1
Q
individual level
A
an individuals orientation toward competition, cooperation, and groups shapes how they might perceive and respond to the interdependence within the team
2
Q
within-group level
A
- interdepdence structure
- member perceptions
- member interactions
3
Q
interdepedence structure example
A
does group require teamwork?
4
Q
member perceptions example
A
do we all rely on one other
5
Q
member interactions example
A
do members cooperate ?
6
Q
between group level (outgroup)
A
- competition with a salient outgroup can strengthen the ingroup environment
7
Q
between group level ingroups
A
effects of changes in ingroup membership can reshape treatment of outgroup
8
Q
Cooperation Vs Competition look at
A
- distribution of rewards
- groups goals
9
Q
distribution of rewards : competition
A
zero sum situation (gains by one reduces gains available to others)
10
Q
Distribution of Rewards: COOPERATION
A
non-zero sum situation (participants can share in rewards equally)
11
Q
Distribution of Rewards : INDIVIDUALISM
A
awards based on personal merit (e.g., school grades)
12
Q
Group Goals: COMPETITION
A
heterogeneous goals (different participants have different goals)
13
Q
Group Goals: COOPERATION
A
homogeneous goals (participants hold the same goals)
14
Q
within group Vs between group processes ; group 1: intragroup = cooperation
group 2: intragroup = cooperation
A
= competition
15
Q
within group Vs between group processes ; group 1: intragroup = cooperation
group 2: intragroup = cooperation
from same thing (doctor and doctor)
A
= cooperation
16
Q
within group Vs between group processes ; group 1: intragroup = competition
group 2: intragroup = competition
A
= competitoin
17
Q
within group Vs between group processes ; group 1: intragroup = competition
group 2: intragroup = cooperation
A
competition
18
Q
The Robbers Cave Experiment
A
The most successful field experiment ever conducted on intergroup conflict”
19
Q
purpose of The Robbers Cave Experiment
A
was to assess intra and inter-group interactions and relations in a natural environment
20
Q
about The Robbers Cave Experiment
A
Took part in Robbers Cave State Park – Oklahoma
11-year-old boys selected for study based on similar
Age, race, socioeconomic status, religion, general appearance
- Divided into two ‘groups’ based on size and capability
21
Q
results of The Robbers Cave Experiment
A
- Ratings of ingroup and outgroup favorability at end of Phase 2
- Boys systematically rated outgroup more negatively than ingroup
22
Q
key messages from the study
A
- Groups are real!
- Individuals naturally orient themselves into ingroups and outgroups
- Groups have psychological validity and meaning to members
- When 2 groups experience competing goals, people categorize themselves more strongly with their ingroup
- We can mitigate conflict between groups by introducing cooperative goals – intergroup contact alone is not enough
23
Q
The Jigsaw Classroom : Aronson et al. (1978):
A
they addressed a pressing practical and societal issue
During 1960s/1970s, desegregation of schools was occurring in states in the US which caused conflict and also demonstrated poor academic achievement for students involved
- Aronson and grad student in Austin, Texas recommended cooperation for solving groups within the class room
24
Q
Theoretical Foundations for “Jigsaw”:
A
- Sherif et al. – Robbers Cave!
- Contact Hypothesis
- Cognitive Dissonance
25
Contact Hypothesis
intergroup interaction can reduce prejudice and improve relations under certain conditions
Allport (1959):
- Equal status between groups
- Intergroup cooperation
- Common goals
- Support from authorities
26
Cognitive Dissonance
People strive for consistency in attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours
When not consistent, you experience unpleasant cognitive dissonance
SO, change behaviour which is readily observable, and people will change attitudes to avoid dissonance
27
what theoretical foundation is more impactful in the jigsaw classroom
Cognitive Dissonance
28
WHAT IS A JIGSAW CLASSROOM??
Like a jigsaw puzzle, every piece (in this instance, information) is required to solve an academic task and achieve full understanding of a concept
29
Description of jigsaw classroom
Students are placed in groups of 5-6 and the lecture content is broken down into 5-6 sections. Each student from a group selects which “topic” they will learn and goes off to learn that topic with others from different groups. They then return to their original group and everyone teaches the remainder of the group “their” information.
30
result of the jigsaw classroom
- competition did decrease
- likeing for gorup mates increased
- liking for other classesmates increase
- self-esteem increase
- competitiveness decreased
- perception of peers as learning sources increased
- perception of being liked by other increased (ingroups might have had a factor)
31
Stanne, Johnson, and Johnson (1999):
Meta-analysis pertaining to success in performance motor tasks based on conditions involving cooperation, competition, or individualism
32
Stanne, Johnson, and Johnson (1999): findings about cooperation
- is superior to competition for achievement and productivity
- is superior to individualism for achievement and productivity
33
Stanne, Johnson, and Johnson (1999): findings about competition
is superior to individualism for achievement and productivity
34
modators to consider
- task interdependence
- task complexity
- group size
35
Task
Inter-
dependence : cooperation
superior for interdependent sport
(e.g., volleyball)
36
Task
Inter-
dependence: competition
superior for independent sport
(e.g., wrestling)
37
Task Complexity
: Cooperation
superior for complex tasks
(e.g., basketball)
38
Task Complexity
: Competition
superior for simple tasks (e.g., RT tests in lab setting)
39
Group Size: cooperation
Cooperation superior for larger groups
(e.g., > 6 members)
40
Group Size: competition
superior for smaller groups
(e.g., < 6 members)
41
exchange
Monitor inputs and attempt to maximize rewards
42
Communal
More concerned with what the group receives, thus work as a joint force
43
Paterson et al. (1987)
studied children in pre-school environment to see if competition is innate or socially learned
44
Paterson et al. (1987) study lowout
Initially Passive Children:
- retaliated successful against aggressor --> became more aggressive
- retaliated unsuccessfully against aggressor --> remained passive
- not object of aggressive attacks ---> remained passive
45
is competition innate or socically learned
Its socially learned ****
- If were are in aggressive environment we are likely to be aggressive
- If were in a competitive environment we likely to be competitive as well
Same with cooperation
ENVIRONMENT LARGE FACTOR
46
Martens (1975) defined competition in sports as
a situational social comparison process
47
competition in sports as a situational social comparison process involving:
- Clear start and end point
- Structured evaluation procedures
- Several stages of appraisal and behavioural responses
- Awareness of competitors and evaluators
48
types of competition
inter-team and intra team
49
types of intrateam compeition
- positional
- situional
- other
50
purpose of positional comp
- playing time distribution
51
purpose of situational comp
motivation in practice
52
purpose of other compeitions
status
53
positional comp occurs between?
players in the same position
54
situitoin comp occurs between
assigned subgroups of players
55
other comp occurs between
entire team or subgroups
56
format of positional comp
longitduinal performance comparsion
57
format of situational comp
subgroup vs subgroup
58
duration of positional comp
ongoing, omnipresent
59
duration of situational comp
usually short
60
What is Positional Competition?
The process of teammates vying for the same limited playing time in one position.
61
more about positional comp
- On-going, omnipresent process
- Occurs between players in the same position
- Elite players desire to play
- Coach plays a central role, reward power
62
Positional competition thought of as generally
competition for playing time
63
study for positional comp involved
1. to advance conceptual framework
2. develop valid/reilable questionnaire
64
Humans have a tendency to form
ingroup/outgroup perceptions and competition with the outgroup
65
Impact of competition and cooperation on performance is moderated by
task and group size
66
Positional competition is ...
inevitable in many sport settings
67
Teamwork Processes
- transition
- action
- interpersonal
68
transition
preparing
69
action
doing
70
interpersonal
maintaining
71
dimensions of transition
Mission analysis, formulation, planning, goal specification, strategy formulation
72
representative tasks of transition
Analyzing the task, constraints, resources, planning, goal setting, developing courses of action
73
dimension of action
Monitoring progress towards goals, systems monitoring, team monitoring and backup behaviour, coordination
74
representative tasks of action
Tracking progress, identifying shortfalls, providing feedback, monitoring resources, coordinating behaviour, communicating info
75
interpersonal dimensions
Conflict management, motivation and confidence building, affect management
76
representative tasks of interpersonal
Managing conflict, resolving disagreements, promoting positive interpersonal relationships, regulating team member emotions
77
Teamwork in Sport definition
“A dynamic process involving a collaborative effort by team members to effectively carry out the independent and interdependent behaviors that are required to maximize a team’s likelihood of achieving its purposes”
78
Conceptual Model of Teamwork revised : management of team maintenance involves
1. psychological support
2. integrative conflict management
79
Psychological Support
Assistive behaviours between members
80
Integrative Conflict Management
Resolving disagreements/perspectives
81
when psychological support and integrative conflict management increases
performance improves
82
regulation of team performance includes
- preparation
- execution
- evaluation
- adjustments
83
preparation involves
- Preparing for the team’s task
- Mission analysis (why are we here?)
- Goal specification (what are our objectives?)
