Effects of guided reflexivity and team feedback on team performance improvement: The role of team regulatory processes and cognitive emergent states

References

• Andres, H. P. (2013). Team cognition using collaborative technology: A behavioral analysis. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28, 38–54. doi:10.1108/02683941311298850
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anseel, F., Lievens, F., & Schollaert, E. (2009). Reflection as a strategy to enhance task performance after feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110, 23–35. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Baard, S. K., Rench, T. A., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2014). Performance adaptation: A theoretical integration and review. Journal of Management, 40, 48–99. doi:10.1177/0149206313488210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Singh, S. (1991). On the use of structural equation models in experimental designs: Two extensions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 8, 125–140. doi:10.1016/0167-8116(91)90020-8
   Google Scholar
• Biemann, T., Ellwart, T., & Rack, O. (2014). Quantifying similarity of team mental models: An introduction of the rrg index. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 17, 125–140. doi:10.1177/1368430213485993
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blaskovich, J. L. (2008). Exploring the effect of distance: An experimental investigation of virtual collaboration, social loafing, and group decisions. Journal of Information Systems, 22, 27–46. doi:10.2308/jis.2008.22.1.27
   Google Scholar
• Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations (pp. 349–381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Bresman, H. (2013). Changing routines: A process model of vicarious group learning in pharmaceutical R&D. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 35–61. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0725
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodbeck, F. C., Kerschreiter, R., Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2007). Group decision making under conditions of distributed knowledge: The information asymmetries model. Academy of Management Review, 32, 459–479. doi:10.5465/AMR.2007.24351441
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, R. D., & Hauenstein, N. M. A. (2005). Interrater agreement reconsidered: An alternative to the rwg indices. Organizational Research Methods, 8, 165–184. doi:10.1177/1094428105275376
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Salas, E., Pierce, L., & Kendall, D. (2006). Understanding team adaptation: A conceptual analysis and model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1189–1207. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1189
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, M. J., & Dunlap, W. P. (2002). Estimating interrater agreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 159–172. doi:10.1177/1094428102005002002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, M. J., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. S. (1999). On average deviation indices for estimating interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 49–68. doi:10.1177/109442819921004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cannon, M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2001). Confronting failure: Antecedents and consequences of shared beliefs about failure in organizational work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 161–177. doi:10.1002/job.85
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Salas, E., & Converse, S. (1993). Shared mental models in expert team decision making. In N. J. Castellan Jr. (Ed.), Individual and group decision making (pp. 221–246). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Carter, S. M., & West, M. A. (1998). Reflexivity, effectiveness and mental health in BBC-TV production teams. Small Group Research, 29, 583–601. doi:10.1177/1046496498295003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295–358). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, W. W., & Newsted, P. R. (1999). Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Statistical strategies for small sample research (pp. 307–342). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Conger, A. J. (1974). A revised definition for suppressor variables: A guide to their identification and interpretation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34, 35–46. doi:10.1177/001316447403400105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, N. J., Gorman, J. C., & Winner, J. L. (2008). Team cognition. In F. T. Durso, R. S. Nickerson, S. T. Dumais, S. Lewandowsky, & T. J. Perfect (Eds.), Handbook of Applied Cognition (pp. 239–268). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Cramton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12, 346–371. doi:10.1287/orsc.12.3.346.10098
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curşeu, P. L., Schalk, R., & Wessel, I. (2008). How do virtual teams process information? A literature review and implications for management. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 628–652. doi:10.1108/02683940810894729
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Dreu, C. K. W. (2007). Cooperative outcome interdependence, task reflexivity, and team effectiveness: A motivated information processing perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 628–638. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.628
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Dreu, C. K. W., Beersma, B., Stroebe, K., & Euwema, M. C. (2006). Motivated information processing, strategic choice, and the quality of negotiated agreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 927–943. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.6.927
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeChurch, L. A., & Mesmer-Magnus, J. R. (2010). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 32–53. doi:10.1037/a0017328
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeShon, R. P., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Schmidt, A. M., Milner, K. R., & Wiechmann, D. (2004). A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1035–1056. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1035
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• di Stefano, G., Gino, F., Pisano, G. P., & Staats, B. R. (2014, March). Learning by thinking: How reflection aids performance. Working Paper. Harvard Business School Technology & Operations Mgt. Retrieved from SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2414478
