The Interplay between Learning Orientation, Openness and Psychological Safety in Team Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Team learning has long been a central interest in team scholarship. Within this work, a number of emergent states have been considered in their influence on team effectiveness. In particular, team learning orientation is known to be positively related to team learning. However, it is less understood exactly how team learning orientation fosters team learning or whether there is conceptual overlap between team learning orientation and other emergent states related to team learning such as team psychological safety. To explore these questions, we designed a time-lagged, survey-based study of teams in the sales division of a large financial services firm, and tested a moderated mediation model of team learning that includes team learning orientation, team openness, and team psychological safety. Our results demonstrates that the relationship between team learning orientation on team learning is mediated by team psychological safety and further, that the relationship between team learning orientation and team psychological safety is moderated by the level of team openness. The mediation effect was only present when team openness was low, but not when it was high. Therefore, we reveal some initial patterns of interaction and discrimination among key team emergent states that are related to team learning.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".