 2015.
All research outputs
#8,537,346
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Human Factors
#533
of 1,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,531
of 346,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Factors
#48
of 144 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,422 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 346,178 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 144 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.