SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 45, 357376.
  • Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  • Anderson, N., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2004). The routinization of innovation research: A constructively critical review of the state-of-the-science. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 147173.
  • Antonio, A. L., Chang, M. J., Hakuta, K., Kenny, D., Levin, S., & Milem, J. (2004). Effects of racial diversity on complex thinking in college students. Psychological Science, 15, 51075514.
    Direct Link:
  • Bell, B. B., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2002). A typology of virtual teams: Implications for effective leadership. Group and Organization Management, 27, 1449.
  • Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Salas, E., Peirce, L., & Kendall, D. (2006). Understanding team adaptation: A conceptual analysis and model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 11891207.
  • Caruso, H., & Woolley, A. W. (2008). Harnessing the power of emergent interdependence to promote diverse team collaboration. In K. W.Phillips, E.Mannix, & M. A.Neale (Eds.), Research on managing groups and teams: Diversity and groups. (Vol. 11, pp. 245266. Bingley, England: Emerald Group.
  • Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2005). Spontaneous access and analogical incubation effects. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 207220.
  • Christensen, B. T., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and pre-inventive structure: The case of engineering design. Memory & Cognition, 35, 2938.
  • Cohen, S., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23, 239290.
  • Cronin, M. A., & Weingart, L. R. (2007). Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams. Academy of Management Review, 32, 761773.
  • Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 391404.
  • Dahl, D. W., & Moreau, P. (2002). The influence and value of analogical thinking during new product ideation. Journal of Marketing Research, 39, 4760.
  • Dahlin, K. B., Weingart, L. R., & Hinds, P. J. (2005). Team diversity and information use. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 11071123.
  • De Dreu, C. K. W. (2008). The virtue and vice of workplace conflict: Food for (pessimistic) thought. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 518.
  • De Dreu, C. K. W., Nijstad, B. A., & Van Knippenberg, D. (2008). Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 2239.
  • De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 741749.
  • De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. (2001). Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 11911201.
  • Derry, S. J., & Schunn, C. D. (2005). Introduction to the study of interdisciplinarity: A beautiful but dangerous beast. In S. J.Derry, C. D.Schunn, & M. A.Gernsbacher (Eds.), Interdisciplinary collaboration: An emerging cognitive science (pp. xiiixx). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Derry, S. J., Schunn, C. D., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (Eds.) (2005). Interdisciplinary collaboration: An emerging cognitive science. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J.Sternberg & J. E.Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 365395). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In T. B.Ward, S. M.Smith, & J.Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 461493). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • DuRussel, L. A., & Derry, S. (2005). Schema alignment in interdisciplinary teamwork. In S. J.Derry, C. D.Schunn, & M. A.Gernsbacher (Eds.), Interdisciplinary collaboration: An emerging cognitive science (pp. 187219). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Edwards, B. D., Day, E. A., Arthur, W., & Bell, S. T. (2006). Relationships among team ability composition, team mental models, and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 727736.
  • Epstein, S. (2005). Making interdisciplinary collaboration work. In S. J.Derry, C. D.Schunn, & M. A.Gernsbacher (Eds.), Interdisciplinary collaboration: An emerging cognitive science (pp. 245263). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Feist, G. J. (2008). The psychology of science has arrived. Journal of the Psychology of Science and Technology, 1, 25.
  • Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., & Law, K. (1995). Mac/fac: A model of similarity-based retrieval. Cognitive Science, 19, 141205.
  • Gebert, D., Boerner, S., & Kearney, E. (2006). Cross-functionality and innovation in new product development teams: A dilemmatic structure and its consequences for the management of diversity. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15, 431458.
  • Goodwin, C. (2005). Seeing in depth. In S. J.Derry, C. D.Schunn, & M. A.Gernsbacher (Eds.), Interdisciplinary collaboration: An emerging cognitive science (pp. 85122). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Gorman, M. E. (2003). Expanding the trading zones for convergent technologies. In M. C.Roco & W. S.Bainbridge (Eds.), Converging technologies for improving human performance: Nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science (pp. 424428). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
  • Gorman, M. E. (2008). Scientific and technological expertise. Journal of Psychology of Science and Technology, 1, 2331.
  • Greitemeyer, T., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2003). Preference-consistent evaluation of information in the hidden profile paradigm: Beyond group-level explanations for the dominance of shared information in group decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 322339.
  • Greitemeyer, T., Schulz-Hardt, S., Brodbeck, F. C., & Frey, D. (2006). Information sampling and group decision making: The effects of an advocacy decision procedure and task experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12, 3142.
  • Hall, R., Stevens, R., & Torralba, T. (2005). Disrupting representational infrastructure in conversations across disciplines. In S. J.Derry, C. D.Schunn, & M. A.Gernsbacher (Eds.), Interdisciplinary collaboration: An emerging cognitive science (pp. 145166). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007). What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 11991228.
  • Hart, J. W., Stasson, M. F., & Karau, S. J. (1999). Effects of source expertise and physical distance on minority influence. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 3, 8192.
  • Hinsz, V. B., Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A. (1997). The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 4364.
  • Hocevar, D., & Bachelor, P. (1989). A taxonomy and critique of measurements used in the study of creativity. In J. A.Glover, R. R.Ronning, & C. R.Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 5375). New York: Plenum Press.
  • Hollingshead, A. B. (1998). Communication, learning, and retrieval in transactive memory systems. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 423442.
  • Hutchins, E. (1995). How a cockpit remembers its speeds. Cognitive Science, 19, 265288.
  • Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517543.
  • Jehn, K. A., & Chatman, J. A. (2000). The influence of proportional and perceptual conflict composition on team performance. International Journal of Conflict Management, 11, 5673.
  • Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741763.
  • Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1980). Mental models in cognitive science. Cognitive Science, 4, 71115.
  • Jones, R. G., Stevens, M. J., & Fischer, D. L. (2000). Selection in team contexts. In J. F.Kehoe (Ed.), Managing selection in changing organizations: Human resource strategies (pp. 210241). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Klein, J. T. (2005). Interdisciplinary teamwork: The dynamics of collaboration and integration. In S. J.Derry, C. D.Schunn, & M. A.Gernsbacher (Eds.), Interdisciplinary collaboration: An emerging cognitive science (pp. 2350). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, 77124.
    Direct Link:
  • Kurtzberg, T. R., & Amabile, T. M. (2000-2001). From Guilford to creative synergy: Opening the black box of team-level creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 285294.
  • Lambert, M. H., & Shaw, B. (2002). Transactive memory and exception handling in high-performance project teams (CIFE Technical Report #137). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University.
  • Levesque, L. L., Wilson, J. M., & Wholey, D. R. (2001). Cognitive divergence and shared mental models in software development project teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 135144.
  • Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (1998). Small groups. In D. T.Gilbert, S. T.Fiske, & G.Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, 4th ed., pp. 415469). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
  • Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (2004). Collaboration: The social context of theory development. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 164172.
  • Lovelace, K., Shapiro, D. L., & Weingart, L. R. (2001). Maximizing cross-functional new product teams’ innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 779793.
  • Mahr, K. (2007). Top ten scientific discoveries. Time. Available at http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/top10/article/0,30583,1686204_1686252_1690961,00.html. Accessed December 24, 2007.
  • Mannix, E., & Neale, M. A. (2005). What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 6, 2.
    Direct Link:
  • Mathieu, J. E., Heffner, T. S., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 273283.
  • Matz, D. C., & Wood, W. (2005). Cognitive dissonance in groups; the consequences of disagreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 2237.
  • Mayer, R. E. (1999). Fifty years of creativity research. In R. J.Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 449460). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  • McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • McGrath, J. E., Arrow, H., Gruenfeld, D. H., Hollingshead, A. B., & O’Connor, K. M. (1993). Groups, tasks, and technology: The effects of experience and change. Small Group Research, 24, 406420.
  • Mishkin, A. H., & Larsen, B. (2006). Implementing distributed operations: A comparison of two deep space missions. Paper presented at American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 9th International Conference on Space Operations (SpaceOps), Rome, Italy, June 19–23, 2006. Available at http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/39795/1/06-1587.pdf. Accessed June 15, 2008.
  • Mishkin, A. H., Limonadi, D., Laubach, S. L., & Bass, D. S. (2006). Working the Martian night shift: The MER tactical operations process. IEEE Robotics and Automation Society Magazine, Special Issue on Mars Exploration Rovers, 13, 4653.
  • National Science Foundation (2007). 2006: Year in review. Available at http://www.nsf.gov/discoveries/disc_summ.jsp?cntn_id=108277. Accessed December 24, 2007.
  • Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. (1985). Originality of word associations as a function of majority vs. minority influence processes. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 277282.
  • Nemeth, C. J., & Rogers, J. (1996). Dissent and the search for information. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 6776.