   Google Scholar
• Diamantopoulos, A., Riefler, P., & Roth, K. P. (2008). Advancing formative measurement models. Journal of Business Research, 61, 1203–1218. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dipboye, R. L. (1990). Laboratory vs. field research in industrial-organizational psychology. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 1–34). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Downey, E. H. (1910). The futility of marginal utility. Journal of Political Economy, 18, 253–268. doi:10.1086/251690
   Google Scholar
• Eddy, E., Tannenbaum, S., & Mathieu, J. (2013). Helping teams to help themselves: Comparing two team-led debriefing methods. Personnel Psychology, 66, 975–1008. doi:10.1111/peps.12041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edmondson, A., Roberto, M., & Watkins, M. (2003). A dynamic model of top management team effectiveness: Managing unstructured task streams. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 297–325. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00021-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellwart, T., & Konradt, U. (2007a). Wissensvermittlung und Wissenskoordination in Gruppen - Überprüfung deutschsprachiger Skalen unter computergestützter Gruppenarbeit [Measuring shared mental models of expertise location in teams: Two validation studies]. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, 51, 128–135. doi:10.1026/0932-4089.51.3.128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellwart, T., & Konradt, U. (2007b, May). Explicit and implicit team coordination: Influences of planning and shared mental models on team conflicts and coordination success. Paper presented at the 13th Congress of Work and Organizational Psychology, Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Ellwart, T., Konradt, U., & Rack, O. (2014). Team mental models of expertise location: Validation of a field survey measure. Small Group Research, 45, 119–153. doi:10.1177/1046496414521303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faraj, S., & Sproull, L. (2000). Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Science, 46, 1554–1568. doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.12.1554.12072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. A. (1958). Statistical methods for research workers. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.
   Google Scholar
• Fornell, C. (1982). A second generation of multivariate analysis: An overview. In C. Fornell (Ed.), A second generation of multivariate analysis (Vol. 1, pp. 1–21). New York, NY: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 382–388. doi:10.2307/3150980
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fransen, J., Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2011). Mediating team effectiveness in the context of collaborative learning: The importance of team and task awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1103–1113. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.05.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frese, M., & Zapf, D. (1994). Action as the core of work psychology: A German approach. In H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunette, & J. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 271–340). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
   Google Scholar
• Geister, S., Konradt, U., & Hertel, G. (2003). A group development system for improving motivation, performance and team climate in virtual teams. In D. Harris, V. Duffy, M. Smith, & C. Stephanidis (Eds.), Human-centred computing: Cognitive, social and ergonomic aspects (pp. 719–723). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Geister, S., Konradt, U., & Hertel, G. (2006). Effects of process feedback on motivation, satisfaction, and performance in virtual teams. Small Group Research, 37, 459–489. doi:10.1177/1046496406292337
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gersick, C. J. G. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 9–41. doi:10.2307/256496
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gevers, J. M. P., van Eerde, W., & Rutte, C. G. (2001). Time pressure, potency, and progress in project groups. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10, 205–221. doi:10.1080/13594320143000636
   Google Scholar
• Gevers, J. M. P., van Eerde, W., & Rutte, C. G. (2009). Team self-regulation and meeting deadlines in project teams: Antecedents and effects of temporal consensus. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18, 295–321. doi:10.1080/13594320701693217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 499–517. doi:10.2307/2392936
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodman, J. S., Wood, R. E., & Chen, Z. (2011). Feedback specificity, information processing, and transfer of training. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115, 253–267. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordijn, E. H., Postmes, T., & De Vries, N. K. (2001). Devil’s advocate or advocate of oneself: Effects of numerical support on pro- and counter attitudinal self persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 395–407. doi:10.1177/0146167201274002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gruenfeld, D. H., Mannix, E. A., Williams, K. Y., & Neale, M. A. (1996). Group composition and decision making: How member familiarity and information distribution affect process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 1–15. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunst, R. F., & Mason, R. L. (2009). Fractional factorial design. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 1, 234–244. doi:10.1002/wics.27
   Google Scholar
• Gurtner, A., Tschan, F., Semmer, N. K., & Nägele, C. (2007). Getting groups to develop good strategies: Effects of reflexivity interventions on team process, team performance, and shared mental models. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102, 127–142. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guzzo, R. A., Wagner, D. B., Maguire, E., Herr, B., & Hawley, C. (1986). Implicit theories and the evaluation of group process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 279–295. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(86)90056-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hackman, J. R. (1975). Group influences on individuals. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally.
