1 k2 R& X' U1 f* yMajor Textbooks:. \# X" q3 \1 Y; D3 s7 O* P
Kerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt. 8 T6 _ \% W, K. rSchwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book]% W) J2 I! I% g) ^4 @4 _ Klein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon]" s4 C+ N. G; W& ]' ~: T$ G- J Supplementary Books:) v( b% B" x1 u6 r+ ]* I6 m Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon] ' m6 K& l* `+ b" ZCook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]- A7 K: e4 t) Q! V* J8 y
Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. MultivariateData Analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJrentice-Hall. [Amazon] 1 E3 c. Q/ U1 H8 N/ |! } x" S% EPedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.8 Q* t* K! G# N5 l* t, _: ? Rogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.8 b1 }! F) a5 T Journal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6).1 F0 g& `0 G# o4 @2 x: l; N2 { Academy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2). + Q; D) M- }1 y" S. G, pMultivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2). ( Q; [7 O, b) O+ [$ i# cLeadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1). 5 M0 b- u3 t5 s4 _7 B; |/ [Academy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6. . @5 K' y+ l9 v9 d, w- k' S: n1 c6 ~Kreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.* O4 d9 X/ Q! z! ~; E/ C2 C7 \ Raudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage., V- k2 h6 c0 |/ d Roberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. % X3 U: w1 |% w& lRoberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. . m1 H9 b: ]+ z! I1 k" z陳曉萍、徐淑英、樊景立、鄭伯壎（2008），組織與管理研究的實證方法，台北：華泰文化。 ]2 {' k: }3 w : a* t5 l; b- n$ r' @0 SIssue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory 6 G' ]: K8 J$ U Y% q8 g* nK & L: Chapter 1 8 L# B% B! }1 g$ K1 w7 s& }; h01-01. Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks. 2 D* A) w- _3 |, i01-02. Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91. 5 A8 i, U7 h- g" H9 p01-03. Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review,15(4): 584-602.. G i) I, l( r# E
01-04. Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128. ( I3 ], `+ a: `8 s3 y# {01-05. Wright, T. A., & Wright, V. P. 1999. Ethicalresponsibility and the organizational researcher: A committed-to-participantresearch perspective. JournalofOrganizationalBehavior,20(7): 1107-1112.6 I8 o; `! N& s" q: ^
01-06. Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,41: 262-269. 7 p: c& B9 G w5 n3 E01-07. 陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。: X' u& p5 K( e' R
01-08. 陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch2: 研究的起點：提問。 $ E4 K8 g: h5 }- L9 c' O6 r E W: K4 M3 l: b' j8 w5 A1 F6 k5 hIssue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development. w# O& c) ^- y( ^) g
02-01. Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2 ! `2 x. M9 W( g3 ?. v0 E, X02-02. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. AcademyofManagementReview,14: 496-515. - L/ e! t3 ^* F8 }/ P02-03. Bartunek, J. M., Rynes, S. L., & Ireland, R. D. 2006. What makes a management researchinteresting and why does it matter? AcademyofManagementJournal,49(1): 9-15. . j# | Y) W' q, M. |02-04. Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? AcademyofManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095.* @/ `( h5 m0 ?3 K: R
02-05. Davis, M. S. 1971. That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenologyof sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of Social Science,1(2): 309-344. . W9 R# R7 }$ K9 X02-06. Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. 1998. Trust and distrust: new relationships andrealities. Academy of Management Review, 23: 438-458. ! ~$ b( n/ h2 W/ X( @$ \) H1 o; }02-07. Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010. 6 S4 Y& E. w8 a* I2 q6 a02-08. Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441.0 K+ b' @- m9 @4 a
02-09. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. A. (1993). The motivational effects ofcharismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4,577–594. : @$ ^ U1 E& f! {02-10. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.2 z& Q0 l, H8 ^5 w+ s9 ]! K
02-11. Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.5 F, N0 L. {+ ?( O$ \
02-12. Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.# p4 h; k [; d) G3 z0 @+ H1 v
02-13. 陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。 6 ]. H! ?) ]- q( S8 o- \' v02-14. Whetten, D. A., Felin, T., & King, B. G. (2009). The practice of theory borrowing inorganizational studies: Current issues and future directs. Journal ofManagement, 35(3), 537-563.4 O& R' c0 e. ~1 ~7 x
' v; v1 H" C. {/ ]# E Issue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion] $ Z5 h f1 Y/ U1 k! {/ ?1 l03-01. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192. - ]4 @/ N7 v9 C# \! a8 z4 b, i03-02. Law, K. S., & Wong, C. S. (1999). Multidimensional constructs instructural equation analysis: An illustration using the job perception and jobsatisfaction constructs. Journal of Management, 25(2): 143-160.+ D' h1 p: [' S# R
03-03. Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Toward a taxonomy of multidimensionalconstructs. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 741-755. 4 j3 O- G5 Z$ n" p# `- ~' U03-04. LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The nature and dimensionality oforganizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis.Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1): 52-65.: d9 b, G7 q% y N1 \; i
03-05. Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K.E. (2000). Adaptability in the workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptiveperformance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4): 612-624. 4 ?) A5 a9 G9 a9 W$ c# B. j03-06. Wong, C. S., Law, K. S., & Huang, G. H. (2008). On the importance of conductingconstruct-level analysis for multidimensional constructs in theory developmentand testing. Journal of Management, 34 (5): 744-764. ; Z- c4 M d( y; e6 V03-07. 陳曉萍等（2008）：ch12. D [+ V5 }+ W( T
- H5 l4 D$ \7 J/ o8 z* v/ W! X5 X# j$ U Issue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion]2 ^% M" G' ?& L8 D7 N9 `& k/ L
**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 8 9 {6 X+ `) l: S- [7 {! l$ ]K & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28.; M9 R/ k. D7 ` _0 c% u) y, ^
04-01. Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.! t% S9 T7 s" k; h) `7 U8 C
04-02. **Schmitt, N. W., & Klimoski, R. J. 1991. Determining the quality of ourmeasures. In Research Methods in Human Resources Management, (pp.88-114). Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Co.7 A. _1 Z% {6 Q/ z
04-03. Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical conclusion validity for organizational science researchers: Areview. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 164-208.6 G8 _- \& t q