  • Nemeth, C. J., & Wachtler, J. (1983). Creative problem solving as a result of majority vs. minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 4555.
  • Nersessian, N. J. (2006). The cognitive-cultural systems of the research laboratory. Organizational Studies, 27, 125145.
  • Nersessian, N. J., & Chandrasekharan, S. (in press). Hybrid analogies in conceptual innovation in science. Cognitive Systems Research, 10(3).
  • Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2006). How the group affects the mind: A cognitive model of idea generation in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 186213.
  • Okada, T., & Simon, H. A. (1997). Collaborative discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 21, 109146.
  • Orasanu, J. (1995). Evaluating team situation awareness through communication. Proceedings of the international conference on experimental analysis and measurement of situation awareness, Daytona Beach, FL.
  • Paletz, S. B. F., Peng, K., Erez, M., & Maslach, C. (2004). Ethnic composition and its differential impact on group processes in diverse teams. Small Group Research, 35, 128157.
  • Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 128.
  • Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Cihangir, S. (2001). Quality of decision making and group norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 918930.
  • Rosenwein, R. (1994). Social influence in science: Agreement and dissent in achieving scientific consensus. In W. R.Shadish & S.Fuller (Eds.), The social psychology of science (pp. 262285). New York: Guilford Press.
  • Salas, E., Stagl, K. C., & Burke, C. S. (2004). 25 years of team effectiveness in organizations: Research themes and emerging needs. In C. L.Cooper & E. T.Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 4791). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Saunders, C. S., & Ahuja, M. K. (2006). Are all distributed teams the same? Differentiating between temporary and ongoing distributed teams. Small Group Research, 37, 662700.
  • Schulz-Hardt, S., Brodbeck, F. C., Mojzisch, A., Kerschreiter, R., & Frey, D. (2006). Group decision making in hidden profile situations: Dissent as a facilitator for decision quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 10801093.
  • Smith, E. R. (2008). Social relationships and groups: New insights on embodied and distributed cognition. Cognitive Systems Research, 9, 2432.
  • Squyres, S. (2005). Roving Mars: Spirit, Opportunity, and the exploration of the red planet. New York: Hyperion.
  • Squyres, S., Grotzinger, J. P., Arvidson, R. E., Bell, J. F., Calvin, W., Christensen, P. R., Clark, B. C., Crisp, J. A., Farrand, W. H., Herkenhoff, K. E., Johnson, J. R., Klingelhofer, G., Knoll, A. H., McLennan, S. M., McSween, H. Y., Morris, R. V., Rice, J. W., Rieder, R., & Soderblom, L. A. (2004). In situ evidence for an ancient aqueous environment at Meridiani Planum, Mars. Science, 306, 17091714.
  • Stasser, G., Stewart, D. D., & Wittenbaum, G. M. (1995). Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: The importance of knowing who knows what. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 244265.
  • Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 14671478.
  • Stewart, D. D., & Stasser, G. (1995). Expert role assignment and information sampling during collective recall and decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 619628.
  • Thompson, L., & Choi, H. S. (2006). Creativity and innovation in organizational teams. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
  • Torrance, E. P. (1988). The nature of creativity as manifest in its testing. In R. J.Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives (pp. 4375). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  • Van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrated model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 10081022.
  • Van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515541.
  • Watson, J. D. (1968). The double helix: A personal account of the discovery of the structure of DNA. New York: Atheneum.
  • Watson, W. E., Johnson, L., Kamalesh, K., & Critelli, J. (1998). Process gain and process loss: Comparing interpersonal processes and performance of culturally diverse and non-diverse teams across time. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22, 409430.
  • Watson, W. E., Johnson, L., & Zgourides, G. D. (2002). The influence of ethnic diversity on leadership, group process, and performance: An examination of learning teams. International Journal of Intercultural relations, 26, 116.
  • Wegner, D. M. (1986). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In B.Mullen & G. R.Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group behavior (pp. 185208). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Wegner, D. M., Erber, P., & Raymond, P. (1991). Transactive memory in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 923929.
  • Weingart, L. R. (1997). How did they do that? The ways and means of studying group process. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 189239.
  • West, M. A. (1990). The social psychology of innovation in groups. In M. A.West & J. L.Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies (pp. 309333). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.
  • West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 355424.
  • West, M. A., & Farr, J. L. (1990). Innovation at work. In M. A.West & J. L.Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies (pp. 313). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Wiener, E. L., Kanki, B. G., & Helmreich, R. L. (Eds.) (1995). Cockpit resource management. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.