# _, y' Z& m# A+ _ Major Textbooks:, x4 m, ?# o2 I
Kerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt. 5 Y7 h% i* Z2 E5 b( J/ ?Schwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book] 3 f& w+ [% \! {' VKlein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon]' G) u0 H9 ]; A5 w/ _ Supplementary Books:6 W9 @ k; N( o. P1 a* m Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon]' I8 u. `* K) o8 X: q, N Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]; N# f2 V! g5 N! ?
Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. MultivariateData Analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJrentice-Hall. [Amazon]& H, L/ _$ Q& ^5 t" x
Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.4 s* D# k, a% u$ @9 a Rogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. * _5 K5 V9 e) b; R8 o/ G0 J) [Journal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6). % u5 X. f9 G2 @, o6 MAcademy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2).2 I* W$ g8 J* O" \* [+ o+ M1 Q2 Z Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2). ! P2 r' t6 M3 N, nLeadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1).4 `4 N+ H+ E7 X# y. c& O9 z) ], d+ _ Academy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6.0 d; R" b. w% H. y
Kreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.' d8 M0 {0 X2 ]: r# L: y Raudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.3 w, B* i3 ]0 g Roberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.4 l. n, g- N5 Q9 b* j$ X% W Roberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. # o" m h C Q O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。 ) l3 t5 T; \: [5 `& J) U( w' S% A6 Q 5 \6 o; ?3 Q0 w$ R4 nIssue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory! |0 X4 A' ^. n- P
K & L: Chapter 1% u! I W; {! g' s- L
01-01. Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks. - [, M# j- [( y% p01-02. Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91. ) j$ Y* A( w/ k& w1 x2 `01-03. Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review,15(4): 584-602.8 T# B/ w& _/ E* B# n
01-04. Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128. 6 A+ r6 x: }( n. ~! r$ W; K0 A01-05. Wright, T. A., & Wright, V. P. 1999. Ethicalresponsibility and the organizational researcher: A committed-to-participantresearch perspective. JournalofOrganizationalBehavior,20(7): 1107-1112. 7 M% n& T+ S4 {: i9 ]5 X01-06. Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,41: 262-269.( F, C* e Q3 s U" B2 G
01-07. 陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。 $ ^2 Y6 X! |, D. n6 ?# S* T- e01-08. 陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch2: 研究的起點：提問。 ' L8 {" Z% q5 L" v* F. P: `( D5 W& f7 l$ E* w. i Issue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development4 E7 {9 ~0 O1 J
02-01. Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2% t. W5 B# u) y ^0 Z5 n$ D+ _
02-02. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. AcademyofManagementReview,14: 496-515.: L3 M: D7 J2 ^ j
02-03. 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.% z$ O. x# V' K! O |
02-04. Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? AcademyofManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095." |; z [* q3 N! ?2 B
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., P4 p( Q$ @* k
02-06. Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. 1998. Trust and distrust: new relationships andrealities. Academy of Management Review, 23: 438-458." y+ g6 h6 v) a2 p$ {
02-07. Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010.# w. S. s; s" z4 ?" F {( [
02-08. Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441.1 r" U% s" f- g% t8 _; A- h
02-09. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. A. (1993). The motivational effects ofcharismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4,577–594.4 D+ _3 x8 O# h# @1 P
02-10. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.2 `/ ?3 W, P, Q4 s1 R" G
02-11. Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.: j& Z" w3 g% [7 k$ u' v
02-12. Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.8 M# u7 q+ K% [) h3 F- @9 i
02-13. 陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。 3 B5 Z8 {, L# g02-14. 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.# ^7 ~( P$ @- B
& ]" U& @- M2 R7 K5 e. AIssue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion]) b+ r$ e7 ]: ~. \: R3 |
03-01. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192. " w I! k5 ], B5 @03-02. 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): 143-160.6 W1 c9 J0 W" N1 j+ B- K+ S
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. 6 d. h; r3 E6 z03-04. 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. * P5 E) X* B# O( ~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. 9 A% G9 {7 |6 R- |& X03-06. 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." a& @$ |+ V3 p, T
03-07. 陳曉萍等（2008）：ch12) ?5 ]- ~9 g4 I- H2 u' Z A, k, T
; z( l( r+ K, M$ p' G+ U. F Issue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion] 1 J! I0 ^" H& e/ V5 C**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 89 N5 b- ]9 U; T$ d3 z8 h
K & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28. h1 S9 y5 h) m5 I( a- Q: {
04-01. Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.+ e0 B$ E6 G, b1 _; X& M; O
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.+ G& k/ y9 \* {, n
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. ^: a9 n$ i* w F" j0 I# G7 @$ R04-04. 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.) i# i5 d- q7 n( z: f1 A
04-05. Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375. - ^. U1 F. j; \8 V04-06. 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 H3 M9 i& j/ g% `( \2 _' L+ ]04-07. 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. * C9 \6 N/ \) [8 V/ A04-08. Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96. 9 l2 L& b4 T) @4 P& o) q0 m- v4 i ; i! ~2 o# d3 H& Z# B# wIssue 5: Measurement: Scale Development+ n" @# F) Z W) S
**Schwab: Chapter 40 D$ S0 t/ [3 U
05-01. **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121. 8 q* l+ b( R, Z2 L" G- E05-02. DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.. q; w; n0 R; e8 G, e
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. m* w2 ~( [' z05-04. **Farh, J. L., Zhong, C. B. & Organ, D. W. 2004. Organizational citizenship behavior inthe People’s Republic of China, Organization Science, 15: 241-253.: L2 j$ k7 Q; |/ I9 }
05-05. Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. 1999. Measuring impression management inorganizations: A scale development based on the Jones and Pittman taxnonomy, OrganizationalResearch Methods, 2: 141-160.3 u& G7 _9 f& X* L: Q# K: a; t! i
05-06. **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch119 Z v) I1 u5 M" v
2 U1 [$ z8 M+ U0 q# U9 _- P Issue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research' X! m1 M5 t! m
MOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3).1 f: Y$ O- i# w; J9 z
$ X; J% F) z9 ]0 g' p- G' ?2 t Issue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing p# ]& o0 N5 o' s0 gK & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 50 w) n- ]% N. h0 i* B
**Schwab: Chapter 13, G* f: l4 N) @, @& t
07-01. **Higgins, M. C. & Kram, K. E. 2001. Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: Adevelopmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 6(2):264-288. 4 G9 m! p7 R& R& a/ g! W4 R7 v07-02. 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.( }- ]0 w; y0 p% v, ~$ k; t
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. . }0 B3 }; l4 }' \% g; W3 w! } u07-04. **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch5 % W; q( S2 x1 ~- U: D07-05. 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.+ E6 G! D; F: B* {- o+ w0 G# g
' g) l0 `2 w5 [- ^0 y! _ Issue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys2 j$ g* u. T6 W; J
**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 7; b: ?- `# x, S- Z, ?
K & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 29 e) s2 v: w6 N
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. 8 s! x. N) o8 n08-02. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, N. 1987. Student guinea pigs: Porcine predictorsand particularistic phenomena. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):160-163.0 h, j: ^3 e; n5 s
08-03. Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159.. b l+ ~3 H$ E
08-04. Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.% s5 O- x* f0 Y0 W; R( o( ]
08-05. **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008. ; H& Q( q7 F7 e6 p08-06. 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. " H* q, _( T7 u$ z- t! a! G08-07. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295. 3 d: n& U- [& K1 b# t" g+ }# z08-08. **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch8# e- O7 E# U5 g
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. & R/ _2 z9 z4 A7 j) j! G08-10. Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179. 6 S* V2 y9 I* p+ w' _0 C0 p8 w8 A1 {08-11. 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. 8 U5 A N! b: D8 M, y08-12. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295. 2 b" C" s+ ]4 M X6 r9 d H5 ^ 6 M) F: v/ v1 d7 e- ~Issue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments9 M1 Y+ N4 ]7 _0 h
**Schwab: Chapter 6 9 P2 s, l0 o" r9 iK & L: Chapters 24 and 22 ( u; M5 W" A* w% a' u- M8 F* o09-01. Cook, T. D. & Shadish, W. R. 1994. Social experiments:Some developments over the past fifteen years. Annual Review of Psychology,45: 545-580. ! l8 k8 I% j, E4 d# 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.$ j) ?+ g$ C/ E/ A" I$ b
09-03. 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. " O& ?; n8 t$ q* L4 k2 _7 E09-04. 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. 0 P. v( E/ {- Y B8 Y09-05. Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.# g F G. f# z" U: P
09-06. **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch6, ch7.: F8 [: X9 R. @% \/ M5 Z. X7 W2 g- V
X m7 r0 x: p6 GIssue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research/ q* K" t m4 M) ^" E& ?- W& W
10-01. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.: S l3 {9 [8 m6 G* x
10-02. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576. 4 o- C; s2 I z+ \- ?/ q10-03. Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.) R8 _2 D6 ~8 j$ B* h$ j+ |( \& S
10-04. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441. 3 `! F) P/ d2 H1 ^10-05. 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.+ B; v: t" \- y: H* F( u; |
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. + b4 C/ g7 o' f10-07. Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. 1991. The dynamics ofintense work groups: A study of British String Quartets, AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 36: 165-186.8 y1 U9 j: Q: I% p8 B
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. 0 X" D1 v4 G6 ^, T( B10-09. 陳曉萍等（2008）：ch10 D1 ^. N1 t- X* x' ^10-10. Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455. $ C$ s3 X; W8 z M9 _% c8 {8 o3 M4 G [9 e( j+ M Issue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion]% J; b( F- M& C9 Q
**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13# d t: d- k9 z# |/ z
K & L: Chapters 90 g& I% {; W _) x! v1 [. i
11-01. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759. 2 a3 D: b1 m7 q( s11-02. Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218. ; f( W# ~3 E' U9 Z" n+ I) a$ y2 U11-03. McFarland, L.A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2003).Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods. Journalof Management, 29(5), 641-661. 4 m7 A3 ~/ j5 Q G4 C7 {11-04. 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.* U! _7 a N' m I, i3 A1 o
11-05. LaHuis, D.M., & Avis, J. M. (2007). Using multilevel randomcoefficient modeling to investigate rater effects in performance ratings. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 10, 97-107.3 b1 O$ v5 \( N# S( j% X; ?
11-06. 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." q4 i) |6 D# X& A2 v
6 c$ v N& E6 f/ bIssue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation2 n9 f, D/ r$ ]5 \1 g0 h
**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19 7 k+ W7 y4 d- P; ]+ ^ MK & L: Chapters 33 and 34) F5 Y- v8 h" |2 g+ A: d
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. 9 E% O0 r7 B1 x& L4 D. {8 P12-02. James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321.3 \, _! o# M% f% q+ U
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.. `) W' e. `; ?4 A- J7 o( K
12-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.8 x$ R: g$ C3 u, l6 ~/ \/ b) R
12-05. **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch14* U3 X: ~7 N/ V1 H0 ^, y& a
6 R. [; E. d% O* U% f5 H7 | Issue 13: Testing mediating effects7 B1 D3 w9 D ?/ @. ~1 W P) h7 {
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): 203-223.2 }+ d J5 P2 M6 ]
13-02. Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358. " x; M& o2 Y0 i, g" {7 A9 {13-03. James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363. # w, _( _+ Q) c3 e* ?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): 83-104.1 F4 P7 J8 s6 j* v
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: 1-24.1 |% N8 R q% n; J* l
13-06. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47.# X" B5 ~ E0 b; a! P
13-07. Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398.: G& d3 [/ l' b$ d
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. ( R) w0 {1 @6 e/ S3 I8 `/ B4 }5 d13-09. Freedman, L. S., & Schatzkin, A. 1992. Sample size forstudying intermediate endpoints within intervention trials of observationalstudies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 136: 1148-1159.: |( g/ y' q1 Z/ U4 I9 K4 `3 `
13-10. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619. % _4 b- s; ?6 i13-11. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158. 9 r- `& A0 U+ H2 N6 P; O: b13-12. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181.8 C. ~3 \8 Z, ?8 x, \1 Y" _# O
13-13. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62. 3 W( w, n8 y6 a+ s r7 c1 L2 l13-14. 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.& f+ w4 S( F# F" \' p% M3 @. H
13-15. Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515.# r1 n/ q/ v8 a0 a" l
13-16. 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/ W! s: E9 S1 T# M
13-17. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107.2 Q0 r" U% I! {& \
13-18. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614." Y* C$ G2 _1 e' h8 g
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. 5 N) U: ]# [, N6 X9 |0 N- b: r13-20. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62.- a- ?2 o$ ]/ j1 b' }- F: J, f
13-21. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445. ( W! [4 V* E3 @2 T4 g c13-22. Smith, E. 1982. Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations:Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 43: 248-259.* C9 a4 W2 \" L7 K. W* d4 O+ O% a
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.( }8 u3 x6 G7 |) q* p" g0 F0 J* \
/ b+ X6 S+ }$ J3 b1 _ Issue 14: Testing moderating effects 4 n. P; r4 T/ E) ?9 v) g/ I4 P14-01. 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., j f# k1 P0 n4 g
14-02. Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417.* h' c7 K- J) [+ n8 N4 |
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. # O. N/ A) m" S2 F" n14-04. 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.( A2 E6 T" ~5 Z3 E
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): 3-10.6 r0 `% K7 C( ^/ Y/ c- m
14-06. 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. ) F9 g3 z! t9 y! V" D + q# P& y P N8 `6 x) gIssue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation / X8 O+ g6 m- NSchwab: Chapters 11 and 191 x j! t {6 m. C5 l
K & L: Chapters 33 and 34 9 j/ F [1 W& @/ z+ D& p15-01. 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. ) X s" N2 l1 I: c15-02. 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: 142-163.0 k$ ?$ U" r4 \. I* | E
15-03. Edwards, J. R., & Lambert L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12: 1-22.3 x; Q* E [7 ]( Q/ K' t- }
15-04. Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128.- r$ g3 l+ f& L
15-05. 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: 877-883.4 h& `1 X, {; @* n
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. 6 |9 b6 l( `1 ^) b; ]; v4 m15-07. Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444.3 X! s0 K6 U3 |0 O$ W3 g9 S3 s
) I' B8 F1 y* q" v5 x( U/ x( s0 Z Issue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation# n1 [" F9 [4 O) C r5 J/ C% l' k
Schwab: Chapters 14 and 17 , K. y7 v1 J, }$ jK & L: Chapter 28 2 `" L& u% h Z. Y) J16-01. Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87. 2 I( d8 Q4 {0 g+ l, I, {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." l$ ~ [8 t3 A; n+ i$ X8 E3 g! r7 f
16-03. Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105.+ [% N6 k! z1 C' ]* A! L8 A
16-04. Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400. ; z$ x; v, G. a" p" m16-05. Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302.: g3 r2 N% g! s+ Z, E' G. s
16-06. 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): 385-417.4 H* V: F7 P+ J- l# @( ?1 f
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. 7 j: A1 A$ m, K* |% I5 ~6 B+ ^" { ] # W, l& b: a/ z1 OIssue 17: Common Method Variance4 H- {+ ]2 V0 c8 x% U- T7 E5 i/ w7 D
**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 20' F: |% W$ A- X# ~" | _ 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.$ [ I, h* Z9 i# j
17-02. Doty, D. H. &Glick, W. H. 1998. Common methods bias: Does common methods variance reallybias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 374-406.6 A$ A1 x# n0 D) u4 [4 U* 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." k9 D. A$ F; H; l0 X* p: G
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.: b7 T7 n, a, S I4 ]# d
17-05. 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: 879-903.4 b/ L% Z# E1 M, M$ B
17-06. Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational researchroblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544. . I$ m3 b2 E; K9 S" w( o! G# Z! R17-07. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223.4 W* S$ u: u% i! k9 m
17-08. 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.* s1 g T; P. F/ V. V; F
17-09. Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232. 7 k/ U9 N7 l( z5 _% f! ^! { 6 G' W/ w/ p2 f3 H8 I. \3 @Issue 18: Data Non-independence! `+ {% d( D9 y6 ~- V
18-01. Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735. 6 w4 ~6 s# O% D G$ f18-02. Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75.; c4 T6 g" G: N: A$ _
18-03. Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.2 P" M2 B/ c% U% o
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. 6 c( {4 I ]8 I5 R9 H18-05. 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." v e4 w( C: x ~
18-06. Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. 1995. On thelevel: Homogeneity, independence, heterogeneity, and interactions inorganizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 20: 7-9.4 q: i" {6 R/ N+ f6 L" O5 H" Q
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. 9 d% D% M; P# c1 V* w , B+ g$ k& @) s$ E; R( e( j9 {Issue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch) ) N) ~4 U7 _; F; l+ {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. 7 L3 f h2 A( i3 C- U, }19-02. Boisot, M. & Child. J. 1996. From fiefs to clans andnetwork capitalism: Explaining China’s emerging economic order. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 41(4): 600-628.+ G6 F+ N1 [3 b
19-03. Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209. & P0 b B# j$ T. m# O19-04. 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. 2 Y( R/ Y+ x" T C! k- T19-05. 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. ( o0 @6 `2 u+ D; @; N8 K; K19-06. Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974.1 y' w) Z7 R; F1 u7 G
19-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151. 0 z* u. Z* W1 ~1 Z& Q W19-08. Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215. : F# S! n9 |# m19-09. 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。5 S7 ~5 }, Q# b, _ \3 p/ i. f
- @) H6 ^0 p% R6 Y q" K
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。 . L3 k/ F, {9 ?. P5 j }- ^) h ; n: X& b* U7 K( O9 p3 r& e19-11. 陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰" W! ]1 d6 }' {5 K
( i8 |0 K0 S1 V19-12. 陳曉萍等（2008）：ch174 L7 s; d2 ]- v
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. , e7 X( a" k8 d, V W2 H: K19-14. Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. AsiaPacificJournalofManagement, 21, 491-513. : l+ e3 J5 H5 t1 |1 A/ J* @" X8 c; c/ Z Issue 20: Structural Equation Modeling! j& ?' p7 N% a& v
K & L: Chapter 35.3 ]3 C% N, a2 v6 g5 O
20-01. 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。, X- m6 Z$ l1 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. 0 G$ b' Z; L3 ^20-03. 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. 0 S* r" w* d i4 l) R5 ^& m1 T20-04. Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172. % Q0 ~2 d6 I7 N! \; V- |2 E20-05. 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. ! V: Q8 I1 e! U6 q: n# {) y5 Z20-06. 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):323-331.1 ?# ~9 l7 B/ f/ A% T2 \
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. " }3 e- p" X( F( [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.! Z$ u- A; B" Q$ I8 |% N
20-09. 陳曉萍等（2008）：ch139 i( L7 K. p& Y# F6 F
/ ]; a( b+ d$ ? Issue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism & E4 r t3 \ h6 ~3 u21-01. 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. ; H: y7 p! D. g5 j9 p; ?0 z21-02. Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.$ O. @ g p8 D( ~2 L$ X0 q
21-03. Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14. 4 O/ T; Q; e) z* k! C21-04. Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652. ; t r5 i* b" w/ y, f7 Y# {21-05. Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607. 5 Y+ V4 B/ E" i" p9 W8 y5 p: ]% d9 E21-06. Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613.% e# H; n l! |, E
21-07. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68). : B4 Z3 U s9 e& F$ u: V% y21-08. 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. ; d8 _) s0 I4 C2 c$ h$ T21-09. von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53). H4 a- j! l. J; L& L- \- J4 p, v1 l
21-10. Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50).1 f r" [ P3 h F+ I8 X
/ G: N- ?. C/ E% H) U% k2 _Issue 22: Level Fallacies , s( Q7 I7 G* _0 C22-01. Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73.1 U6 W( c% L* V9 S( T
22-02. Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191.8 Y8 q; D2 x6 ^" i) R
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." M- Y V9 p9 l! S( j& b
22-04. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357. 5 L$ O3 D; U$ c- P, S+ E- ?: U0 R22-05. **Schwartz, S. (1994). The fallacy of the ecological fallacy:The potential misuse of a concept and the consequences. American Journal ofPublic Health, 84, 819-824.7 N2 J/ E. {) h( Q; f7 J0 x
22-06. Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777. / X( S; F$ ~3 |4 B; b8 @& T. n ^7 Y9 u# q( L: N1 i4 ? Issue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena* t$ u& {. U: n0 f
23-01. James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112. 0 N x6 q) J; A+ ~23-02. Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller.6 g9 Q& w1 Q" O6 C, e+ M9 ~4 z
23-03. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Doherty, M. L. 1989. Integrationof leadership and climate: Examination of a neglected issue. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 74(4): 546-553. . K: }. [3 ~- y: n23-04. Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540. - i' ?* H# B8 X23-05. **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53.1 M1 X! J; a1 y* T7 R
23-06. 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. / r: | k2 R3 b% l23-07. 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. : M3 v/ B( s6 p( Y23-08. 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, 987-1005.2 Z" ~6 g, C0 e2 g2 c* `2 V! P
23-09. Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42., K; d! L, U. _
23-10. Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348. ' I9 A }; Z2 }& j) s8 ?/ d7 N23-11. Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.4 ]8 b! t* l% \7 I5 S
23-12. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.1 {' g" U9 W5 K' I% F( e/ a
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. 4 ^) ?) b# c* E23-14. **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974., K& _) J6 n* d( ^; W- c2 n* j
( c; w* Y: m% A+ ]) dIssue 24: Levels in Theory Building% u/ P$ d2 g( k3 z4 A: ^
24-01. 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. 9 }! f8 P( H5 i24-02. Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248.# r9 y) {: I1 \
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: 346-357.8 t& f: V* g- M, a' V% ^& o5 ]" Z
24-04. Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229.5 a. Q; n( u, o5 h: \" T F
24-05. George, J. M., & James, L. R. 1994. Levels issues in theory development. Academyof Management Review, 19: 639-640. (Critique of Klein et al., 1994); M. ^- B- X* U% Z4 I8 t- p
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) 2 O" R5 f! |& e+ T! }: r+ Q24-07. Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.: Z+ w- i4 _" i6 _) Y
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., [: N) e0 {. P; e* d+ D
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.; g: B# W* f" E
24-10. 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).( P% u4 L* G+ Y3 [! T9 m. E) ]8 k
24-11. Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201.- a: [4 f4 X) O) w; [
7 Z& o3 ?9 s0 |. e4 u Issue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective : I) M) v/ o. D. P. @* B6 r25-01. **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922.- x- m: D9 m& W8 u- |
25-02. **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. ) N8 V6 Y; n+ S0 V. S: o* l# |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. 5 g- F* J. Z! P; R$ [1 U25-04. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338., ~3 _5 V& f0 t
25-05. Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610.5 y7 j$ e4 Q4 U/ V' A" P p
25-06. 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. + b9 |9 @) l+ f2 m' B& o0 m25-07. 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. 8 b* v: U# _ u 9 i/ S0 j# d3 Q* f s+ wIssue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory ' H1 O' X) \6 h2 H- ^4 M
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. , e- M" a* i+ V* @26-02. Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307. 8 v; h! H- O6 s3 W% V26-03. Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346. 4 r" B( [6 @8 G! K0 ]0 L' S4 H7 j2 H9 Q( |) ? Issue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research% j; C* i4 k3 R
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. / K/ m" {! O) Q) n; O27-02. **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.* Q3 O& t, B& P4 L+ z v& p, }
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.. t- h- u+ M. G6 w1 q3 f
5 G2 `4 K: a* O" y9 `; _ Issue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process ' A/ |* [3 p4 @# s1 y" g$ ]8 G! O
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.( F0 W4 v) a# A+ {: b! a F3 `( x
28-02. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253. % h3 k! I5 v) a8 f28-03. Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453.6 r& }$ U6 @) s
28-04. Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773. 0 X- `, M2 P2 r28-05. 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.) h0 J# L& f! M) I
+ T( S; Q$ [$ ]$ `Issue 29: Measurement and Aggregation / w, n: M) g. j1 f1 t29-01. Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765. 9 U K, L2 S% M/ h, v8 d% m0 a29-02. Burke, M. J. & Dunlap, W. P. 2002. Estimating interrateragreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5(2): 159-172. $ O& M/ G* ]- t" L8 u7 X! _29-03. James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229. , A; K( n4 z& w! E0 J29-04. **James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimatingwith-group reliability with and without response bias. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 69(1): 85-98.0 t" t# {$ k. ~) O, V# v# E/ [0 H
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.$ z6 @# u8 l/ e
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. & q4 Z( {# ~* e5 Q" Q+ {3 U- ^- F29-07. Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582.( }+ l% w( N8 ~ \& v: r( R+ m
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. . J6 S# O& W! h9 ~0 X29-09. Campbell, D. T. 1958. Common fate, similarity, and otherindices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities.Behavioral Science, 3: 14-25.0 Z9 Y" e T3 g4 p
29-10. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563. + L2 j, ~0 S, ?7 S7 i2 P5 B4 ]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./ M7 z( h$ {) y0 q2 J; [
29-12. 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. 8 M2 z8 |9 e0 u2 w29-13. Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373.5 u# r+ U P, k% S2 @
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 c Y7 _, Y) l) m" Y29-15. 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. 7 z- e. K d9 J( G29-16. **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. 5 Z! F) h$ V7 [' y3 B8 F1 B29-17. 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.' N6 Q; b2 r# ~! Y) N9 w* j
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: 127-135.9 _( H6 ]/ q* z4 M4 D& m
29-19. McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46., Y4 ?: W" h% v d. v: @2 T
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.: E# E* g- D( l3 Y( M. G* Y
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. / T) ^* a/ }+ _+ ?+ G* o3 Y , x5 M z2 ~/ q }8 D# B3 hIssue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis9 i/ Q* o6 |4 w, J8 D$ q
30-01. Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395. 2 `8 J, H. b3 P: L& F9 x7 b30-02. James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424.: F* s/ j, Y8 G
30-03. George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.0 _, {4 i* \! `; B: f% ~/ P
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. 4 f7 g( y2 ]- h8 i4 S30-05. 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, 78:798-804.8 ~& D+ E2 [+ q
30-06. **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.. u0 F2 }6 s$ O* o0 a! c' k/ t
30-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. H. 1989. On the empiricalidentifications of dimensions of cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20(2): 133-151. 0 V+ t/ I/ B2 N. ^3 N" Q+ J30-08. 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. + ]8 P9 Z" F/ R4 H# x30-09. 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. 4 F6 e' ^0 X3 E) \3 ~/ V30-10. **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.) ~+ ^1 V, {# x# g. T3 e6 z) z
) g5 `4 I ?% D7 w' ^ q+ ^Issue 31: Introduction to HLM * ]) I4 R$ I7 y1 Q8 K
31-01. **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744., \* Q4 w1 s# a8 h! q
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.; T# N' I2 H/ \- \( s
31-03. **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641.3 y3 C) F0 w0 x' N( s M
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: 3-16.5 v$ p% L; B: ^ H: B+ u
( Z5 N/ [# Q# n- P; ` Issue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM ' ^- S9 t3 _3 U$ B32-01. Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297. 2 y; r1 P7 G+ m3 g& @32-02. **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.# C) R% f* W- i" s' i$ ]( P5 c+ b( d
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. 3 Q& \7 t8 T H4 \5 P% o32-04. Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33. 3 k5 d7 u, b9 C8 q/ C32-05. **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94. 7 K7 I6 d6 R Y% |32-06. Glission, C., & James, L. R. 2002. The cross-level effects of culture andclimate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:767-794. - D" a; }! ~$ C, c) K3 p32-07. Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522. " {- D/ l$ B, c) |- ^32-08. Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255. " d9 Y m( _' P- L& C32-09. 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.! a* J( f" w& E5 t1 O) }1 s
32-10. 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)1 }! r" j6 o* u$ Z" ^4 u
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. 1 Y& m- `2 M' R# [! F3 B32-12. 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: 951-973.1 ?) Q+ b2 _- {
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.$ u9 R8 e3 s% d$ T o
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.( H4 G8 Y9 K7 E& d3 D2 ^( i2 L
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., G" D! j. r/ A* `, H
. m: ?* O V) h# x; D$ d Issue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research : I e3 }! [7 p, H1 @8 h" v# B33-01. Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571.; V) l( y5 i/ k3 S0 _% N9 H
33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582. 8 @& b! h/ A+ A9 P% E33-03. 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. 0 T4 @9 T. L. Y" h6 C7 R33-04. 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. 7 b! D/ g3 }9 B5 B( b0 t33-05. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. E. 2007. A framework fortesting meso-mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior. Journalof Organizational Behavior, 28: 141-172.1 Y* j- L% w# `
33-06. Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277. . q D- K) |* {5 z" S+ S, Y- B$ \, O7 `" x$ z Issue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review 9 G/ g* ^4 `4 r( c' _7 sSchwab: Chapters 15 and 21 # z8 l3 q$ K& t- Q34-01. 應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信 0 `1 X3 T. S0 u34-02. 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.' g6 `& w; e, A3 I! Q0 \
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.. e$ i) M9 m+ S+ z% O- o5 f, u
34-04. **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout). * i2 b( s, h( M( K% F: V6 ^8 q34-05. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515.# Z, m- C" @' G& I' O
34-06. **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. 2 S& s4 I; B( \3 u$ N& M34-07. **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6. + c/ b4 w H: P) G( T8 L34-08. Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164. 6 y6 @# K0 @" ]( ^/ I34-09. Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307.& d0 E3 I( v+ r& g" u
34-10. Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92. ' g! l( \# ?2 c. l ( V0 l- z# K) W3 kIssue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism 6 w% [4 l: F9 D/ s } _! @% k. o% D35-01. **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。 1 V* v) }0 V& ^4 K9 c9 `) ~+ r7 G$ @水流花靜---科學與詩的對話。1 l! X4 a: Z- q" `3 b
P.121~139.台北:天下文化。! V' A' g6 A7 V( g/ g
35-02. 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.1 q3 B3 @- F% o
35-03. Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242. 4 |$ I1 ~5 P4 E9 c: Q0 B35-04. Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.1 e, u: F5 i( |
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.+ b9 r: J% K9 N) a I4 O
35-06. Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312.! u+ N8 W0 \0 O
35-07. Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2). ' t9 c8 s0 j9 J0 v+ V( A35-08. Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620. $ Y: A5 l: i9 a z' x5 L2 x35-09. **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) ! W1 d0 j+ e0 {9 m H' V" 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: 4-70.7 f, A5 Q; G6 N8 V; c9 l
35-11. Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158. ' ~. r* q. _/ s7 P7 d/ l9 E35-12. Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44., F. Q+ I0 y9 m7 O- Q/ X7 v! w& X
35-13. Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.1 V, t+ y) M5 @* f0 Z* L
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: 202-220.8 [3 {# P3 r9 y, j& ^. h& U, i
; g* x4 | C5 l, ?# y6 m. L
rentice-Hall. [Amazon]& H, L/ _$ Q& ^5 t" x