Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30147253›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational and organizational psychology2018

Information sharing in interteam responses to disaster.

Sara Waring, Laurence Alison, Grace Carter, Chloe Barrett-Pink, Michael Humann, Lauren Swan, Tomas Zilinsky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Sara WaringCritical and Major Incident Psychology Research Group Psychology Department University of Liverpool UK.
Laurence AlisonCritical and Major Incident Psychology Research Group Psychology Department University of Liverpool UK.
Grace CarterCritical and Major Incident Psychology Research Group Psychology Department University of Liverpool UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7244-037X
Chloe Barrett-PinkCritical and Major Incident Psychology Research Group Psychology Department University of Liverpool UK.
Michael HumannCritical and Major Incident Psychology Research Group Psychology Department University of Liverpool UK.
Lauren SwanCritical and Major Incident Psychology Research Group Psychology Department University of Liverpool UK.
Tomas ZilinskyCritical and Major Incident Psychology Research Group Psychology Department University of Liverpool UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research demonstrates that information sharing is facilitated by familiarity, and having a common understanding of problems, use of lexicon, and semantic meaning. These factors can be difficult to develop within extreme environments such as disasters as members of the multi-agency system that responds often have limited experience of working together. Public inquiries repeatedly highlight the impact of information sharing difficulties on public safety, but limited academic research has focused on identifying concrete behaviours that facilitate interteam information sharing within such environments. This paper presents a case study of a national disaster response exercise involving 1,000 emergency responders. Data consist of structured observations, recordings of interteam meetings, and interviews with emergency responders. Results of mixed-method analysis indicate that interteam information sharing is delayed by limited situation awareness and poor articulation. Conversely, adopting behaviours that promote common frames for understanding interteam capabilities and information requirements improves information sharing and potentially reduces cognitive effort required to process information. Findings contribute to interteam communication theory by highlighting that in complex, time-constrained environments, having a shared understanding of responsibilities and information requirement is important for minimizing redundant deliberation and improving relevance and speed. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Facilitating the exchange and interpretation of relevant information is important for improving situation assessment, decision-making, and the implementation of appropriate actions for addressing risks.Interteam information sharing can be particularly challenging when teams are comprised of members from across different organizations with different language and cultures that must form

Indexed as

emergency responseinformation sharingknowledge boundariesmultiteam systemrepresentational gaps

Identifiers

PMID30147253
PMCPMC6099413

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.