- 最后登录
- 2016-11-27
- 注册时间
- 2003-1-21
- 威望
- 250
- 金钱
- 16832
- 贡献
- 11934
- 阅读权限
- 255
- 积分
- 29016
- 日志
- 4
- 记录
- 0
- 帖子
- 1438
- 主题
- 69
- 精华
- 0
- 好友
- 380
    
- 注册时间
- 2003-1-21
- 最后登录
- 2016-11-27
- 积分
- 29016
- 精华
- 0
- 主题
- 69
- 帖子
- 1438
|
今天在网上找文章时,恰巧看见一所台湾大学的网站。它们把不同的管理学问卷研究方法的领域的重要的文章都写出来了(其实是他们两个教研究方法的课程的大纲)。我稍为看了一下,很多经典的文章都在里面了。当然我没有详细的看,不保证所有的文章都是好的。不过作为一个阅读的清单,不失为一个好的开始。网站是:& ~" r) z5 Q0 B. r1 c( |
http://spaces.isu.edu.tw/~RMonline/website/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=52&Itemid=66
$ I2 [. B8 y- d$ @ H. R: e0 p6 c1 R2 _! B, t; b$ l5 `5 K
因为是公开网站,资料应该是公开的。同时我怕国内的同学不容易上到台湾的网站,所以剪贴了出来给大家参考。不过,不仅这不是我的东西,所以请大家作为“参考”好了。
' q" h. a C- N' N) c; b2 J& C, ^+ G
Kenny) C! Z2 I) f7 b" }5 ^+ i; m3 `
8 T4 I; f3 m, Q. Z0 v; b研究方法线上
9 ^* B7 j( @9 b/ h. a, F4 z* r
( d$ ^; H6 N7 D, C/ K* a1 K0 rResearchMethodology I
% {# i6 E1 \* V, l9 eOverviewTextbooks
$ X: J# Y& k6 B9 e6 }! h% z& nIssue1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory
5 C6 I; e! h2 _6 H5 }Issue2: Theory and Hypothesis Development $ \* D7 d$ t: i L, } y
Issue3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct
6 E# }& {, W. HIssue4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity ) w5 x) T4 Z P" w
Issue5: Measurement: Scale Development 6 x2 o, P2 j$ s+ f: n: \# q
Issue6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
% J2 k* O2 Y/ ~# f( r+ j" ~2 aIssue7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
% T; }5 S( r7 ?, LIssue8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys
. r) F' }6 G$ W. m$ DIssue9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments 6 a. g9 ?' ?' k5 U2 }$ m
Issue10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research
: w; [4 a# M; d1 S5 s- |0 S$ j+ E, `' lIssue11: Statistical Analysis and Inference: q' k. [+ `5 J2 x9 S
Issue12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation
0 o# T: F/ S7 }; XIssue13: Testing mediating effects8 `; j+ n6 A) R" b5 ~
Issue14: Testing moderating effects
% r) o l! @3 FIssue15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation * I$ U8 L% X% t/ A5 G9 h
Issue16: Reliability and Construct Validation # t2 a, b2 A3 K
Issue17: Common Method Variance 7 k5 f0 {/ l8 q7 ?% i
Issue18: Data Non-independence
+ J v& O7 w1 N( v1 UIssue19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and Indigenous Research)
# d, u% s) i; T6 e9 CIssue20: Structural Equation Modeling7 L/ W$ x5 o+ c, H! U
. U0 G& [0 [0 W: i, t$ H y% z) K' i
Major Textbooks:, _, o M) o& j- t
Kerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
, h; H! Z8 B/ W9 OSchwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book]* f- G1 d2 w+ c" Q/ a
Klein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon]! O: ?8 Z( a3 `. t3 l$ k
Supplementary Books:
4 `9 }* _+ x# f# O7 r" wCohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon]6 [3 ?* Z4 r) p4 N) _! X' f! x" `
Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]/ p$ K. _/ ?% e+ n* u8 S
Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. MultivariateData Analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ rentice-Hall. [Amazon]! v" n3 O( S3 w
Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum., e) j8 x+ e8 n" h' O" X& q- }
Rogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
2 T; t- p% A0 _8 P% X& A" X" OJournal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6).5 |: K; E* c/ m8 d8 ]5 Q) j
Academy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2).# u# u1 X# t# P& E
Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2).
