Elasticity and Rigidity Constructs and Ratings of Subjective Workload for Individuals and Groups

Guastello, Stephen J.; Marra, David E; Correro, Anthony N.; Michels, Maura; Schimmel, Henry

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-61061-0_4

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To resolve this limitation, personality and cognitive variables could be substituted for the leadership questionnaire items in the broad spectrum factor inasmuch as individual traits contribute to patterns of overt behavior (Zaccaro, 2007). Some traits that are being actively explored for their responsiveness to workload issues include field independence, fluid intelligence, conscientiousness, anxiety, and coping strategies (Guastello, 2014; Guastello et al, 2017, 2018). Other types of behavioral schema could be examined as well.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the first session, all participants completed three timed cognitive tests and an untimed survey that were not used in the present study; those data were used in other studies on workload topics (Guastello et al, 2017; Guastello, Correro, & Marra, 2018). The remainder of the session was spent learning the ER game.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Psychological studies in cognitive workload arose from the observation that there is a limit to the total quantity of information that a person or team can process within a fixed amount of time before error rates proliferate. Suboptimal but good enough decisions are generally the norm when complex decisions are required (Broadbent, 1958; Conrad, 1951; Guastello, Marra, Correro, Michels, & Schimmel, 2017; Rosser & Rosser, 2015; Simon, 1957). Importantly, there is growing evidence that people generally respond differently to workload stressors due to their differences in pertinent cognitive abilities, knowledge and experience, empathy and emotional intelligence, and flexibility in using coping strategies (Gruszka, Matthews, & Szymura, 2012; Guastello, 2014; Guastello et al, 2017; Guastello, Shircel, Malon, & Timm, 2015; Thompson, 2010).…”

Section: Leadership Emergencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The TLX rating constructs are mental demands, physical demands, temporal demands, performance demands, effort required, and frustration. Although the TLX is responsive to differences in workload (Dey & Mann, 2010; Hart, 2006), a small amount of rating variance has been traced to personality traits and cognitive abilities that can limit the available mental resources devoted to the task or to adapting to changes in the task environment (Guastello et al, 2017; Guastello, Shircel, et al, 2015; Oron-Gilad, Szalma, Stafford, & Hancock, 2008). All other things being equal a task will be performed better if it is designed for lower workload on the TLX.…”

Section: Leadership Emergencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, Helton, Funke, and Knott (2014) developed a set of subjective workload ratings for group workload (GWL)—coordination demand, communication demand, time sharing demand, team efficacy, team support, and team dissatisfaction—which were defined to parallel the TLX ratings. The GWL ratings are responsive to experimental manipulations of workload (Guastello & Marra, 2018; Guastello et al, 2017). The scales were negatively correlated with performance on a disaster prevention simulation (Helton et al, 2014).…”

Section: Leadership Emergencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Do emergent leaders experience greater workload? The swallowtail catastrophe model and changes in leadership in an emergency response simulation.

Guastello

Correro²,

Marra

2018

Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although positions of greater responsibility imply greater workloads and consequences for actions, the experience of emergent leaders might be different. People who gravitate toward leadership roles might have a better understanding and skill set for the task requirements, and thus report lower workload. However, they might also report greater workload because they recognize demands that others do not foresee. Either way, the demands could impact a person’s willingness to play a leadership role. This study examined workload effects within the framework of the swallowtail catastrophe model for leadership emergence. The experiment involved an emergency response simulation in two sessions; 348 undergraduates were organized into 44 teams of various sizes. Workload was experimentally varied by team size, number of attackers, and time pressure. Subjective experience was measured by standardized ratings of individual and group-level sources of workload. In the empirical models, team discussions contributed to the asymmetry parameter, group size contributed to the bifurcation parameter, and team performance corresponded to the bias parameter. Changes in leadership between sessions were explained by the same dynamics, but here, individual ratings of performance demands and frustration also contributed to the bias parameter; moreover, ratings of coordination demands—a type of group-level workload—contributed to the asymmetry parameter. Participants who were not leaders in the first session but assumed leadership roles later were less frustrated by the task, perceived the performance demands as greater, and perceived the coordination demands to be less compared to others.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%