The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis.
Abstract
This study sought to unify the team composition literature by using meta-analytic techniques to estimate the relationships between specified deep-level team composition variables (i.e., personality factors, values, abilities) and team performance. The strength of the team composition variable and team performance relationships was moderated by the study setting (lab or field) and the operationalization of the team composition variable. In lab settings, team minimum and maximum general mental ability and team mean emotional intelligence were related to team performance. Only negligible effects were observed in lab settings for the personality factor and team performance relationships, as well as the value and team performance relationships. In contrast, team minimum agreeableness and team mean conscientiousness, openness to experience, collectivism, and preference for teamwork emerged as strong predictors of team performance in field studies. Results can be used to effectively compose teams in organizations and guide future team composition research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Schwartz, S. H. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6 · Cited by 14,619
THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META‐ANALYSIS
BARRICK, M. R., & MOUNT, M. K. (1991) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x · Cited by 8,689
Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81 · Cited by 6,404
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
A Temporally Based Framework and Taxonomy of Team Processes
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259182 · Cited by 3,659
What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639702300303 · Cited by 3,526
Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis.
De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.741 · Cited by 3,071
Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict and Performance
Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667029 · Cited by 2,971
The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration.
Mullen, B., & Copper, C. (1994) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.2.210 · Cited by 1,398
Price, K. H., Harrison, D. A., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. (2002) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/3069328 · Cited by 583
Managing Emotions During Team Problem Solving: Emotional Intelligence and Conflict Resolution
Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. C. (2004) · Human Performance · doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1702_4 · Cited by 549
Comparing meta-analytic moderator estimation techniques under realistic conditions.
Steel, P. D., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2002) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.96 · Cited by 309
Offermann, L. R., Bailey, J. R., Vasilopoulos, N. L., Seal, C., & Sass, M. (2004) · Human Performance · doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1702_5 · Cited by 166
Cited by
Teamwork in healthcare: Key discoveries enabling safer, high-quality care.
Rosen, M. A., DiazGranados, D., Dietz, A. S., Benishek, L. E., Thompson, D., Pronovost, P. J., & Weaver, S. J. (2018) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/amp0000298 · Cited by 1,283
Stahl, G. K., Maznevski, M. L., Voigt, A., & Jonsen, K. (2010) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2009.85 · Cited by 1,248
Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., Lukasik, M. A., Belau, L., & Briggs, A. L. (2011) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206310365001 · Cited by 907
Self-citationvan der Vegt, G. S., Essens, P., Wahlström, M., & George, G. (2015) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2015.4004 · Cited by 742
Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature
O’Neill, T., McNeese, N., Barron, A., & Schelble, B. (2022) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720820960865 · Cited by 695
Metadata
- Authors
- Bell, S. T.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2007-05
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 595-615
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W2012082729
- Cited by
- 1,137
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 35.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