# B3 `1 j$ Z1 z8 FLeadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1).
8 S/ ]+ n4 m9 K$ ^4 ~1 l0 T2 G/ [Academy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6.7 a* @2 w0 @* X. P) J" [+ n' ^7 Q
Kreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5 I6 _' f ]* Q& o/ m+ N- B2 ]' V& XRaudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9 Q* I8 ~9 L5 WRoberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.1 C+ y* j. I/ J6 z4 }; G- z
Roberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.2 Z" P. c. ~ e
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。
: N) Q/ x/ B! L2 r7 G* G- B. [% P, |/ P, z0 v9 ~! Z1 F
Issue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory
, ~9 L. C$ N# I9 N, zK & L: Chapter 1/ _ t+ U. S3 D/ { l& M" E
01-01. Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks.+ s7 t0 o2 Q, o0 b* K# M- w
01-02. Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91.# U3 d" q6 D2 }! I/ b6 F
01-03. Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 584-602.( U6 a9 P, x$ G5 p6 V/ L
01-04. Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128." T" x) ]. x/ k& |" j
01-05. Wright, T. A., & Wright, V. P. 1999. Ethicalresponsibility and the organizational researcher: A committed-to-participantresearch perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior,20(7): 1107-1112.% J0 \% J3 L) q9 V+ ?
01-06. Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly,41: 262-269.' h6 p( S }, E) |5 E) z& V$ w
01-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。/ b' T5 X5 g4 ~" y3 d( Z
01-08. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch2: 研究的起點:提問。6 a$ h/ g) O) _" l J3 l, k! @
' D4 H+ |3 |0 i
Issue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development
a% A( a2 w" K02-01. Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2
! }5 O: W% Q* p+ V1 L8 D02-02. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review,14: 496-515.7 b" q q" z. i9 |
02-03. 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): 9-15.8 k% T1 b* n" | h6 ^0 L1 J
02-04. Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? Academy of ManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095./ Q% o- b, u+ t7 k
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.
- w( i$ @, x8 q) ^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.
! A- L# J: ]8 ~8 e, Z- V02-07. Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010.& @* S8 d Q# H. e0 ?
02-08. Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441.
0 E) h8 N7 n" T4 \ X- ~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.* Q3 a' Z/ g4 v7 j X/ x- c1 y
02-10. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.8 W# e& J9 m2 J {
02-11. Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.
: P" @" t) P* h2 Q! O02-12. Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.
3 q) M6 e+ o8 g- Y02-13. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。
4 q' U7 O2 R% N. L' ~! R* m02-14. 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.
9 J7 f" d) p* N+ }0 M' V. ^! O7 ~6 T9 }! n3 p
Issue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion]
& G4 L% }; E( H# M5 d0 Y. Q1 i3 I5 t03-01. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192.
+ y& J+ t/ {5 I, b03-02. 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.
( d8 m* m _3 k6 ]7 W03-03. Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Toward a taxonomy of multidimensionalconstructs. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 741-755.; n, v7 I! _: ~
03-04. 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.
4 e* b+ f. I" H$ A" N- Y8 W% g03-05. 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.
6 A& `$ W# H( P2 j$ y1 Q* M C03-06. 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): 744-764.7 W+ g7 t" Z! l) V' ^6 G
03-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch12
# [$ q/ q& X( k3 K$ g% d
O' D U1 m- D! M; s. NIssue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion]* j+ `) m) Y. n4 D8 i; @$ @# |
**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 8
1 |' V- L; c; j) u3 l- E8 ?" [K & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28., L Y9 m& h. X S
04-01. Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.: U* T- f9 G& Z5 n
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.. c" ^. X. M4 A4 o- h3 B: I: X2 t
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 f6 a7 z- y6 d# p; c9 F04-04. 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.
