Limits...
Coordination and Collective Performance: Cooperative Goals Boost Interpersonal Synchrony and Task Outcomes

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Whether it be a rugby team or a rescue crew, ensuring peak group performance is a primary goal during collective activities. In reality, however, groups often suffer from productivity losses that can lead to less than optimal outputs. Where researchers have focused on this problem, inefficiencies in the way team members coordinate their efforts has been identified as one potent source of productivity decrements. Here, we set out to explore whether performance on a simple object movement task is shaped by the spontaneous emergence of interpersonally coordinated behavior. Forty-six pairs of participants were instructed to either compete or cooperate in order to empty a container of approximately 100 small plastic balls as quickly and accurately as possible. Each trial was recorded to video and a frame-differencing approach was employed to estimate between-person coordination. The results revealed that cooperative pairs coordinated to a greater extent than their competitive counterparts. Furthermore, coordination, as well as movement regularity were positively related to accuracy, an effect that was most prominent when the task was structured such that opportunities to coordinate were restricted. These findings are discussed with regard to contemporary theories of coordination and collective performance.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Misses (i.e., balls dropped) as a function of pair type and instruction condition. Error bars represent ±1 SEM.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5037181&req=5

Figure 5: Misses (i.e., balls dropped) as a function of pair type and instruction condition. Error bars represent ±1 SEM.

Mentions: When considering the number of balls dropped or missed, the analysis revealed a main effect of pair type, F(1,44) = 34.57, p < 0.001, = 0.44 (i.e., pseudo < actual), and a marginally significant effect of condition, F(1,44) = 3.82, p = 0.057, = 0.08 (i.e., cooperation < competition), which were qualified by an interaction between these factors, F(1,44) = 8.49, p = 0.006, = 0.16, as shown in Figure 5. Post hoc pairwise comparisons (Bonferroni corrected) indicated that while there was no difference as a function of condition when solo efforts (i.e., pseudo-pairs) were combined (p = 0.74), actual pairs in the competitive condition made significantly more errors (i.e., more misses) than those in the cooperative condition (p = 0.03).


Coordination and Collective Performance: Cooperative Goals Boost Interpersonal Synchrony and Task Outcomes
Misses (i.e., balls dropped) as a function of pair type and instruction condition. Error bars represent ±1 SEM.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5037181&req=5

Figure 5: Misses (i.e., balls dropped) as a function of pair type and instruction condition. Error bars represent ±1 SEM.
Mentions: When considering the number of balls dropped or missed, the analysis revealed a main effect of pair type, F(1,44) = 34.57, p < 0.001, = 0.44 (i.e., pseudo < actual), and a marginally significant effect of condition, F(1,44) = 3.82, p = 0.057, = 0.08 (i.e., cooperation < competition), which were qualified by an interaction between these factors, F(1,44) = 8.49, p = 0.006, = 0.16, as shown in Figure 5. Post hoc pairwise comparisons (Bonferroni corrected) indicated that while there was no difference as a function of condition when solo efforts (i.e., pseudo-pairs) were combined (p = 0.74), actual pairs in the competitive condition made significantly more errors (i.e., more misses) than those in the cooperative condition (p = 0.03).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Whether it be a rugby team or a rescue crew, ensuring peak group performance is a primary goal during collective activities. In reality, however, groups often suffer from productivity losses that can lead to less than optimal outputs. Where researchers have focused on this problem, inefficiencies in the way team members coordinate their efforts has been identified as one potent source of productivity decrements. Here, we set out to explore whether performance on a simple object movement task is shaped by the spontaneous emergence of interpersonally coordinated behavior. Forty-six pairs of participants were instructed to either compete or cooperate in order to empty a container of approximately 100 small plastic balls as quickly and accurately as possible. Each trial was recorded to video and a frame-differencing approach was employed to estimate between-person coordination. The results revealed that cooperative pairs coordinated to a greater extent than their competitive counterparts. Furthermore, coordination, as well as movement regularity were positively related to accuracy, an effect that was most prominent when the task was structured such that opportunities to coordinate were restricted. These findings are discussed with regard to contemporary theories of coordination and collective performance.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus