ORCID Profile
0000-0001-8918-7585
Current Organisation
University of South Australia
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Academy of Management
Date: 2015
Publisher: Inderscience Publishers
Date: 2015
Publisher: No publisher found
Date: 2014
Publisher: No publisher found
Date: 2014
Publisher: No publisher found
Date: 2007
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 04-02-2020
DOI: 10.1017/IOP.2019.121
Abstract: Peer review is a critical component toward facilitating a robust science in industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology. Peer review exists beyond academic publishing in organizations, university departments, grant agencies, classrooms, and many more work contexts. Reviewers are responsible for judging the quality of research conducted and submitted for evaluation. Furthermore, they are responsible for treating authors and their work with respect, in a supportive and developmental manner. Given its central role in our profession, it is curious that we do not have formalized review guidelines or standards and that most of us never receive formal training in peer reviewing. To support this endeavor, we are proposing a competency framework for peer review. The purpose of the competency framework is to provide a definition of excellent peer reviewing and guidelines to reviewers for which types of behaviors will lead to good peer reviews. By defining these competencies, we create clarity around expectations for peer review, standards for good peer reviews, and opportunities for training the behaviors required to deliver good peer reviews. We further discuss how the competency framework can be used to improve peer reviewing and suggest additional steps forward that involve suggestions for how stakeholders can get involved in fostering high-quality peer reviewing.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 31-03-2021
DOI: 10.1002/JOB.2515
Abstract: Shared leadership in teams is believed to be beneficial for team effectiveness. Yet recent empirical evidence shows that it may not always bring positive effects. On the one hand, the team leadership literature suggests that shared leadership allows for frequent interactions among members, improving intrateam harmony and reducing conflicts. On the other hand, the team power literature suggests that frequent influence interactions among multiple leaders can form an arena in which members fight over their power turfs, thereby triggering conflict. Drawing on dominance complementarity theory, we suggest that team power base ersity—the variety in power bases among team members from which they derive their informal influence—is an important contingency that moderates the impact of shared leadership on relationship conflict to influence team performance. In a s le of 70 project‐based teams, we find support for the proposition that at high levels of team power base ersity, shared leadership has a positive downstream effect on team performance through reduced team relationship conflict. We discuss the contributions to knowledge about shared leadership and highlight practical implications for temporary teams with no formally designated leaders.
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 09-12-2020
Abstract: This chapter provides an introduction to neurophysiological methods from the field ofcognitive neuroscience, and how they may be applied to address research questions in the field ofmanagerial and organisational cognition. The chapter focuses on electroencephalography (EEG)as an accessible and useful tool to expand the theoretical horizons for research on organisationalcognitive neuroscience. We briefly review the cognitive neuroscience methods that have beenpreviously applied to investigate in idual and team decision-making and cognition. We thendescribe contemporary EEG measures that reflect in idual cognition and compare them tocomplementary measures in the field of psychology and management. We also discuss how theseneurobiological measures of cognition relate to and may predict both in idual cognitiveperformance and team cognitive performance (decision-making). This chapter aims to assistscholars in the field of managerial and organisational cognition in understanding thecomplementarity between psychological and neurophysiological methods, and how they may becombined to develop new hypotheses in the intersection of these research fields.
Publisher: No publisher found
Date: 2009
Publisher: No publisher found
Date: 2012
Publisher: Emerald
Date: 10-08-2020
Abstract: This paper aims to understand the effects of team power asymmetry (hierarchy) on team learning. Literature suggests that power asymmetry can hurt team learning due to unequal interactions. The authors integrate the situated focus theory of power and the theory of adversarial growth to propose that environmental hardship can moderate this relationship. Such that, under environmental hardship there is a shift in power relations within hierarchical teams, such that power asymmetry positively relates to team learning via increased team egalitarianism (interactional equality). The study is presented in two parts. Part 1 reviews the literature and builds the theoretical arguments for the conceptual model, while Part 2 empirically examines the model on a s le of military teams. In Part 1, the authors propose a theoretically derived model and directions for future research in team power, dynamics and learning. It provides directions to empirically validate a contingency-based model to resolve the dilemma of creating equality and high levels of team learning in hierarchical teams. The conceptual model and hypotheses contribute to the team learning literature by theoretically clarifying the conditions under which power asymmetry is likely to improve team learning.
Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited
Date: 22-11-2021
Publisher: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Date: 24-03-2022
DOI: 10.1101/2022.03.23.485424
Abstract: The endeavour to understand human cognition has largely relied upon investigation of task-related brain activity. However, resting-state brain activity can also offer insights into in idual information processing and performance capabilities. Previous research has identified electroencephalographic resting-state characteristics (most prominently: the in idual alpha frequency IAF) that predict cognitive function. However, it has largely overlooked a second component of electrophysiological signals: aperiodic 1/ f activity. The current study examined how both oscillatory and aperiodic resting-state EEG measures, alongside traditional cognitive tests, can predict performance in a dynamic and complex, semi-naturalistic cognitive task. Participants’ resting-state EEG was recorded prior to engaging in a Target Motion Analysis (TMA) task in a simulated submarine control room environment (CRUSE), which required participants to integrate dynamically changing information over time. We demonstrated that the relationship between IAF and cognitive performance extends from simple cognitive tasks (e.g., digit span) to complex, dynamic measures of information processing. Further, our results showed that in idual 1/ f parameters (slope and intercept) differentially predicted performance across practice and testing sessions, whereby flatter slopes were associated with improved performance during learning, while higher intercepts were linked to better performance during testing. In addition to the EEG predictors, we demonstrate a link between cognitive skills most closely related to the TMA task (i.e., spatial imagery) and subsequent performance. Overall, the current study highlights (1) how resting-state metrics – both oscillatory and aperiodic - have the potential to index higher-order cognitive capacity, while (2) emphasising the importance of examining these electrophysiological components within more dynamic settings and over time.
Publisher: American Psychological Association (APA)
Date: 08-2018
DOI: 10.1037/APL0000305
Abstract: Voice, or the expression of work-related suggestions or opinions, can help teams access and utilize members' privately held knowledge and skills and improve collective outcomes. However, recent research has suggested that sometimes, rather than encourage positive outcomes for teams, voice from members can have detrimental consequences. Extending this research, we highlight why it is important to consider voice centralization within teams, or the extent to which voice is predominantly emanating from only a few members rather than equally spread across all members. We argue that, under certain circumstances, voice centralization is harmful to the utilization of members' expertise in the team and, thereby, to team performance. Specifically, we propose that voice centralization is likely to have negative effects when it occurs around members who are more socially dominant or are less reflective. We find support for our arguments in a s le of 78 teams (319 team members) working on graduate student projects in a business school over a semester. Overall, through our theory and results, we showcase why it is important for future studies to examine the distribution of voice among team members. (PsycINFO Database Record
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 14-07-2020
Publisher: No publisher found
Date: 2009
Publisher: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Date: 26-09-2023
Publisher: Emerald
Date: 16-11-2021
Abstract: This paper aims to clarify under which conditions, and via what mechanisms, power asymmetry is likely to affect team learning. This work is part of a two-paper series. Part I presents the theoretical arguments linking power asymmetry to team learning via egalitarianism and the moderating role of environmental hardship. In Part II, the authors provide an empirical evaluation of the conceptual model presented in Part I. Data was gathered on 4,637 military personnel nested in 143 ongoing teams. Multiple regression analysis was used to analyze the proposed moderated mediation model. The results show that under higher levels of environmental hardship, teams with higher power asymmetry (greater hierarchy) show greater team egalitarianism and higher team learning. The results show that under higher levels of environmental hardship, teams with higher power asymmetry (greater hierarchy) show greater team egalitarianism and higher team learning. The empirical examination of the proposed relationships is based on a large s le of military teams in the real world. Future research would benefit from testing the model on different s les across industries and adopting different operationalizations for environmental hardship relevant to each industry. This work provides insights to help practitioners to preserve the coordination benefits of hierarchy, while still promoting more egalitarianism and team learning in hierarchical teams.
Publisher: No publisher found
Date: 2014
Publisher: Academy of Management
Date: 08-2018
Publisher: Academy of Management
Date: 08-2017
Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing
Date: 14-07-2020
Publisher: Academy of Management
Date: 2013
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 02-2023
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 18-12-2019
Abstract: This article applies a quantitative analysis of gender ersity variables to custom data sets of 2011 and 2016 Australian Bureau of Statistics Census data for Film, TV and Radio employment. Prima facie, employment figures across a whole sector or employment segment can appear to be broadly representative of the Australian population, but looking more closely, it becomes apparent that the ‘devil is in the level’. Although there is often parity at the macro level, drilling down into specific roles and their differential levels of seniority and power reveals inequalities between those in key and more secure gatekeeping positions and those further down the organisational hierarchy. Focusing on gender, this article will argue that the lack of ersity at senior levels of employment is a key contributing factor to lack of ersity within cultural and creative industries, reinforcing power imbalances and social and economic inequity.
Publisher: Academy of Management
Date: 08-2019
Publisher: Academy of Management
Date: 2013
Publisher: American Psychological Association (APA)
Date: 07-2016
DOI: 10.1037/APL0000059
Abstract: Task conflict has been the subject of a long-standing debate in the literature-when does task conflict help or hurt team performance? We propose that this debate can be resolved by taking a more precise view of how task conflicts are perceived in teams. Specifically, we propose that in teams, when a few team members perceive a high level of task disagreement while a majority of others perceive low levels of task disagreement-that is, there is positively skewed task conflict, task conflict is most likely to live up to its purported benefits for team performance. In our first study of student teams engaged in a business decision game, we find support for the positive relationship between skewed task conflict and team performance. In our second field study of teams in a financial corporation, we find that the relationship between positively skewed task conflict and supervisor ratings of team performance is mediated by reflective communication within the team. (PsycINFO Database Record
Publisher: No publisher found
Date: 2009
Publisher: No publisher found
Date: 2010
No related grants have been discovered for Ruchi Sinha.