rdf-syntax-grammar
mods:
  schema location: http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-2.xsd
  title info:
    non sort: The
    title: comparative effectiveness of after-action review in co-located and distributed team training environments
  name:
    name part: Jarrett, Steven.
    role:
      role term: creator
  name:
    name part: Arthur, Winfred, Jr.
    role:
      role term: thesis advisor.
  type of resource: text
  genre: bibliography
  origin info:
    place:
      place term: txu
    date issued: 2012
    issuance: monographic
  language:
    language term: eng
  physical description:
    form: remote
    extent: 1 online resource.
  abstract: The team-training literature provides favorable support for the after-action review (AAR)?s ability to improve cognitive, skill, and attitudinal outcomes in co-located and distributed environments. However, the comparative effectiveness of co-located and distributed AARs is unknown. Thus, the objective of the present study was to investigate the comparative effectiveness of co-located and distributed AARs. The present study examined the AAR?s effect on performance, declarative knowledge, team-efficacy, team voice, team cohesion, and team-level reactions. Data were obtained from 492 undergraduate students (47.66% female) assigned to 123 4-person teams who participated in a team training protocol using a 3 (type of AAR review: non-AAR versus subjective AAR versus objective AAR) x 2 (geographic dispersion: co-located and distributed training environments) x 3 (sessions) repeated measures design. The results indicate that AAR teams had significantly higher performance scores than the non-AAR teams. In addition, the AAR teams had higher perceptions of team-efficacy and higher levels of team cohesion than the non-AAR teams. With the exception of team-level reactions, there were no other significant differences between the distributed AAR and co-located AAR conditions. Similarly, there were no significant differences across any of the outcome variables between the objective and subjective AAR conditions, indicating that the type of AAR did not impact the results of the training. The findings of the present study highlight several practical and scientific implications that should be considered regarding AAR training. Primarily, regardless of the training environment or type of AAR, AAR training remains an effective intervention at increasing performance and attitudinal-based outcomes. In addition, the results suggest that the use of distributed AARs does not engender the proposed process losses that were hypothesized. Thus, the use of this training to reduce administrative …
  note: by Steven Jarrett.
  note: "Major Subject: Psychology"
  note: Electronic resource.
  note: Doctor of Philosophy Texas A&M University 2012 http://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-2012-08-11752
  note: Includes bibliographical references.
  note: Text (Dissertation)
  subject:
    topic: Major Psychology
  subject:
    topic: Distributed Training
  subject:
    topic: Objectivity
  subject:
    topic: Team Training
  subject:
    topic: After-Action Review
  identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-2012-08-11752
  record info:
    record content source: TXA
    record creation date: 121119
    record change date: 20150922144150.0
    record identifier: in00002756682