   Google Scholar
• Hackman, J. R. (1990). Groups that work (and those that don’t). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading teams. Setting the stage for great performances. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison, D. A., Mohammed, S., McGrath, J. E., Florey, A. T., & Vanderstoep, S. W. (2003). Time matters in team performance: Effects of member familiarity, entrainment, and task discontinuity on speed and quality. Personnel Psychology, 56, 633–669. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00753.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation and conditional process modeling. Retrieved October, 2013, from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277–319.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hertel, G., Geister, S., & Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15, 69–95. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2005.01.002
   Google Scholar
• Hertel, G., Konradt, U., & Orlikowski, B. (2004). Managing distance by interdependence: Goal setting, task interdependence, and team-based rewards in virtual teams. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13, 1–28. doi:10.1080/13594320344000228
   Google Scholar
• Hinds, P. J., Carley, K. M., Krackhardt, D., & Wholey, D. (2000). Choosing work group members: Balancing similarity, competence, and familiarity. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 81, 226–251. doi:10.1006/obhd.1999.2875
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinds, P. J., & Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication. Organization Science, 16, 290–307. doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinsz, V. B., Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A. (1997). The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 43–64. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollingshead, A. B., McGrath, J. E., & O’Connor, K. M. (1993). Group task performance and communication technology: A longitudinal study of computer-mediated versus face-to-face work groups. Small Group Research, 24, 307–333. doi:10.1177/1046496493243003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517–543. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070250
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1993). Rwg: An assessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 306–309. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, M. D., Hollenbeck, J. R., Scott DeRue, D., Barnes, C. M., & Jundt, D. (2013). Functional versus dysfunctional team change: Problem diagnosis and structural feedback for self-managed teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 122, 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.03.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkman, B. L., Gibson, C. B., & Kim, K. (2012). Across borders and technologies: Advancements in virtual teams research. In S. W. J. Kozlowski (Ed.), Oxford handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 789–858). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Gibson, C. B., Tesluk, P. E., & McPherson, S. O. (2002). Five challenges to virtual team success: Lessons from Sabre, Inc. The Academy of Management Executive, 16, 67–79. doi:10.5465/AME.2002.8540322
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkman, B. L., Tesluk, P. E., & Rosen, B. (2001). Assessing the incremental validity of team consensus ratings over aggregation of individual-level data in predicting team effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 54, 645–667. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00226.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klimoski, R., & Mohammed, S. (1994). Team mental model: Construct or metaphor? Journal of Management, 20, 403–437. doi:10.1177/014920639402000206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback-interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Chao, G. T. (2012). Macrocognition, team learning, and team knowledge: Origins, emergence, and measurement. In E. Salas, S. M. Fiore, & M. P. Letsky (Eds.), Theories of team cognition: Cross-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 19–48). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• Lant, T., & Hurley, A. (1999). A contingency model of response performance feedback. Group and Organizational Management, 24, 421–437. doi:10.1177/1059601199244002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, S., & Hershberger, S. (1990). A simple rule for generating equivalent models in covariance structure modeling. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 313–334. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2503_4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LePine, J. A. (2003). Team adaptation and postchange performance: Effects of team composition in terms of members’ cognitive ability and personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 27–39. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LePine, J. A. (2005). Adaptation of teams in response to unforeseen change: Effects of goal difficulty and team composition in terms of cognitive ability and goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1153–1167. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1153
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, K., Lange, D., & Gillis, L. (2005). Transactive memory systems, learning, and learning transfer. Organization Science, 16, 581–598. doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0143
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsley, D. H., Brass, D. J., & Thomas, J. B. (1995). Efficacy-performance spirals—A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review, 20, 645–678. doi:10.2307/258790
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locke, E. A. (1986). Generalizing from laboratory to field settings. Lexington, MA: Brooke.
   Google Scholar
• Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57, 705–717. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593–614. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26, 356–376. doi:10.2307/259182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marks, M. A., Zaccaro, S. J., & Mathieu, J. E. (2000). Performance implications of leader briefings and team-interaction training for team adaptation to novel environments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 971–986. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.971
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masuch, M. (1985). Vicious circles in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 14–23. doi:10.2307/2392809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieu, J. E., Heffner, T. S., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 273–283. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.273
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieu, J. E., Rapp, T. L., Maynard, M. T., & Mangos, P. M. (2009). Interactive effects of team and task shared mental models as related to air traffic controllers’ collective efficacy and effectiveness. Human Performance, 23, 22–40. doi:10.1080/08959280903400150
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLeod, P. L. (2013). Distributed people and distributed information: Vigilant decision-making in virtual teams. Small Group Research, 44, 627–657. doi:10.1177/1046496413500696
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., DeChurch, L. A., Jiménez-Rodriguez, M., Wildman, J., & Shuffler, M. (2011). A meta-analytic investigation of virtuality and information sharing in teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115, 214–225. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohammed, S., & Dumville, B. C. (2001). Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 89–106. doi:10.1002/job.86
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohammed, S., Ferzandi, L., & Hamilton, K. (2010). Metaphor no more: A 15-year review of the team mental model construct. Journal of Management, 36, 876–910. doi:10.1177/0149206309356804
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreland, R. L. (1999). Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. In L. L. Thompson, J. M. Levine, & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge (pp. 3–31). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1992). Problem identification in groups. In S. Worchel, W. Wood, & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Group process and productivity (pp. 17–48). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Moreland, R. L., & McMinn, J. G. (2010). Group reflexivity and performance. In S. R. Thye & E. Lawler (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 27, pp. 63–95). Bingley: Emerald Press. doi:10.1108/S0882-6145(2010)0000027006
   Google Scholar
• Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
   Google Scholar
• Nadler, D. A. (1979). The effects of feedback on task group behavior: A review of the experimental research. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 309–338. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(79)90001-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Pearsall, M. J., Ellis, A. P. J., & Bell, B. S. (2010). Building the infrastructure: The effects of role identification behaviors on team cognition development and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 192–200. doi:10.1037/a0017781
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, R., & Behfar, K. J. (2003). The dynamic relationship between performance feedback, trust, and conflict in groups: A longitudinal study. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 92, 102–112. doi:10.1016/S0749-5978(03)00090-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 531–544. doi:10.1177/014920638601200408
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Randall, K. R., Resick, C. J., & DeChurch, L. A. (2011). Building team adaptive capacity: The roles of sensegiving and team composition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 525–540. doi:10.1037/a0022622
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roe, R. A. (2014). Test validity from a temporal perspective: Incorporating time in validation research. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23, 754–768. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2013.804177
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rico, R., Sánchez-Manzanares, M., Gil, F., & Gibson, C. (2008). Team implicit coordination processes: A team knowledge-based approach. Academy of Management Review, 33, 163–184. doi:10.5465/AMR.2008.27751276
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, A. (2005). SmartPLS (Version 2.0 beta) [Computer software]. Hamburg: University of Hamburg. Retrieved from www.smartpls.de
   Google Scholar
• Rönkkö, M., & Ylitalo, J. (2011). PLS marker variable approach to diagnosing and controlling for method variance. Espoo: Aalto University.
   Google Scholar
• Rosen, B., Furst, S., & Blackburn, R. (2007). Overcoming barriers to knowledge sharing in virtual teams. Organizational Dynamics, 36, 259–273. doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2007.04.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouse, W. B., Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Salas, E. (1992). The role of mental models in team performance in complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 22, 1296–1308. doi:10.1109/21.199457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schellens, T., van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2005). The impact of role assignment on knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups. Small Group Research, 36, 704–745. doi:10.1177/1046496405281771
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schippers, M. C., Den Hartog, D. N., Koopman, P. L., & Wienk, J. A. (2003). Diversity and team outcomes: The moderating effects of outcome interdependence and group longevity and the mediating effect of reflexivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 779–802. doi:10.1002/job.220
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schippers, M. C., Den Hartog, D. N., & Koopman, P. L. (2007). Reflexivity in teams: A measure and correlates. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 56, 189–211. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2006.00250.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schippers, M. C., Den Hartog, D. N., Koopman, P. L., & van Knippenberg, D. (2008). The role of transformational leadership in enhancing team reflexivity. Human Relations, 61, 1593–1616. doi:10.1177/0018726708096639
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schippers, M. C., Edmondson, A. C., & West, M. A. (2014). Team reflexivity as an antidote to team information-processing failures. Small Group Research, 45, 731–769. doi:10.1177/1046496414553473.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schippers, M., Homan, A. C., & van Knippenberg, D. (2013). To reflect or not to reflect: Prior team performance as a boundary condition of the effects of reflexivity on learning and final team performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 6–23. doi:10.1002/job.1784
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schippers, M. C., West, M. A., & Dawson, J. F. (2012). Team reflexivity and innovation: The moderating role of team context. Journal of Management. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0149206312441210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schippers, M. C., West, M. A., & Edmondson, A. C. (in press). Team reflexivity and innovation. In R. Rico, N. M. Ashkanasy, & O. B. Salas (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of teamwork and collaborative processes. Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Shiv, B., Britton, J. A. E., & Payne, J. W. (2004). Does elaboration increase or decrease the effectiveness of negatively versus positively framed messages? Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 199–208. doi:10.1086/383435
