The Measurement of Team Mental Models: We Have No Shared Schema Export

@article{citeulike:2896240, abstract = {This article seeks to promote the advancement of empirical research on team mental models by (a) highlighting the conceptual work that must precede the selection of any measurement tool, (b) delineating measurement standards for group-level cognitions, and (c) evaluating a set of techniques for measuring team mental models. Pathfinder, multidimensional scaling, interactively elicited cognitive mapping, and text-based cognitive mapping are critiqued and compared according to their treatment of content and structure, as well as their psychometric properties. We conclude that these four techniques hold promise for measuring team mental models and illustrate the variability in measurement options. However, careful attention to the research question and research context must precede the selection of any measurement tool. 10.1177/109442810032001}, author = {Mohammed, Susan and Klimoski, Richard and Rentsch, Joan R.}, citeulike-article-id = {2896240}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109442810032001}, citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://orm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/3/2/123}, day = {1}, doi = {10.1177/109442810032001}, journal = {Organizational Research Methods}, keywords = {cognitive\_schemas, cultural\_schemas, measurement, mental\_model}, month = {April}, number = {2}, pages = {123--165}, posted-at = {2008-06-15 15:28:29}, priority = {2}, title = {The Measurement of Team Mental Models: We Have No Shared Schema}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109442810032001}, volume = {3}, year = {2000} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:2896240 L3 - citeulike-article-id:2896240 N2 - This article seeks to promote the advancement of empirical research on team mental models by (a) highlighting the conceptual work that must precede the selection of any measurement tool, (b) delineating measurement standards for group-level cognitions, and (c) evaluating a set of techniques for measuring team mental models. Pathfinder, multidimensional scaling, interactively elicited cognitive mapping, and text-based cognitive mapping are critiqued and compared according to their treatment of content and structure, as well as their psychometric properties. We conclude that these four techniques hold promise for measuring team mental models and illustrate the variability in measurement options. However, careful attention to the research question and research context must precede the selection of any measurement tool. 10.1177/109442810032001 IS - 2 JF - Organizational Research Methods EP - 165 TI - The Measurement of Team Mental Models: We Have No Shared Schema VL - 3 SP - 123 KW - cognitive_schemas KW - cultural_schemas KW - measurement KW - mental_model AU - Mohammed, Susan AU - Klimoski, Richard AU - Rentsch, Joan PY - 2000/04/01/ UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109442810032001 ER -