Personality and performance: Assessing the mediating role of mental model formation in the personality-performance relationship

Personality has long been linked to performance. Evolutions in this relationship have brought forward new questions regarding the true nature of how personality impacts performance. Both direct and indirect relationships have been proven significant. This study further investigated potential indirect relationships by including a mediating variable, mental model formation, in the personality-performance relationship. Undergraduate students were assessed in a 6-week period, Time 1 - Time 2 experiment. Conceptualizations of personality included measures of the Big 5 model and Self-efficacy, with performance measured by content quiz and overall course scores. Findings showed that the Big 5 personality traits, extraversion and agreeableness, positively and significantly impacted commonality with the instructor's mental model. However, commonality with the instructor's mental model did not impact performance. In comparison, commonality with an expert mental model positively and significantly impacted performance for both the content quiz and overall course score. Furthermore, similarity with an expert mental model positively and significantly impacted overall course performance. Hypothesized full mediation of mental model formation for the personality-performance relationship was not supported due to a lack of direct effect relationships required for mediation. However, a revised conceptualization of results emerged. Findings from the current study point to the novel and unique role mental models play in the personality-performance relationship. While personality traits do impact mental model formation, accuracy in the mental models formed is critical to performance.

Personality and Performance: Assessing the Mediating Role of Mental Model Formation in the Personality-Performance Relationship

Personality has long been linked to performance. Evolutions in this relationship have brought forward new questions regarding the true nature of how personality impacts performance. Both direct and indirect relationships have been proven significant. This study further investigated potential indirect relationships by including a mediating variable, mental model formation, in the personality-performance relationship. Undergraduate students were assessed in a 6-week period, Time 1 - Time 2 experiment. Conceptualizations of personality included measures of the Big 5 model and Self-efficacy, with performance measured by content quiz and overall course scores. Findings showed that the Big 5 personality traits, extraversion and agreeableness, positively and significantly impacted commonality with the instructor’s mental model. However, commonality with the instructor’s mental model did not impact performance. In comparison, commonality with an expert mental model positively and significantly impacted performance for both the content quiz and overall course score. Furthermore, similarity with an expert mental model positively and significantly impacted overall course performance. Hypothesized full mediation of mental model formation for the personality-performance relationship was not supported due to a lack of direct effect relationships required for mediation. However, a revised conceptualization of results emerged. Findings from the current study point to the novel and unique role mental models play in the personality-performance relationship. While personality traits do impact mental model formation, accuracy in the mental models formed is critical to performance.

Teams leading teams: Examining the role of leadership in multi-team systems

A major challenge of modern teams lies in the coordination of the efforts not just of individuals within a team, but also of teams whose efforts are ultimately entwined with those of other teams. Despite this fact, much of the research on work teams fails to consider the external dependencies that exist in organizational teams and instead focuses on internal or within team processes. Multi-Team Systems Theory is used as a theoretical framework for understanding teams-of-teams organizational forms (Multi-Team Systems; MTS's); and leadership teams are proposed as one remedy that enable MTS members to dedicate needed resources to intra-team activities while ensuring effective synchronization of between-team activities. Two functions of leader teams were identified: strategy development and coordination facilitation; and a model was developed delineating the effects of the two leader roles on multi-team cognitions, processes, and performance.^ Three hundred eighty-four undergraduate psychology and business students participated in a laboratory simulation that modeled an MTS; each MTS was comprised of three, two-member teams each performing distinct but interdependent components of an F-22 battle simulation task. Two roles of leader teams supported in the literature were manipulated through training in a 2 (strategy training vs. control) x 2 (coordination training vs. control) design. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and mediated regression analysis were used to test the study's hypotheses. ^ Results indicate that both training manipulations produced differences in the effectiveness of the intended form of leader behavior. The enhanced leader strategy training resulted in more accurate (but not more similar) MTS mental models, better inter-team coordination, and higher levels of multi-team (but not component team) performance. Moreover, mental model accuracy fully mediated the relationship between leader strategy and inter-team coordination; and inter-team coordination fully mediated the effect of leader strategy on multi-team performance. Leader coordination training led to better inter-team coordination, but not to higher levels of either team or multi-team performance. Mediated Input-Process-Output (I-P-O) relationships were not supported with leader coordination; rather, leader coordination facilitation and inter-team coordination uniquely contributed to component team and multi-team level performance. The implications of these findings and future research directions are also discussed. ^

