The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Transactive Memory: Learning Who Knows What in Work Groups and Organizations
Abstract
D. M. Wegner was the first to analyze transactive memory, especially as it occurs in couples. A transactive memory system can thus provide a group&s;s members with more and better information than any of them could remember alone. This chapter discusses most interested in three factors associated with the operation of transactive memory systems. The first of these factors was memory differentiation, or the tendency for group members to specialize in remembering different aspects of the assembly process. The second factor was task coordination, or the ability of group members to work together efficiently on the radio. The final factor was task credibility, or the level of trust among group members in one another&s;s radio knowledge. Videotapes of the groups were again rated by several judges, using the same procedures as before. A major strength of the interpersonal approach is that knowledge about a task can be shared in ways that are tailored to a worker&s;s specific needs.
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
Cited by
Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda.
van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1008 · Cited by 2,911
Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x · Cited by 2,623
Disrupted Routines: Team Learning and New Technology Implementation in Hospitals
Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M., & Pisano, G. P. (2001) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3094828 · Cited by 1,729
Coordinating Expertise in Software Development Teams
Faraj, S., & Sproull, L. (2000) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.12.1554.12072 · Cited by 1,689
Edmondson, A. C. (2003) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/1467-6486.00386 · Cited by 1,635
Transactive Memory Systems in Organizations: Matching Tasks, Expertise, and People
Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A. B. (2004) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1040.0069 · Cited by 553
Recognizing and Utilizing Expertise in Work Groups: A Status Characteristics Perspective
Bunderson, J. S. (2003) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3556637 · Cited by 527
Expanding Explainability: Towards Social Transparency in AI systems
Ehsan, U., Liao, Q. V., Muller, M., Riedl, M. O., & Weisz, J. D. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445188 · Cited by 538
Situated Knowledge and Learning in Dispersed Teams
Sole, D., & Edmondson, A. (2002) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/1467-8551.13.s2.3 · Cited by 452
Teaming With a Synthetic Teammate: Insights into Human-Autonomy Teaming
McNeese, N. J., Demir, M., Cooke, N. J., & Myers, C. (2018) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720817743223 · Cited by 380
2 Old Assumptions, New Work: The Opportunities and Challenges of Research on Nonstandard Employment
Ashford, S. J., George, E., & Blatt, R. (2007) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.1080/078559807 · Cited by 288
Something(s) old and something(s) new: Modeling drivers of global virtual team effectiveness
Maynard, M. T., Mathieu, J. E., Rapp, T. L., & Gilson, L. L. (2012) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.1772 · Cited by 225
(2007) · D-Scholarship@Pitt (University of Pittsburgh) · Cited by 141
Metadata
- Authors
- Moreland, R. L.
- Venue
- Shared Cognition in Organizations
- Publisher
- Psychology Press
- Published
- 1999-07-01
- Pages
- 3-32
- OpenAlex
- W2909938751
- Cited by
- 566
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 29.55
- Type
- book chapter
- 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.
