Is this project an undergraduate, graduate, or faculty project?
Undergraduate
Project Type
individual
Campus
Daytona Beach
Authors' Class Standing
Carissa Aumack, Senior
Lead Presenter's Name
Carissa Aumack
Lead Presenter's College
DB College of Arts and Sciences
Faculty Mentor Name
Dr. Joseph Keebler
Abstract
When working with teams, certain factors will dictate whether they function well or not, with one such factor being psychological safety. Psychological safety (PS) is determined by a shared belief that, within the team, it is safe to take interpersonal risks (Edmonson, 1999). This definition does not entirely encapsulate the concept of PS, as it focuses on the concept as a team-based belief and does not consider how individual beliefs of PS can differ from the collective. A cursory literature review was conducted (8 articles related to PS), and based on the findings, a nomological network (i.e., a representation of indirectly observed constructs) was created, displaying key interrelated constructs for further investigation. The aim of this project is to facilitate conceptualizations of factors that influence PS by accounting for differences in the level of measurement (e.g., individual- or group-level). Factors shown to have positive correlations include team performance and communication; meanwhile, authoritarian leadership possesses a negative correlation. Each of these factors was found to have at least a moderate, if not strong, relationship with PS. Notable results include communication often being a mediator for PS to impact performance; thus, it is likely the means through which PS is often established, maintained, and enhances performance. Similarly, PS has a significant positive impact on perceived team performance, indicating that one may be able to intervene by manipulating PS. Furthermore, multiple studies on the topic discovered that authoritarian leadership negatively influences employee performance as it reduces employees’ perceptions of PS or acts as a barrier to PS (Tu et al., 2023; Remtulla et al., 2021). Ultimately, most PS research relies on Edmonson’s (1999) definition and scale; as such, a re-examination of these relationships is needed in order to establish how PS is perceived at the individual level rather than the group-level belief.
Did this research project receive funding support (Spark, SURF, Research Abroad, Student Internal Grants, Collaborative, Climbing, or Ignite Grants) from the Office of Undergraduate Research?
No
Included in
Is It Safe to Speak Up? A Theoretical Examination of the Measurement of Psychological Safety
When working with teams, certain factors will dictate whether they function well or not, with one such factor being psychological safety. Psychological safety (PS) is determined by a shared belief that, within the team, it is safe to take interpersonal risks (Edmonson, 1999). This definition does not entirely encapsulate the concept of PS, as it focuses on the concept as a team-based belief and does not consider how individual beliefs of PS can differ from the collective. A cursory literature review was conducted (8 articles related to PS), and based on the findings, a nomological network (i.e., a representation of indirectly observed constructs) was created, displaying key interrelated constructs for further investigation. The aim of this project is to facilitate conceptualizations of factors that influence PS by accounting for differences in the level of measurement (e.g., individual- or group-level). Factors shown to have positive correlations include team performance and communication; meanwhile, authoritarian leadership possesses a negative correlation. Each of these factors was found to have at least a moderate, if not strong, relationship with PS. Notable results include communication often being a mediator for PS to impact performance; thus, it is likely the means through which PS is often established, maintained, and enhances performance. Similarly, PS has a significant positive impact on perceived team performance, indicating that one may be able to intervene by manipulating PS. Furthermore, multiple studies on the topic discovered that authoritarian leadership negatively influences employee performance as it reduces employees’ perceptions of PS or acts as a barrier to PS (Tu et al., 2023; Remtulla et al., 2021). Ultimately, most PS research relies on Edmonson’s (1999) definition and scale; as such, a re-examination of these relationships is needed in order to establish how PS is perceived at the individual level rather than the group-level belief.