Team cohesiveness and efficacy explained outcomes in interprofessional education

Abstract

Background While team cohesiveness and collective efficacy have been construed as important characteristics of a high functioning team, the psychological mechanism through which they promote positive outcomes remains unknown. Yet this mechanism is important to teachers and programme implementers to yield actionable intervention that can be used to craft effective practices for optimizing team outcomes. This is especially true in interprofessional education (IPE) in medical education, where team-based approach in patient management is promoted. Drawing from the social-cognitive theory, we examined a hypothesized model where team cohesiveness predicts collaboration outcomes (teamwork satisfaction, overall satisfaction with the team experience, and IPE goal attainment) via collective efficacy. Methods We used data from Chinese medicine, medicine, nursing, and social work students in Hong Kong (n = 285) who were enrolled in IPE. They were invited to respond to scales in two time points. We performed mediation analysis using structural equations modelling to test the hypothesized indirect effect model: team cohesiveness → collective efficacy → outcomes. Results Results of structural equation modelling revealed that collective efficacy fully mediated the relationships between team cohesiveness and all three team outcomes, providing support for the hypothesised model [RMSEA = .08, NFI = .90, CFI = .93, IFI = .93, TLI = .93]. Team cohesiveness predicted the achievement of collaboration outcomes via collective efficacy. Conclusions The findings demonstrated the important roles of team cohesiveness and collective efficacy in promoting successful team collaboration. Team cohesiveness predicted collective efficacy, and collective efficacy, in turn, predicted collaboration outcomes. This study contributed in theorising the pathways towards successful team collaboration outcomes.

Prevalence of Social Anxiety Disorder and its associated factors among Foreign-born Undergraduate Students in Türkiye: A Cross-Sectional Study

“…Furthermore, other studies from diverse regions across the globe consistently reveal comparable results [14,[45][46][47]. In a 2023 study conducted in Hong Kong, however, males showed higher rates of SAD than females; this contradicts results from other studies and can be explained by the acknowledged sampling size bias within the dataset, as the female sample was significantly larger than the male sample [48]. We can understand the higher frequency of SAD in women most effectively through a vulnerability-stress perspective.…”

“…Responses are captured on a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely), allowing for a comprehensive symptom severity score ranging from 0 to 68. The scoring system classifies severity into five categories: none or very mild (less than 20), mild (21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30), moderate (31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40), severe (41)(42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50), and very severe (51 or more), enabling detailed analysis of social anxiety levels among the surveyed population.…”