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith-Jentsch, K. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Kraiger, K. (2005). Investigating linear and interactive effects of shared mental models on safety and efficiency in a field setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 523–535. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.3.523
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srivastava, A., Bartol, K. M., & Locke, E. A. (2006). Empowering leadership in management teams: Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 49, 1239–1251. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2006.23478718
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stasser, G., Stewart, D. D., & Wittenbaum, G. M. (1995). Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: The importance of knowing who knows what. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 244–265. doi:10.1006/jesp.1995.1012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stasser, G., Vaughan, S. I., & Stewart, D. D. (2000). Pooling unshared information: The benefits of knowing how access to information is distributed among group members. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 82, 102–116. doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2890
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stelzl, I. (1986). Changing a causal hypothesis without changing the fit: Some rules for generating equivalent path models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 21, 309–331. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2103_3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, D. L., & Lukaszewski, K. M. (2009). An expanded model of the factors affecting the acceptance and effectiveness of electronic human resource management systems. Human Resource Management Review, 19, 134–143. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, A. B., MacKinnon, D. P., & Tein, J.-Y. (2008). Tests of the three-path mediated effect. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 241–269. doi:10.1177/1094428107300344
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tschan, F. (1995). Communication enhances small group performance if it conforms to task requirements: The concept of ideal communication cycles. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 371–393. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp1703_6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tschan, F. (2002). Ideal cycles of communication (or cognitions) in triads, dyads, and individuals. Small Group Research, 33, 615–643. doi:10.1177/1046496402238618
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tschan, F., McGrath, J. E., Semmer, N. K., Arametti, M., Bogenstaetter, Y., & Marsch, S. U. (2009). Temporal aspects of processes in ad-hoc groups: A conceptual schema and some research examples. In R. A. Roe, M. J. Waller, & S. R. Clegg (Eds.), Time in organizational research (pp. 42–61). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Uitdewilligen, S., Waller, M. J., & Pitariu, A. H. (2013). Mental model updating and team adaptation. Small Group Research, 44, 127–158. doi:10.1177/1046496413478205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W., Segers, M., Woltjer, G., & Kirschner, P. (2011). Team learning: Building shared mental models. Instructional Science, 39, 283–301. doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9128-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Ginkel, W. P., Tindale, R. S., & van Knippenberg, D. (2009). Team reflexivity, development of shared task representations, and the use of distributed information in group decision making. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 13, 265–280. doi:10.1037/a0016045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Ginkel, W. P., & van Knippenberg, D. (2009). Knowledge about the distribution of information and group decision making: When and why does it work? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 218–229. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vashdi, D. R., Bamberger, P. A., & Erez, M. (2013). Can surgical teams ever learn? The role of coordination, complexity, and transitivity in action team learning. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 945–971. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0501
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warkentin, M., & Beranek, P. M. (1999). Training to improve virtual team communication. Information Systems Journal, 9, 271–289. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2575.1999.00065.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weick, K. E. (1979). Causal loop and control. The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed., pp. 72–88). Addison Wesley: New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• West, M. A. (1996). Reflexivity and work group effectiveness: A conceptual integration. In M. A. West (Ed.), Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 555–579). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• West, M. A. (2000). Reflexivity, revolution, and innovation in work teams. In M. M. Beyerlein, D. Johnson, & S. T. Beyerlein (Eds.), Product development teams (Vol. 5, pp. 1–29). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Widmer, P. S., Schippers, M. C., & West, M. A. (2009). Recent developments in reflexivity research: A review. Psychology of Everyday Activity, 2, 2–11.
   Google Scholar
• Wiedow, A., & Konradt, U. (2011). Two-dimensional structure of team process improvement: Team reflection and team adaptation. Small Group Research, 42, 32–54. doi:10.1177/1046496410377358
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiedow, A., Konradt, U., Ellwart, T., & Steenfatt, C. (2013). Direct and indirect effects of team learning on team outcomes: A multiple mediator analysis. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 17, 232–251. doi:10.1037/a0034149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, L. J., Cote, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (1989). Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Reality or artifact? Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 462–468. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.3.462
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, L. J., Edwards, J., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2003). Recent advances in causal modeling methods for organizational and management research. Journal of Management, 29, 903–936. doi:10.1016/S0149-2063(03)00084-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittenbaum, G. M., Hollingshead, A. B., & Botero, I. (2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71, 286–310. doi:10.1080/0363452042000299894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittenbaum, G. M., & Stasser, G. (1998). The reevaluation of information during group discussion. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 1, 21–34. doi:10.1177/1368430298011003
   Google Scholar
• Wold, H. (1982). Soft modeling: The basic design and some extensions. In K. G. Jöreskog & H. Wold (Eds.), Systems under indirect observation: Causality, structure, prediction (Vol. 2, pp. 1–54). Amsterdam: North Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, R. E., Goodman, J. S., Beckmann, N., & Cook, A. (2008). Mediation testing in management research: A review and proposals. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 270–295. doi:10.1177/1094428106297811
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar