Multiple routes to mind wandering: Predicting mind wandering with resource theories.

Three experiments examine individual (attentional capacity) and task-related characteristics leading to mind wandering, and the effect of mind wandering on task performance. Drawing on resource theories, we tested interactive nonlinear effects of these predictors, manipulating task demand using math tests of varying difficulty (Exp 1: N = 143, three levels between-subjects; Exp 2: N = 59, three levels within-subjects; Exp 3: N = 133, four levels within-subjects). Results confirmed that mind wandering was most frequent during extreme task demand levels, although the effect varied somewhat between experiments. Additionally, results from Experiment 3 and an integrated analysis demonstrated that people with relatively higher attentional capacity were less likely to mind wander as task demand increased. Moreover, mind wandering was more detrimental to performance as task demand increased across all experiments. Our findings build on past research by demonstrating the importance of accounting for interactions and nonlinear effects of task demand and attentional capacity in mind wandering research.

The comparative effect of subjective and objective after-action reviews on team performance on a complex task.

The after-action review (AAR; also known as the after-event review or debriefing) is an approach to training based on a review of trainees' performance on recently completed tasks or performance events. Used by the military for decades, nonmilitary organizations' use of AARs has increased dramatically in recent years. Despite the prevalence of AARs, empirical research investigating their effectiveness has been limited. This study sought to investigate the comparative effectiveness of objective AARs (reviews based on an objective recording and playback of trainees' recent performance) and subjective AARs (reviews based on a subjective, memory-based recall of trainees' recent performance). One hundred eighty-eight individuals, participating in 47 4-person teams, were assigned to 1 of 3 AAR conditions and practiced and tested on a cognitively complex performance task. Although there were no significant differences between objective and subjective AAR teams across the 5 training outcomes, AAR teams had higher levels of team performance, team efficacy, openness of communication, and cohesion than did non-AAR teams but no differences in their levels of team declarative knowledge. Our results suggest that AARs are effective at enhancing training outcomes. Furthermore, AARs may not be dependent on objective reviews and therefore may be a viable training intervention when objective reviews are not feasible or possible.

Team task analysis: differentiating between tasks using team relatedness and team workflow as metrics of team task interdependence.

OBJECTIVE: As a constructive replication and extension of Arthur, Edwards, Bell, Villado, and Bennett (2005), the objective of the current study was to further investigate the efficacy of team relatedness and team workflow ratings (along with their composite) as metrics of interdependence. BACKGROUND: Although an analysis of task and job interdependence has important implications and uses in domains such as job design, selection, and training, the job analysis literature has been slow to develop an effective method to identify team-based tasks and jobs. METHOD: To achieve the study's objectives, 140 F-16 fighter pilots (35 four-person teams) rated 34 task and activity statements in terms of their team relatedness and team workflow. RESULTS: The results indicated that team relatedness and team workflow effectively differentiated between tasks with varying levels of interdependency (as identified by instructor pilots who served as subject matter experts) within the same job. In addition, teams that accurately perceived the level of interdependency performed better on a four-ship F-16 flight-training program than those that did not. CONCLUSION: Team relatedness and team workflow ratings can effectively differentiate between tasks with varying levels of interdependency. APPLICATION: Like traditional individual task or job analysis, this information can serve as the basis for specified human resource functions and interventions, and as diagnostic indicators as well.

The importance of distinguishing between constructs and methods when comparing predictors in personnel selection research and practice.

The authors highlight the importance and discuss the criticality of distinguishing between constructs and methods when comparing predictors. They note that comparisons of constructs and methods in comparative evaluations of predictors result in outcomes that are theoretically to conceptually uninterpretable and thus potentially misleading. The theoretical and practical implications of the distinction between predictor constructs and predictor methods are discussed, with three important streams of personnel psychology research being used to frame this discussion. Researchers, editors, reviewers, educators, and consumers of research are urged to carefully consider the extent to which the construct-method distinction is made and maintained in their own research and that of others, especially when predictors are being compared. It is hoped that this discussion will reorient researchers and practitioners toward a more construct-oriented approach that is aligned with a scientific emphasis in personnel selection research and practice.

The use of person-organization fit in employment decision making: an assessment of its criterion-related validity.

Because measures of person-organization (P-O) fit are accountable to the same psychometric and legal standards used for other employment tests when they are used for personnel decision making, the authors assessed the criterion-related validity of P-O fit as a predictor of job performance and turnover. Meta-analyses resulted in estimated true criterion-related validities of .15 (k = 36, N = 5,377) for P-O fit as a predictor of job performance and .24 (k = 8, N = 2,476) as a predictor of turnover, compared with a stronger effect of .31 (k = 109, N = 108,328) for the more commonly studied relation between P-O fit and work attitudes. In contrast to the relations between P-O fit and work attitudes, the lower 95% credibility values for the job performance and turnover relations included zero. In addition, P-O fit's relations with job performance and turnover were partially mediated by work attitudes. Potential concerns pertaining to the use of P-O fit in employment decision making are discussed in light of these results.

Team task analysis: identifying tasks and jobs that are team based.

This paper presents initial information on the development and validation of three team task analysis scales. These scales were designed to quantitatively assess the extent to which a group of tasks or a job is team based. During a 2-week period, 52 male students working in 4-person teams were trained to perform a complex highly interdependent computer-simulated combat mission consisting of both individual- and team-based tasks. Our results indicated that the scales demonstrated high levels of interrater agreement. In addition, the scales differentiated between tasks that were predetermined to be individual versus team based. Finally, the results indicated that job-level ratings of team workflow were more strongly related to team performance than were aggregated task-level ratings of team-relatedness or team workflow. These results suggest that the scales presented here are an effective means of quantifying the extent to which tasks or jobs are team based. A research and practical implication of our findings is that the team task analysis scales could serve as criterion measures in the evaluation of team training interventions or predictors of team performance.