↓ Skip to main content

Group learning capacity: the roles of open-mindedness and shared vision

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Group learning capacity: the roles of open-mindedness and shared vision
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00150
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mimi Lord

Abstract

Open-mindedness (OPM) is a construct that is considered a key foundational aspect of learning in individuals, groups and organizations. Also known as critical inquiry or reflection, OPM is believed to increase learning through examination of prior beliefs, decisions and mistakes, and also through openness to new ideas. Renowned theorists including Dewey and Argyris have emphasized the relationship between OPM and learning, yet little quantitative research has tested it or examined moderators of the linkage. The setting for the current study is that of endowment investment committees at U.S. universities and colleges who need to make knowledgeable and well-reasoned decisions about the composition of investment portfolios. Findings indicate that OPM has a positive, significant effect on group learning capacity (LCAP) and also that shared vision, which represents the group's collective purpose and direction, moderates that relationship. The literature review and discussion offer insights about how OPM is related to the research on group conflict, and how shared vision (SHV) differs from concepts such as interpersonal cohesiveness and conformity that have been associated with groupthink. A review of relevant research from the fields of organizational learning, group dynamics, and absorptive capacity provides context for the development of the hypotheses and the discussion of findings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 106 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 24 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 33 31%
Social Sciences 12 11%
Psychology 10 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 25 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 31 May 2022.
All research outputs
#13,429,348
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,322
of 29,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,992
of 255,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#264
of 429 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,702 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 255,577 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 429 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.