Adaptation in knowledge-based teams: An examination of team composition, leader sensegiving, and cognitive, behavioral, and motivational mechanisms

Organizations are increasingly relying on teams to do the work that has traditionally been done by individuals. At the same time, the environments in which these organizations and teams operate have been becoming progressively more complex and uncertain. These trends raise important questions about the factors that enable teams to adapt. In response to these questions, the current study sought to identify the cognitive, behavioral, and motivational processes and emergent states that promote a team's adaptation to unforeseen changes and novel events, and the team compositional characteristics and leadership processes that enabled these processes and emergent states. Two hundred twenty two undergraduate students from a large Southeastern University composed 74 3-person teams, and participated in a computerized decision-making simulation where each team formed the governing body (i.e., Mayor's cabinet) for two separate simulated cities, and made strategic decisions about city operations. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three roles, distributing expertise and creating mutual interdependence. External team leader sensegiving was manipulated through video recorded communications from an external team leader. Results indicate that team cognitive ability, achievement striving, and psychological collectivism, as well as external team leader sensegiving, were all related to the similarity and quality of team members' strategy-focused mental models (cognitive emergent states), and to the amount of information sharing among members (behavioral process). In turn, teams with more similar and higher quality mental models, and who shared greater levels of information, were found to have a greater ability to react and adapt to environmental changes, and to have greater levels of decision-making effectiveness. Results indicate a pattern of relationships consistent with hypotheses, and have important implications for organizations and knowledge-based teams charged with management responsibilities. Organizations should staff teams with the compositional characteristics that enable the development of similar and high quality mental models, and that promote information sharing among teammates. Similarly, organizations which train and develop leaders to engage in sensegiving behaviors enable team adaptability and promote enhanced decision-making effectiveness when faced with unforeseen changes and novel situations.

The impact of cross -training on team processes and performance

Recently, researchers have begun to investigate the benefits of cross-training teams. It has been hypothesized that cross-training should help improve team processes and team performance (Cannon-Bowers, Salas, Blickensderfer, & Bowers, 1998; Travillian, Volpe, Cannon-Bowers, & Salas, 1993). The current study extends previous research by examining different methods of cross-training (positional clarification and positional modeling) and the impact they have on team process and performance in both more complex and less complex environments. One hundred and thirty-five psychology undergraduates were placed in 45 three-person teams. Participants were randomly assigned to roles within teams. Teams were asked to “fly” a series of missions on a PC-based helicopter flight simulation. ^ Results suggest that cross-training improves team mental model accuracy and similarity. Accuracy of team mental models was found to be a predictor of coordination quality, but similarity of team mental models was not. Neither similarity nor accuracy of team mental models was found to be a predictor of backup behavior (quality and quantity). As expected, both team coordination (quality) and backup behaviors (quantity and quality) were significant predictors of overall team performance. Contrary to expectations, there was no interaction between cross-training and environmental complexity. Results from this study further cross-training research by establishing positional clarification and positional modeling as training strategies for improving team performance. ^

Evaluation of the internal structural validity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) anxiety disorders in children and adolescents

The purpose of the present dissertation was to evaluate the internal validity of symptoms of four common anxiety disorders included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fourth edition (text revision) (DSM-IV-TR; American Psychiatric Association, 2000), namely, separation anxiety disorder (SAD), social phobia (SOP), specific phobia (SP), and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), in a sample of 625 youth (ages 6 to 17 years) referred to an anxiety disorders clinic and 479 parents. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were conducted on the dichotomous items of the SAD, SOP, SP, and GAD sections of the youth and parent versions of the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for DSM-IV (ADIS-IV: C/P; Silverman & Albano, 1996) to test and compare a number of factor models including a factor model based on the DSM. Contrary to predictions, findings from CFAs showed that a correlated model with five factors of SAD, SOP, SP, GAD worry, and GAD somatic distress, provided the best fit of the youth data as well as the parent data. Multiple group CFAs supported the metric invariance of the correlated five factor model across boys and girls. Thus, the present study’s finding supports the internal validity of DSM-IV SAD, SOP, and SP, but raises doubt regarding the internal validity of GAD.^