- Action planning (how are we going to succeed)
84
execuation involves
- Undertaking the team’s task
- communication (between members)
- coordinated action (between members)
- cooperative behaviours (between members)
85
evaluation involves
- Reflecting on the team’s task
- performance monitoring
- system monitoring
86
adjustments involves
- Changing things up (if needed) for the team’s task
- problem solving (why did the outcome occur)
- innovation (making changes in a good way)
- backing up (helping people perform roles)
- intrateam coaching (providing performance feedback)
87
how is teamwork assessed in teams?
Multidimensional Assessment of Teamwork in Sport (McEwan & Beauchamp, 2018)
88
Multidimensional Assessment of Teamwork in Sport (McEwan & Beauchamp, 2018) is a
66-item questionnaire that assesses teamwork across the dimensions previously discussed
89
McEwan (2020):
- used the MATS
- 178 team sport athletes
- MATS ----> satisfactions
90
MATS---> satisfaction mediated by?
- cohesion
- collective efficacy
91
because MATS is long researchers
created 2 brief measures using a heterogenous sample (UK, USA, CANADA, and singapore) of 647 interdependent sport athletes
92
what are the 2 brief measure created ?
- MATS -shorts (19 items)
- MATS- global (5 items)
93
can teamwork be improved? study McEwan and Beauchamp (2020):
about it
- 10-week pilot nonrandomized controlled intervention design
- 12 interdependent sport teams (187 athletes)
94
McEwan and Beauchamp (2020):
teamwork traing what weeks
- 2 and 6
95
McEwan and Beauchamp (2020): teamwork assessed what weeks
1, 5, 10
96
teamwork training; team charter
- Mission analysis, Psychological support, Conflict management
- Specifying behavioural norms related to managing conflict and providing interpersonal support
97
teamwork briefs
- Goal specification, Planning
- Pre-competition team meetings where members reiterate the team’s main performance goals and action plans
98
teamwork training: debriefs
- Performance monitoring, Systems monitoring, Problem solving, Innovation
- Post-competition team meetings where members review the team’s performance, including whether/why they achieved their goals
99
teamwork training simulations
- Coordination, Cooperation, Communication
- Members first describe specific behaviours that maximize teamwork execution and devote specific time during practices to developing/improving these behaviours
100
So can teamwork be improved?
yes but... look at lecture slides
101
additional considersations of teamwork
- over reilance on cohesion
- need multi level assessment
- teams are dynamic
102
over reliance on cohesion
- Goal setting had the strongest effect sizes
103
Need multi level assessment
Individuals exist within groups; simply assessing individual-level outcomes fails to account for broader influences
104
Teams are dynamic
Not static entities that progress in a linear manner
105
Longitudinal Teamwork Research in Sport : López-Gajardo et al. (2023a)
execution and cohesion lead to
- collective efficacy
- perceived team performance
106
Longitudinal Teamwork Research in Sport : López-Gajardo et al. (2023b)
leadership quality leads to
- execution
- team resilience
107
Coach Impact in Sport
Coach created motivational climate
108
coaches who have high task and low ego lead to
teamwork behaviours
109
Coach Impact in Sport : Crawford et al. (2024)
Qualitative interviews w/ interdependent sport athletes and coaches to explore how coaches can promote teamwork
110
results from Coach Impact in Sport : Crawford et al. (2024)
Need to create an environment to facilitate teamwork by focusing on certain aspects
111
what are the aspects to focus on to create environment that supports teamwork?
- athlete selections
- team composition
- athlete roles
- interpersonal relations
- intrateam competition
112
(McEwan & Crawford, 2022)
study to understand why does teamwork execution break down
113
prupose of (McEwan & Crawford, 2022) study
Better understand why processes break down—when teammates do not demonstrate effective teamwork execution
114
about (McEwan & Crawford, 2022) study
Sample: 18 British athletes (11 men, 7 women) from interdependent sport
Method: Semi-structured interviews on 2 occasions
Topics discussed: communication, coordination, cooperation
115
Precursors to Teamwork Breakdowns
1. Ineffective team prep during pre-competition warm-up
2. Ineffective team monitoring, problem solving, action planning, and conflict management during in-competition transition periods
3. Changes to team roster over season and during games
4. Unhelpful leadership during game play
5. Poor unity amongst team members regarding objectives and relationships
6. Problematic levels of confidence
7. Poor performance during competition
116
effective team preparation is ____
crucial for teamwork
117
____ and ____ leaders are needed for teamwork
task and motivational
118
what may help optimize teamwork while social cohesion sustains teamwork
task cohesion
119
May be a nuanced relationship between
team confidence and teamwork execution
120
There is a reciprocal effect between
performance and teamwork
KNPE 363
flashcards
Decks in class (11)
# Cards