04-04. Schriesheim, C. A., Cogliser, C. C., Scandura, T. A., Lankau,M. J., & Powers, K. J. 1999. An empirical comparison of approaches forquantitatively assessing the content adequacy of paper-and-pencil instruments. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 2: 140-156. 9 A4 Q4 ~ t* B* n9 U% p8 [' R' g04-05. Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375. 6 b2 J+ K E9 X5 M: `; h04-06. Lim, B. C., & Ployhart, R. E. 2006. Assessing theconvergent and discriminant validity of Goldberg's international personalityitem pool: A multitrait-multimethod examination. Organizational ResearchMethods, 9(1): 29-54. 0 E2 Y' e& y: f+ E7 q) k04-07. Cole, M. S., Bedeian, A. G., & Feild, H. S. 2006. The measurementequivalence of web-based and paper-and-pencil measures of transformationalleadership: A multinational test. Organizational Research Methods, 9(3):339-368.- _. ~( |, _7 v; W6 x
04-08. Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96. 6 b" T+ l1 X- m! l( ` 8 p% f, W* J* S5 ~$ c8 B LIssue 5: Measurement: Scale Development8 W5 @* u7 J0 F# R5 X6 |0 O+ T
**Schwab: Chapter 4 . n" B' Z5 Y/ T# F' @3 W" d05-01. **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121.! D' }8 X- w0 \. c4 U$ k
05-02. DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.; h) C2 N& K z4 @+ `! B
05-03. Vandenberg, R. J. & Lance, C. E. 2000. A Review andSynthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, andRecommendations for Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,3: 4-70. 2 {! F( {' D) B0 n7 ?' O05-04. **Farh, J. L., Zhong, C. B. & Organ, D. W. 2004. Organizational citizenship behavior inthe People’s Republic of China, Organization Science, 15: 241-253. * h0 b; K$ w( `9 t E05-05. Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. 1999. Measuring impression management inorganizations: A scale development based on the Jones and Pittman taxnonomy, OrganizationalResearch Methods, 2: 141-160.* O1 N5 ^% a: b: A. I# X/ U! J" [
05-06. **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch112 c Y: x; w) u5 J5 S1 @; a" I
1 S6 X: p, T. c BIssue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research1 l$ t; I D* t3 t0 Y7 h
MOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3). 4 `* w8 d4 _* T3 |/ N. s8 e6 T; y6 E3 F4 o' u Issue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing ( P# p( u2 q3 \/ j# k/ ^; p: NK & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 51 ^7 q( s5 h# x) b- A
**Schwab: Chapter 13 4 h% U$ M; x) [( f% @+ R# I07-01. **Higgins, M. C. & Kram, K. E. 2001. Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: Adevelopmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 6(2):264-288. $ t7 y# ~/ c/ u( B5 ~/ p, F07-02. Law, K. S. & Wong, C. 1999. Multidimensional constructs in structuralequation analysis: An illustration using the job perception and jobsatisfaction constructs. Journal of Management. 25(2):143-160.9 t/ O9 ?$ p! }! _$ Q
07-03. **Cortina, J. M., & Folger, R. G. 1998. When is it acceptable to accept a nullhypothesis: No way, Jose? Organizational Research Methods, 1: 334-350. 8 ?5 Y% }" g; Q( x07-04. **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch5 - x) A; S6 V/ w. ~0 W; Q2 S* K07-05. Williams, L. J., Edwards, J. R., & Vandenberg, R. J. 2001. Recent advances in causal modelingmethods for organizational and management research. Journal of Management,29(6): 903-936.! |7 X* n, n1 X- w& Z, P' R% `
" Z" b" G1 O! ^- q. T; \Issue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys - K7 a$ m: \" A/ p p**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 7 ' e+ `9 `9 M7 k" {K & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 29. K& U- M- }$ ]0 s
08-01. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, N. 1986. The “science of the sophomore” revisited:From conjecture to empiricism. Academy of Management Review, 11(1):191-207. & E2 ?8 F% @8 q X2 u) C2 D08-02. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, N. 1987. Student guinea pigs: Porcine predictorsand particularistic phenomena. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):160-163. % u( { C8 z' l+ D* |3 l2 g3 I& x08-03. Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159. ; v3 L, J6 b: D! c" E08-04. Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.* c0 ?7 p# D; Y& J5 c0 f
08-05. **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008. ' m0 _# q9 d' E0 l7 V @$ F2 R08-06. Saks, A. M. 1995. Longitudinal field investigation of themoderating and mediating effects of self-efficacy on the relationship betweentraining and new comer adjustment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80:211-225.6 b1 w' O2 e+ g. B0 h X& r8 T& Y" K
08-07. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295. & o5 v) e5 O1 m; ?" \) u6 m08-08. **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch8$ g0 j6 m4 \4 h
08-09. Austin, J. T., Scherbaum, C. A., & Mahlman, R. A.(2002). History of research methods in industrial and organizationalpsychology: Measurement, design, analysis. In S. G. Rogelberg(Ed.), Handbook of research methods inindustrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1-33). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.1 ~6 f0 U1 r8 ~) [3 I
08-10. Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179. / g; V3 J L. D% G08-11. Stone-Romero, E. F., Weaver, A. E., & Glenar, J. L. (1995).Trends in research design and data analytic strategies in organizationalresearch. Journal of Management, 21, 141-157. 6 C8 l% o. V, Y5 d08-12. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.8 u: T. {5 l+ F; X8 G }- H
- f* J0 r+ r5 P Issue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments( [! Y5 C; b, Z6 Q2 V1 ]
**Schwab: Chapter 6 # K" ?! @- j* W' KK & L: Chapters 24 and 22, ]$ i# E1 {1 O5 L" x/ R
09-01. Cook, T. D. & Shadish, W. R. 1994. Social experiments:Some developments over the past fifteen years. Annual Review of Psychology,45: 545-580. % `4 Q0 S6 C' J7 ^; Z09-02. **Dvir, T., Eden, D., & Banjo, M.L. 1995. Self-fulfillingprophecy and gender: Can women be Pygmalion and Galatea? Journal of AppliedPsychology, 80(2): 153-170. % K9 ^ P- Q- t! B" C$ {) A09-03. Audia, P. G., Locke, E. A., & Smith, K. G. 2000. Theparadox of success: An archival and a laboratory study of strategic persistencefollowing radical environment change. Academy of Management Journal,43(5): 837-853./ t+ r& G7 L/ f' W' d# M
09-04. Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B. J., & Shamir, B. 2002. Impact of transformational leadership onfollower development and performance: A field experiment. Academy ofManagement Journal, 45(4): 735-744. 6 }7 E. z8 B" G, R" Q0 L2 K09-05. Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.2 S( S3 h; c; n# g- y" B
09-06. **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch6, ch7. - K/ s v8 _* `1 j# C ' R2 Z0 L3 U) O& Y1 wIssue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research - f, O. s! ?6 W# U9 N1 C10-01. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550. 0 z1 B$ k' f+ z& r: c10-02. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576." X$ ]1 K% y" g* N2 F
10-03. Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.' w+ p" B" S# J4 i6 {
10-04. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441. / }1 Q# B! q; b, S* U: l4 g10-05. Elsbach, K. D. & Kramer, R.M. 2003. Assessing creativity inHollywood pitch meetings: Evidence for a dual-process model of creativityjudgments. Academy of Management Journal, 46(3): 283-301. $ C3 V( ?; D# ]# P- D8 D/ {5 ?10-06. King, N. 2004. Using interviews in organizational research. InC. Cassell and G. Symon (eds.) Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods inOrganizational Research. 11-22. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.7 X# x- P r {' F, e9 j% y
10-07. Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. 1991. The dynamics ofintense work groups: A study of British String Quartets, AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 36: 165-186. 0 V0 e; C, W- k* q7 O. R* z: `' n$ `10-08. Silvester, J. 2004. Attributional coding. In C. Cassell and G.Symon (eds.) Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in OrganizationalResearch. 228-241. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage., h( s( ]/ l% h A3 T% K4 r
10-09. 陳曉萍等（2008）：ch10" O6 V. L3 O# l. N3 Y0 D9 e$ X1 h* g
10-10. Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455. , S5 K4 d5 I9 `7 y4 U7 B/ s$ j( B% v0 c5 f1 t4 _% V. O Issue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion] - P. c1 w2 o* C0 q**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 8 {" s# y) d& q2 f3 ~4 uK & L: Chapters 9 ' d9 I/ H% Y1 ]1 a0 w1 P* b/ t11-01. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759.- R, F+ k4 X1 Z1 c7 j" L& t* w
11-02. Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218.* _) L# B( [7 @
11-03. McFarland, L.A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2003).Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods. Journalof Management, 29(5), 641-661. . H1 m3 q Q# }6 A( A, E8 Y11-04. Rauniar, R. & Shah, S. (2002). Statistical significance vs.practical (meaningful or clinical or biological) significance for academic andnon-academic research. Decision Sciences Institute 2002 Annual MeetingProceedings, 2469-2472.1 H7 A r/ _6 p# ]+ w
11-05. LaHuis, D.M., & Avis, J. M. (2007). Using multilevel randomcoefficient modeling to investigate rater effects in performance ratings. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 10, 97-107. 8 `4 }% a* g$ ~& D+ G& e11-06. Cashen, L., & Geiger, S. W. (2004). Statistical power andthe testing of null hypotheses: A review of contemporary management researchand recommendations for future studies. Organizational Research Methods, 7,151-167. ) k3 T4 q. g+ {7 r( m! X( S) z* s' P: S* s- T& W Issue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation 5 C6 [1 Q% `* S2 V8 V**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19+ R I% Y( s# S/ |6 `
K & L: Chapters 33 and 345 i/ B3 X- t8 p$ m6 |% N% s
12-01. **Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1986. The moderator-mediator variabledistinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, andstatistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,51(6): 1173-1182. / g [5 r0 l& y; l T! ?, q$ X" d( ?12-02. James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321.. i, T/ W# c2 Y, s9 v9 v- t
12-03. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. R. 2006. Clarifying conditionsand decision points for mediational type inferences in Organizational Behavior.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 1031-1056.! z2 Y/ ?* K* {7 L( T6 b
12-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614. ) P& H8 X" |2 d$ }* W5 v12-05. **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch14 + w" o2 r: e' k* j2 \' J + a" j+ T% b. ~1 bIssue 13: Testing mediating effects9 l7 J! ~0 d2 t
13-01. Mathieu, J. E., DeShon, R. P., & Bergh, D. D. 2008.Mediational inferences in organizational research: Then, now, and beyond. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 203-223.& p. @1 I( r, T. d( T5 _
13-02. Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358. |- G# ?6 f+ _0 B2 s' M+ V; V; n13-03. James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363.* J0 A- l0 @2 Z5 G7 K8 A9 [
13-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G.,& Sheets, V. 2002. A comparison of methods to test mediation and otherintervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1): 83-104.) i& H: h) c- u$ A0 E
13-05. Pituch, K. A., Whittaker, T. A., & Stapleton, L. M. 2005. Acomparison of methods to test for mediation in multisite experiments. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 40: 1-24.9 L( `9 h2 U3 q! g# N1 i2 \
13-06. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47. & e; Q- J7 q% n) d13-07. Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398. 7 V% c# n y, _& k4 H. ]13-08. Bollen, K. A. 1987. Total direct and indirect effects instructural equation models. In C. C. Clogg (Ed.), Sociological methodology(pp. 37-69). Washington DC: American Sociological Association. $ s) B# l7 V0 [& Y E1 ~' ]13-09. Freedman, L. S., & Schatzkin, A. 1992. Sample size forstudying intermediate endpoints within intervention trials of observationalstudies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 136: 1148-1159.8 d) p9 [5 W( ^8 Z' @) I6 A
13-10. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619. o( D) U! Y, R13-11. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158. N; T6 [0 j' s3 m+ |; s5 @
13-12. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181. 3 z; ^/ j$ M: a: I7 ^; [, S13-13. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62.( ~. q& [( P9 e* g4 J1 q
13-14. Sobel, M. E. 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervals forindirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.) SociologicalMethodology 1982, (pp. 290-312). Washington, DC: American SociologicalAssociation. + o1 D0 z7 O8 w5 X- M) ^13-15. Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515. - J& E$ c- o" x$ k13-16. Hoyle, R. H., & Kenny, D. A. 1999. Statistical power andtests of mediation. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Statistical strategies forsmall sample research. Newbury Park: Sage. " Y! X% k+ N) R1 l% L: ]13-17. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107. 4 z7 F+ G0 J; ^& D7 d2 x13-18. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.# a* [8 [4 Y/ O" q8 L
13-19. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G.,& Sheets, V. 2002. A comparison of methods to test the significance ofthe mediated effect. Psychological Methods, 7: 83-104. ; w7 l2 o0 z) O/ G6 k) B- O13-20. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62. 4 E, N# S: }- E) g( z13-21. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445.- M/ R+ x: b) j# r
13-22. Smith, E. 1982. Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations:Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 43: 248-259.2 p, I/ F% ~2 N* h2 }3 u. _, s
13-23. Sobel, M. E. 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervalsfor indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.),Sociological Methodology 1982 (pp. 290-312). Washington DC: AmericanSociological Association., c/ w B: }" ^/ \
# z! N3 Y3 i. ?6 Y Issue 14: Testing moderating effects : Y" G+ Z2 n: X2 c5 f14-01. Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A.T. 2002. Time, teams, task performance: Changing effects of surface-anddeep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of management Journal,45(2): 1029-1045.# c- ^( C# ]4 }8 |( W* Q! M
14-02. Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417. 6 H0 [) @7 X4 H5 j7 L& F% I& |14-03. Dionne, S. D., Yammarino, F. J., Atwater, L. E., & James, L. R. 2002. Neutralizing substitutes for leadershiptheory: Leadership effects and common methods bias. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 87(3): 454-464. # u. y, I4 ]& a; I9 E4 A" C6 k14-04. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. R. 2006. Clarifying conditionsand decision points for mediational type inferences in Organizational Behavior.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 1031-1056.; J9 N" \" K7 S4 v k& k7 z3 h
14-05. Stone E. F. & Hollenbeck, J. R. 1989. Clarifyingcontroversial issues surrounding statistical procedures for detecting moderatorvariables: Empirical evidence and related matters. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 74(1): 3-10. " L+ \7 d' B' U14-06. Villa, J. R., Howell, J. P., Dorfman, P. W., Daniel, D. L.2003. Problems with detecting moderators in leadership research using moderatedmultiple regression. Leadership Quarterly, 14(1): 3-23. 1 }; `! n; u4 Z6 I- _/ |9 V( n2 ^- o5 I; S1 w' P& U' i- i4 F Issue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation ; d: U X3 ]/ SSchwab: Chapters 11 and 195 x8 r' l4 @3 R/ E
K & L: Chapters 33 and 34 1 J; M D; _( |0 q15-01. Edwards, J. R. & Lambert, L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1): 1-22.& }! ?! b1 S2 @3 J- {/ Z {
15-02. Bauer, D. J., Preacher, K. J., & Gil, K. M. 2006.Conceptualizing and testing random indirect effects and moderated mediation inmultilevel models: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods,11: 142-163.7 g5 s9 e& ?" F3 j. ]* G: L8 B! b; l
15-03. Edwards, J. R., & Lambert L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12: 1-22. 9 ~5 E; j- c( h: A4 ]$ L15-04. Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128. g) a' s- D7 K b2 O15-05. Kraemer H. C., Wilson G. T., Fairburn C. G., & Agras W.S. 2002. Mediators and moderators of treatment effects in randomizedclinical trials. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59: 877-883.! B0 G5 s* M( L$ U5 [0 ~
15-06. Muller, D., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2005). Whenmoderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 89: 852-863. n: l" i- G5 \. M
15-07. Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444.' f6 H+ R2 d) c0 j
5 O; G* _9 J2 ^2 z+ |' o8 I4 z Issue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation ) E8 ]. W+ C% S4 S( j+ oSchwab: Chapters 14 and 17) z: ~% I) [# G; B
K & L: Chapter 28 & _% i2 [3 a' ?$ U& S16-01. Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87.4 V* v" e p- R& H/ U6 B& ]: F
16-02. Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical Conclusion Validity for Organizational Science Research: A Review. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 1: 164-208.$ P% ~, @: b. \9 H
16-03. Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105. - z6 D7 p6 B. y6 ~16-04. Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400.6 \: i: O4 `! R- z4 _: _
16-05. Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302. ! I$ L2 k" K9 A16-06. Schriesheim, C. A., & Powers, K. J. 1993. Improvingconstruct measurement in management research: Comments and a quantitativeapproach for assessing the theoretical content adequacy of paper-and-pencilsurvey-type instruments. Journal of Management, 19(2): 385-417." a" {! n: x H1 _
16-07. Schwab, D. P. 1980. Construct validity in organizationalbehavior. In Staw B. M. & Cummings L. L. (Eds.) Research inOrganizational Behavior, 2, Greenwich, Con: JAI Press Inc. 3-43.- d! V5 m V$ c& O% R7 T
2 X* X! h! r5 D. l8 ?5 |0 L8 eIssue 17: Common Method Variance : i W, N6 ^- K( B6 g8 j- ~**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 20! L; h* U$ w* e: I* [
17-01. **彭台光, 高月慈, 林鉦棽 2006. 管理研究中的共同方法變異：問題本質、影響、測試和補救。管理學報，23(1): 77-98. ' a6 T! ^- E m* z17-02. Doty, D. H. &Glick, W. H. 1998. Common methods bias: Does common methods variance reallybias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 374-406.3 ?0 g ?( l' l' W$ F1 y
17-03. Goffin, R. D. & Gellatly, I. R. 2001. A multi-raterassessment of organizational commitment: Are self-report measures biased? Journalof Organizational Behavior, 22: 437-451.3 d/ U1 y/ L6 u* e& ], `' q, ^
17-04. Kemery, E. R. & Dunlap, W. P. 1986. Partialling factorscores does not control method variance: A reply to Podsakoff and Todor.Journal of Management, 12(4): 525-530. ; T( k+ f: T! N0 a) L3 q- Y17-05. Podsakoff, P. M. & MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff,N. P. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review ofthe literature and recommended remedies, Journal of Applied Psychology,88: 879-903. 1 S# A" K6 r/ e& n; X! D( L; `17-06. Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational researchroblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544.5 d! @. H1 h' i$ w* h! H+ H0 f% S
17-07. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223. / a9 ], m2 K/ L. m( E17-08. Spector, P. E. & Brannick, M. T. 1995). The nature andeffects of method variance in organizational research. International Reviewof international and organizational Psychology, 10: 249-274. % v1 V/ n% g' e5 h/ c% s17-09. Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232. : y" n7 G; ~+ y% {; F ~6 Z) ^- _- e1 w- m5 I7 D: ~% T+ X Issue 18: Data Non-independence. T: k, @5 i+ ?/ I
18-01. Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735. $ v* i0 U8 }5 h7 R1 G. x/ q18-02. Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75. $ t4 {) k' M5 J; F18-03. Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.$ U0 Y7 s$ P. q: ]5 k8 X; p
18-04. Bliese, P. & Hanges, P. J. 2004. Being too liberal and tooconservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they wereindependent. Organizational Research Methods, 7: 400-417. L* c p& ~8 p18-05. 彭台光 & 林鉦棽 2008. 組織現象和層次議題: 非獨立性資料的概念和實徵. 組織與管理, 1(1): 95-121. 6 J6 R% I0 F* o. S& Y18-06. Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. 1995. On thelevel: Homogeneity, independence, heterogeneity, and interactions inorganizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 20: 7-9.! I Z S1 u1 N/ }/ e
18-07. Kenny, D. A., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Livi, S., &Kashy, D. A. 2002. The statistical analysis of data from small groups.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83: 126-137. ( w: }0 ?, _" S8 R2 f. @; d% }5 _3 j+ l Issue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch), `2 C. T3 t8 ^ m7 k8 M
19-01. Adler, N. A., Campbell, N. & Laurent, A. 1989. In search ofappropriate methodology: From outside the People’s Republic of China lookingin. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1): 61-74. 8 P* f1 T+ E" O& o8 U' z3 w19-02. Boisot, M. & Child. J. 1996. From fiefs to clans andnetwork capitalism: Explaining China’s emerging economic order. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 41(4): 600-628. . E9 d+ x A* m7 S @# A3 n19-03. Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209. & `3 b4 z% d8 g* L: i19-04. Farh, J. L., Tsui, A. S., Xin, K., & Cheng, B. S. 1998. Theinfluence of relational demography and guanxi: The Chinese case. OrganizationScience, 9: 471-488.% B% p- T2 G5 ?/ P$ J, e5 q
19-05. Farh, J. L. & Cheng, B. S. 2000. A cultural analysis ofpaternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In J. T. Li, A. S. Tsui,& E. Weldon (Eds.), Management and Organizations in the Chinese Context.London: MacMillan, 2000: 84-127. t2 {8 n+ a+ e8 r# H, d( \19-06. Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974./ D. [5 {+ F4 E) x' ~' H/ @: q+ {
19-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151./ S6 V" n8 O" `. n) e. @6 {
19-08. Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215.' ~3 c7 ]" C' s$ E1 U) N: v0 Y; T; T
19-09. 楊國樞(主編) 1993。「本土心理學的開展」 (本土心理學研究第一期)，台北：台灣大學心理系本土心理學研究室。 1 _4 @1 v6 l# [2 q4 p( |3 l! w9 i& P0 c( }
19-10. 楊國樞(主編) 1996。「本土心理學方法論」(本土心理學研究第八期)，台北：台灣大學心理系本土心理學研究室。 2 g7 O2 R; L/ R5 \7 {. ^2 ]) m. U" K z1 q* \. c
19-11. 陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰# K- w0 g3 B, x9 C( N: N
1 E# }( N* Y5 n J- C d
19-12. 陳曉萍等（2008）：ch177 a1 t& S# `- W2 m, w N5 @
19-13. Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oraland written materials. In H. C. Triandis, & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbookof cross-culturalpsychology. Vol. 2: Methodology (pp. 389^I44).Boston, MA: Allyn Bacon.7 m. j0 e Z" u' U
19-14. Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. AsiaPacificJournalofManagement, 21, 491-513. , H3 A, c* z' y1 K5 ^+ E 2 \; `1 v' E' @- S9 ? HIssue 20: Structural Equation Modeling% w4 W5 c& ]- b* I
K & L: Chapter 35. 2 W) R9 p9 ] w8 M% t7 P8 Z: M1 P20-01. 林清山 1984。「線性結構關係」(LISREL)電腦程式。中國測驗年會測驗學刊，31:149-164。3 M4 r d; g7 a
20-02. Feldt, T., Kivimaki, M., Rantala, A., & Tolvanen, A. 2004.Sense of coherence and work characteristics: A cross-lagged structural equationmodeling with managers. Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 77: 323-342. + L( Z5 V2 [# X: l! {9 J: z20-03. Jonge, J. de, Dormann, C., Janssen, P. P. M., Dollard, M. F.,Landeweerd, J. A., & Nijhuis, F. J. N. 2001. Testing reciprocalrelationships between job characteristics and psychological well-being: Across-lagged structural equation model. Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 74: 29-46.% o+ ^7 E' X3 a J
20-04. Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172. J, P0 u3 U# m X' J: {8 s% t P: A+ y
20-05. Lytle, A. L., Brett, J. M., Barsness, Z. I., Tinsley, C.H.,& Janssens, M. 1995. A paradigm for confirmatory cross-cultural research inorganizational behavior. Research in Organization Behavior, 17: 167-214. . w$ m+ Q7 I. d2 s+ W1 ?3 q20-06. Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. 1994. An alternativeapproach to method effects using latent-variable models: Applications inorganizational behavior research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3):323-331.! W* U0 ^2 w0 e" ] h* h
20-07. Williams, L. J. & Brown, B. K. 1994. Method Variance inorganizational behavior and human resources research: Effects on correlations,path coefficients, and hypothesis testing. Organizational Behavior and HumanDecision Process. 57: 185-209.1 e8 i1 U0 z& s' D2 B" A5 o
20-08. Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. 2006. Problems with itemparceling for comfirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 9: 369-403., F. C. e$ Y* ~* Z0 c. L3 ~
20-09. 陳曉萍等（2008）：ch136 D# N: O3 D" _* N1 I# k& @
# C- ]- H' }- F6 T3 C' U3 x Issue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism h1 m `9 o% b! d# B
21-01. Courgeau, D. 2003. General introduction. In D. Courgeau (Ed.), Methodologyand Epistemology of multilevel analysis: Approaches from different socialsciences (pp.1-23). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.' I4 P( [$ i% z+ J C6 B
21-02. Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.5 I4 F' O+ i* O' F: l# t) G
21-03. Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14. 0 T9 H4 [ Z! g* e; l2 H- z21-04. Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652./ d% ~- Z$ e8 H% R* o" z8 e
21-05. Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607. ! `! L, X& o5 D+ B+ s21-06. Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613. ( Z: R! s7 D- E5 g4 E21-07. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68). / E1 Y9 D! @& m3 i I, a( q21-08. von Bertalanffy, L. 1972. The history and status of generalsystems theory. In G.J. Klir (Ed.), Trends in general systems theory(pp. 21-41). NY: Wiley. + B( b) p* I6 U21-09. von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53)./ J* W9 ]1 o. Q% z
21-10. Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50). 5 O7 G! B* o+ n; g, J* Q6 N! ?, f m4 b f8 y, U, x1 I Issue 22: Level Fallacies ; R- u! `" E% ~+ f4 V22-01. Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73. 0 J! C4 [8 U, y; b8 K# U3 Q22-02. Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191./ p# g7 P, i( `% P; B3 c7 ]' V) N
22-03. **Thorndike, E. L. (1939). On the fallacy of imputing thecorrelations found for groups to the individuals or smaller groups composingthem. American Journal of Psychology, 52, 122-124.9 _6 S O% Y* }3 N7 w
22-04. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357. 7 q- s: H2 i' ?22-05. **Schwartz, S. (1994). The fallacy of the ecological fallacy:The potential misuse of a concept and the consequences. American Journal ofPublic Health, 84, 819-824. / k& |0 |+ @. K/ h0 Q22-06. Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777.$ [8 ?1 ? _6 Q6 y$ c4 a
4 R, Y- I: e5 t" eIssue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena5 ~/ g0 l6 U) {1 x' I, L3 F2 l) Y
23-01. James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112. 5 d# k0 ^' J' G [+ R* F23-02. Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller. % ]& X& R. a- v: Z8 X# R! W- u* d: N23-03. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Doherty, M. L. 1989. Integrationof leadership and climate: Examination of a neglected issue. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 74(4): 546-553., X9 B/ G+ E7 x0 U% S
23-04. Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540.. c8 q! Z1 [2 ^" W. P1 g. D- l
23-05. **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53. & F5 k8 A; }6 L/ V3 I$ U23-06. Johns, G. 1999. A multi-level theory of self-serving behaviorin and by organizations. In Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior,21: 1-38. ) a% [# A& ^1 z! b# s* x Z/ A8 F23-07. Weingart, L. 1997. How did they do that? The ways and means ofstudying group process. In Staw B. M., & Cummings L. L. (Eds.), Research inOrganizational Behavior, 19: 189-239. " ^: n; y8 l, C" m* V5 h1 ~# k23-08. Horwitz, S. K., & Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects ofteam diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic analysis of team demography.Journal of Management, 33, 6, 987-1005.' J( W+ n9 s( p0 J3 e1 X2 e
23-09. Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42.( L2 _ y! z2 T) T
23-10. Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348. + o# Z# ~. q( }* \0 J23-11. Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218./ l& g! ~/ _$ B% p7 F7 f1 T- M
23-12. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.6 K* ~- @( _" f1 e# [9 K
23-13. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. 1981.Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 501-524.# l) J, W, o4 U \% P
23-14. **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974. 7 i5 @( d+ g: Q3 l3 f$ y & f7 J# Y# F+ L4 D! F2 R0 U2 @Issue 24: Levels in Theory Building 7 x0 |/ j( d$ t$ O/ x) y24-01. Hitt, M. A., Beamish, P. W., Jackson, S. E., & Mathieu, J.E. 2007. Building theoretical and empirical bridges across levels: Multilevelresearch in management. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6): 1385-1399.6 [. F4 a8 d8 g6 J3 \! H O
24-02. Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248. d9 R) ^. J% Q% g8 {# J& v
24-03. Dansereau, F., Yammarino, F. J., & Kohles, J. C. 1999. Multiple levelsof analysis from a longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theorybuilding. Academy of Management Journal, 24: 346-357. , _2 A) H' ~ v" F. E7 Z24-04. Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229. # H9 H8 G/ G* G, M! a+ H' k24-05. George, J. M., & James, L. R. 1994. Levels issues in theory development. Academyof Management Review, 19: 639-640. (Critique of Klein et al., 1994)- F8 ^% D, x/ M6 w( c
24-06. Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. On the level:Homogeneity, independence, heterogeneity, and interactions in organizationtheory. Academy of Management Review, 20: 7-17. (Response to George & James, 1994) ) R4 @# e% O* ^ M, p24-07. Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.% c8 i- e( j+ z5 R( F
24-08. Mossholder, K. W. & Bedeian, A. G.. 1983. Cross-level inference andorganizational research: Perspectives on interpretation and application.Academy of Management Review, 8(4): 547-558.4 M& L f# M6 P% o3 k
24-09. Glick, W. H. (1980). Problems in cross-level inference. In K.H.Roberts & L. Burstein (eds.) Issues in Aggregation. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. 17-30. : ~" Y1 z9 [7 y3 g24-10. Roberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Developing an interdisciplinaryscience of organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass (Chapters 1-3, pp.1-80).* I4 T5 k. L' \
24-11. Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201. 1 ~+ @, ^0 c/ x; a6 Q( y1 |/ i ! b/ v+ M r5 B! q2 MIssue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective7 ?9 [/ O5 ?% E8 r( q& E
25-01. **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922. $ f5 ?1 c( _4 e25-02. **House, R. J., Rousseau, D.M., & Thomas-Hunt, M. 1995. The mesoparadigm: A framework for the integration of micro and macro organizationalbehavior. In Staw, B. M., & Cummings, L. L. (Eds.), Research inOrganizational Behavior, 17: 71-114.- O3 S4 l+ c6 Y+ S' D
25-03. Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. 1982. Toward a macro-orientedmodel of leadership: An odyssey, In J.G. Hunt, U. Sekaran, & C. Schrieshiem(Eds.), Leadership: Beyond Establishment Views, Carbondale, IL: SouthernIllinois University Press. 2 e O8 Z1 {/ Q* T+ z# u4 r25-04. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338. 6 M/ G" S2 i& u25-05. Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610. - X" c3 G, g. t6 v25-06. Tosi, H. 1992. The organization and the environment: The E/Olink in the model. The Environment/Organization/Person Contingency Model: AMeso Approach to the Study of Organizations. 29-66. Greenwich, Conn: JAI.. j4 I, x- F/ a+ s
25-07. Cappelli, P., & Sherer, P. 1991. The missing role ofcontext in OB: The need for a meso-level approach. In Staw, B. M., & Cummings, L. L. (Eds.), Research inOrganizational Behavior, 13: 55-110.' y( f" s b0 N6 m; h2 Y) w" q
3 {( o) Y; F2 ~7 l Issue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory . r8 Z0 D0 v# G* a; w. \
26-01. **Kozlowski, S.W.J. & Kline, K. 2000. A multilevel approach to theory andresearch in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K.and K, 3-90.$ n: a5 ]3 f5 D
26-02. Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307. $ u; a' J+ _1 X1 `; V26-03. Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346.- f! o- O. ^7 C) E
! C9 |7 S8 t8 CIssue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research k) D) G O0 A# ^& H }
27-01. **林鉦棽 & 彭台光 2006。多層次管理研究：分析層次的概念、理論和方法。管理學報，23(6): 649-675.+ C- `* i3 x# |
27-02. **Hofmann, D.A. 2002. Issues in multilevel research: Theorydevelopment, measurement, and analysis. In S.G. Rogelberg’s(ed.) Handbook of Research Methods inIndustrial and Organizational Psychology. 247-274. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.; _' u- U9 q7 g. M( m& O
27-03. Kline, K. J. &Kozlowski, S. J. 2000. From micro to meso: Critical stepsin conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research. OrganizationalResearch methods, 3(3): 211-236. 2 U/ A6 N) L# @( r2 Z5 `7 z8 w8 ?0 O9 x; `4 \ Issue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process & G- H+ Y7 F/ Z7 m( S
28-01. Morgeson, F. P., & Hofmann, D. A. 1999. The structure and function ofcollective constructs: Implications for multilevel research and theorydevelopment. Academy of Management Review, 24: 249-265.% Q- @6 q5 d7 S6 U0 b' c6 ]
28-02. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253. ! a4 A* j. J" h0 y: ?28-03. Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453. ( c1 [8 {+ t' O/ E0 R28-04. Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773.7 Y7 b- \: r% l% V) B, G
28-05. Walter, F., & Bruch, H. 2008. The positive group affectspiral: A dynamic model of the emergence of positive affective similarity inwork groups. Journal of Organizational Psychology, 29, 239-261. \6 A( c; v. l4 s) E' R6 @+ b% n: H9 m0 {" Z! B6 \ Issue 29: Measurement and Aggregation }$ O. m7 ]/ e' a29-01. Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765.' s) R1 ^* o; K2 q
29-02. Burke, M. J. & Dunlap, W. P. 2002. Estimating interrateragreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5(2): 159-172. / _# h+ e" M9 `2 A4 v4 z" \29-03. James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229. 9 f6 F9 P! O2 B& D" E! }. l' x29-04. **James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimatingwith-group reliability with and without response bias. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 69(1): 85-98.9 E7 L v( _. O( o: \
29-05. James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1993. Rwg: Anassessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 78(2): 306-309.* O, F; A. A1 z& Q( I* c
29-06. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hattrup, K. 1992. A disagreementabout within-group agreement: Disentangling issues of consistency versusconsensus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(2): 161-167.( p/ L7 @* c/ Q; N9 M5 b
29-07. Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582." {& O9 ?3 H# ^6 O1 S/ [
29-08. Freeman, J. 1980. The unit problem in organizational research.In W.M. Evan (Ed.), Frontiers in organization and management (pp.59-68). NY: Praeger.# u0 @. r ?: W8 {9 v0 \$ p
29-09. Campbell, D. T. 1958. Common fate, similarity, and otherindices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities.Behavioral Science, 3: 14-25.! D! h- C5 F; I- h
29-10. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563.# V \) F. F/ T5 H; b; p
29-11. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. 1989. Interrater reliability coefficientscannot be computed when only one stimulus is rated. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 74: 368-370. % S1 P0 i4 t0 c! S# c& I9 ~3 q29-12. Bliese, P. 2000. Within-group agreement, non-independence, andreliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein& S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research and methods inorganizations (349-381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.* s1 v# E9 K" m4 L
29-13. Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373." N; n6 ]# W& E& J5 G$ x% g+ o
29-14. Bliese, P. D., & Halverson, R. R. 1998. Group size andmeasures of group-level properties: An examination of eta-squared and ICCvalues. Journal of Management, 24: 157-172. 4 t6 q* G& E% y$ C5 t; ]6 M29-15. Bliese, P. D. & Hanges, P. J. 2004. Being too liberal andtoo conservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they wereindependent. Organizational Research Methods, 7: 400-417.; i, c3 B$ |, T. q: }+ c, w% Y1 O
29-16. **Castro, S. L. 2002. Data analytic methods for the analysis ofmultilevel questions: A comparison of intraclass correlation coefficients,rwg(j), hierarchical linear modeling, within- and between-analysis, and randomgroup resampling.Leadership Quarterly, 13: 69-93.8 Z3 S! n% ?" P% X+ a* q
29-17. Lindell, M. K., & Brandt, C. J. 2000. Climate quality andclimate consensus as mediators of the relationship between organizationalantecedents and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: 331–348., M/ H) s2 l$ |; `
29-18. Lindell, M. K., Brand, C. J., & Whitney, D. J. 1999. Arevised index of interrater agreement for multitem rating of a single target.Applied Psychological Measurement, 23: 127-135.5 c9 X6 X% w( O- s% X5 t% E
29-19. McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46. % v8 [9 t- E. K, U; Z5 `29-20. Bliese P. D., Halverson, R. R., & Rothberg, J. M. 1994.Within-group agreement scores: Using resampling procedures to estimate expectedvariance. Academy Management Best Paper Proceeding, 306-307. ' U1 |# k9 X1 I3 j! k( F/ w4 ^29-21. Burke, M. J., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. S. 1999. Onaverage deviation indices for estimating interrater agreement.Organizational Research Methods, 2(1): 49-68.1 z0 i+ |0 c( u1 Q
& q0 E$ h. P( G2 ~$ bIssue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis0 W+ G. v4 B0 N; Y. k
30-01. Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395. 4 {! Q- T6 e: A3 q+ _/ v2 V( ~: o y30-02. James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424. - Z* S2 [( b7 S) F* Q1 B' X30-03. George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.! r t3 C9 y! H
30-04. Yammarino, F. J., & Markham, S. E. 1992. On theapplication of within and between analysis: Are absence and affect reallygroup-based phenomenon? Journal of Applied Psychology, 77: 168-176.$ ?& X* V# Y2 ]# F0 [6 Z6 c
30-05. George, J. M., & James, L. R. 1993. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups revisited: Comment on aggregation, level of analysis, and recentapplication of within and between analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78:798-804. " A% _+ d3 i# Q! e( h* I$ C+ e30-06. **Chan, D. 1998. Functional relations among constructs in thesame content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of compositionmodels. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 234-246. * g" \' B" j! h& O30-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. H. 1989. On the empiricalidentifications of dimensions of cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20(2): 133-151. & J; o0 H* T$ h30-08. Peterson, M. F. & Castro, S. 2006. Measurement metrics ataggregate levels of analysis: Implications for organization culture researchand the GLOBE project. Leadership Quarterly, 17: 506-521. ( g" w6 O4 I3 {, R, N2 G30-09. Dansereau, F., Yammarino, F. J., & Kohles, J. 1999. Multiple levels ofanalysis from a longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 24: 346-357.; I7 X3 Z. L$ t: d( G! @ a4 v
30-10. **Klein, K. J., Bliese, P. D., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Dansereau, F., Gavin, M. B., Griffin,M. A., Hofmann, D. A., James, L. R., Yammarino, F. J., & Bligh, M. C. 2000 Multilevelanalytical techniques: Commonalities, differences, and continuing questions.In K. & K. 512-553. ; D5 [6 C3 ?1 P& o, K. t 6 M6 ]$ q; m& j2 oIssue 31: Introduction to HLM ! d% U/ D5 u u t' H4 s31-01. **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744.4 @( l- G5 k6 ^) q" Y
31-02. Hofmann, D. A. & Griffin, M. A., Gavin, M. B. 2000. Theapplication of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K.& K. 467-511. 8 ^2 r" Z P8 \" ^) A* Q0 V31-03. **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641.) X+ w9 M3 T5 e
31-04. Klein, K. J., Conn, A. B., Smith, D. B., & Sorra, J. S. (2001). Is everyonein agreement? An exploration of within-group agreement in employee perceptionsof the work environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 3-16. # E0 Z3 J% j i' b) R 3 X! P3 a# _3 E0 GIssue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM$ E! Y) Y$ _% ]
32-01. Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297. 4 [% x' x* l/ s- l, H4 v32-02. **Cole, M. S. & Bedeian, A. G. 2007. Leadership consensus as a cross-levelcontextual moderator of the emotion exhaustion-work commitment relationship. LeadershipQuarterly, 18: 447-462.8 H0 u! s$ N2 x ]+ L# q
32-03. Eyring, J. D., Johnson, D. S., & Francis, D. J. 1993. Across-level units-of-analysis approach to individual differences in skillacquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 805-815.7 r- X/ ?& y: B- d" l
32-04. Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33. . H; G) J* V* ?9 s: G9 Q' Y+ [32-05. **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94. * \5 s; I5 a& }+ x3 L32-06. Glission, C., & James, L. R. 2002. The cross-level effects of culture andclimate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:767-794. # v; A. e, {( K6 e9 Q32-07. Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522. : \1 ^' [% U5 a32-08. Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255. 0 [' {/ u0 ]0 U0 F2 d32-09. Kidwell, R. E., Mossholder, K.W., & Bennett, N. 1997.Cohesiveness and organizational citizenship behavior: A multilevel analysisusing work groups and individuals. Journal of Management, 23: 775-793. 4 f! F5 R6 T" Q0 h32-10. Paris, L. 2004. The effects of gender and culture on implicitleadership theories: A cross-cultural study. William H. Newman Award, Academyof Management meeting. (Award given to a single-authored paper based ondissertation). S& R0 i9 T! Y5 j
32-11. Sacco, J. M., & Schmitt, N. 2005. A dynamic multilevel model of demographicdiversity and misfit effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2):203-231. " n: k- @0 m) x0 p% p" [0 \32-12. Steensma, H. K., Marino, L., & Dickson, P. H. 2000. Theinfluence of national cultural on the formation of technology alliances byentrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 951-973. 9 i7 f4 B9 H6 o0 F! V: `* ]32-13. Steward, G. L., Fulmer, I. S., & Barrick, M. R. 2005. Anexploration of member roles as a multilevel linking mechanism for individualtraits and team outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 58: 343-365.* t( X9 G: Y2 z( \) Q; }0 ~# b" @
32-14. Vancouver, J. B. 1997. The application of HLM to the analysisof the dynamic interaction of environment, person and behavior. Journal ofManagement, 23: 795-818.. V% ~; o$ r1 o; |+ F
32-15. Whitener, E. M. 2001. Do “high commitment” human resource practicesaffect employee commitment? A cross-level analysis using hierarchical linearmodeling. Journal of Management, 27: 515-535.8 ~" K j, j* e0 U$ R* J ?
. F8 z* L. {+ m Issue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research 6 b/ j* v* q; Z# h33-01. Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571. . D' F! n3 w+ c. V33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582.7 J$ v- V q# _* D: b
33-03. Dansereau, F., Yammarino, F. J., & Kohles, J. C. 1999. Multiple levelsof analysis from a longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theorybuilding. Academy of Management Journal, 24: 346-357.: a* r j' i* H v5 \/ o
33-04. Chen, G., Mathieu, J. E., & Bliese, P. D. 2004. Aframework for conducting multilevel construct validation. In F. J. Yammarino& F. Dansereau (Eds.), Research inmultilevel issues: Multilevel issues in organizational behavior and processes (Vol.3): 273-303. Elsevier: Oxford, U.K.4 `: g l. |* i( K
33-05. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. E. 2007. A framework fortesting meso-mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior. Journalof Organizational Behavior, 28: 141-172." P3 ^9 s1 z2 c4 ?
33-06. Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277. ! y6 ?) H" r+ h8 k; k/ I& x0 M k6 U' i/ B F/ C7 ^5 D, f( Z Issue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review8 G+ N2 _" R" I) J
Schwab: Chapters 15 and 211 k2 ], @0 E' D5 F& S
34-01. 應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信 % I% J' M3 g# X- @4 t8 _34-02. Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Colbert, A.E., & Rynes, S.L. 2007. What cause a management article to becited—Article, author, or journal? Academy of Management Journal, 50(3):491-506., O/ V: E q R8 M p. I
34-03. Bartunek, J. M., Rynes, S. L., & Ireland, R. D. 2006. What makes a management researchinteresting and why does it matter? Academy of Management Journal,49(1): 9-15.0 m; z, @! B/ t+ d( h# a0 @2 `
34-04. **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout).: W- \% D, N) \1 U" A( _- @
34-05. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515. " d0 z! |0 h5 V) ^" N, h34-06. **Daft, R. L. 1995. Why I recommended that your manuscript berejected and what you can do about it. In L.L. Cummings & P.J. Frost(eds.), Publishing in the Organizational Science, 2nd ed.,164-182. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. # T. t- ?) n& E34-07. **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6.9 n( d0 _4 U- v# q6 `
34-08. Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164.( j6 F, A. p4 Q; U 34-09. Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307. 4 W9 Q8 q Q) C7 n: m0 S34-10. Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92.( x. C: n f( @& w
$ A& Q# t+ J" n; a! r* E. oIssue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism( I1 `0 f4 q0 W7 V/ R
35-01. **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。 7 _; ~ O+ l. [# L f4 i; q水流花靜---科學與詩的對話。 ! v2 o" B# _, X' ?' y2 bP.121~139.台北:天下文化。 + [) K! K8 V6 t- H35-02. Smith, K. G., & Hitt, M. A. 2005. Learning how to developtheories from the masters. In K.G. Smith & M.A. Hitt (Eds.) Great mindsin management: The process of theory development, pp. 573-588. New York:Oxford University Press. 7 ~0 |6 e' o$ T9 U35-03. Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242.+ F% |% H) n8 Y2 m
35-04. Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.6 ?- |, A0 g% x E& W7 d
35-05. Canella, A. A. Jr., & Paetzold, R. L. 1994. Pfeffer’sbarriers to the advance of organizational science: A rejoinder. Academy ofManagement Review. 19(2): 331-341. " F/ U" y( G/ i6 S2 P3 E7 l3 \9 ]35-06. Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312. # o3 L D8 H y# h$ x2 ?35-07. Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2). ( q' G# P# t( u# Z35-08. Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620.9 i" p/ C* I* Z
35-09. **Prasad, A. & Prasad, P. 2002. The coming of age ofinterpretive organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 5(1):4-11. (A special issue on interpretive genres of organizational researchmethods) ' P' S/ s1 ~1 u- K% i e35-10. Vandenberg, R. J. & Lance, C. E. 2000. A Review andSynthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, andRecommendations for Organizational Research. Organizational ResearchMethods, 3: 4-70.( t& B% } m+ y& }% G
35-11. Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158.1 [" h/ ^. l! V1 {
35-12. Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44.( k! A% M* Q" e/ j# F
35-13. Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.4 Y5 X' y7 a: H4 J/ \0 f- Z- _- ~
35-14. **Lance, C. E., Butts, M. M., & Michels, L. C. 2006. Thesources of four commonly reported cutoff criteria: What did they really say? OrganizationalResearch Methods, 9: 202-220.% N; M$ d* m& l" L9 J* t
rentice-Hall. [Amazon]