MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141463378 · doi:10.21818/001c.16779

Situational Influences on Team Helping Norms: Case Study of a Self-directed Team

2007· article· en· W2141463378 on OpenAlexaff
P. Robert Duimering, Robert B. Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Behavioral and Applied Management · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicTeam Dynamics and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituational ethicsTeam compositionTeam effectivenessTask (project management)Psychological safetyPsychologyApplied psychologyFlexibility (engineering)Knowledge managementSituation awarenessAsynchronous communicationSocial psychologyNorm (philosophy)Computer scienceEngineeringManagementPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A case study investigated the behavioral characteristics of a self-directed work team, and properties of the team’s task situation that may have influenced team behavior. Results indicate that helping among team members was the most prominent group norm, and also suggest various situational factors may have encouraged helping behavior, including task flexibility, low task interdependence, asynchronous demand variability, and the lack of formal performance measures. Implications for future research and management practice are discussed. The paper contributes toward a better understanding of the behavioral characteristics of effective teams and the influence of task situation on team behavior.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Behavioral and Applied ManagementSame topicTeam Dynamics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207