D$ I/ R& M, e( l" @; O04-05. Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375.7 W/ @0 `; v. b2 g
04-06. 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.
& R0 a% Y" d" J04-07. 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.
5 u4 p, g h- t* Q! a2 p04-08. Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96./ ^$ Y9 f' t) D& Z; j
% E! h# f( X4 E1 K- ^
Issue 5: Measurement: Scale Development7 D2 P5 i7 N/ {* {& W
**Schwab: Chapter 4" S8 Y n4 _2 m
05-01. **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121.
c4 @/ E8 {2 B. W- ]05-02. DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.1 M- X; m# `3 q/ Q; @
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.
; v0 N8 b0 k8 n) b2 l05-04. **Farh, J. L., Zhong, C. B. & Organ, D. W. 2004. Organizational citizenship behavior inthe People’s Republic of China, Organization Science, 15: 241-253.
, u% k; ?/ M6 _9 D- n& Z05-05. 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.
7 _- A& v5 i: S! ?: ]6 U05-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch11
8 z6 d% p( \5 [, {/ m ^+ q( j0 p+ q6 G( t7 ~
Issue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research1 D: [( i; X; p7 b
MOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3).- x' I5 {) q5 L0 B+ B
: R4 r* o" s9 ?- t' V# [Issue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
2 h1 {# i# o" q) t3 vK & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 5( f0 R7 v) `% ~( @ T G$ ?
**Schwab: Chapter 13
5 o" N& i/ Y: x' s07-01. **Higgins, M. C. & Kram, K. E. 2001. Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: Adevelopmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 6(2):264-288.
/ _( X+ Y2 f6 e2 x* \07-02. 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., c9 n9 m& a$ I* F% B7 P
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./ H; s N2 T9 j
07-04. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch5+ r7 e3 ?& M1 ]. G- a5 \. \3 s
07-05. 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.
! b% p: ?7 \% Q" Q# l N
1 S3 a% Z8 \2 ]1 k' u5 p& MIssue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys
# V5 m! s5 ?+ L**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 7
8 H7 _* Y# h+ B- AK & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 29 t6 K- Q% v R& Y4 X( r6 @
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):191-207.2 d# ^" A8 E% K8 \# E9 P
08-02. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, N. 1987. Student guinea pigs: Porcine predictorsand particularistic phenomena. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):160-163.
8 \" Q/ E) ^# e08-03. Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159.
. _0 q2 d, \! P5 D3 _$ U& `% ?+ I08-04. Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.: r) l) y! ?" N
08-05. **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008." F( L4 K7 m; h, L n- [; I
08-06. 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.
" I/ ~; }6 s2 V08-07. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.6 I$ T$ S4 w ]# O- @! J
08-08. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch8( w9 A2 ~ P% Y, Y: w: C+ ^
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.
6 s+ ?, k: I5 N9 C08-10. Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179.7 _& h h! v4 N( t; p7 g2 R
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.- Q7 \4 A1 o1 \, m! x8 {# @
08-12. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.# c& v/ o# a& M# X9 [
M E) V! n$ ~* E4 ^4 M: Q/ TIssue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments! P8 C9 \* a+ ?- N* X+ b
**Schwab: Chapter 6
6 A+ ^7 o; x- X) b3 l4 ?' A: rK & L: Chapters 24 and 22
$ s/ `7 y2 T. g6 n l9 [4 W2 m09-01. Cook, T. D. & Shadish, W. R. 1994. Social experiments:Some developments over the past fifteen years. Annual Review of Psychology,45: 545-580.# H, K8 f7 [ e7 r0 p/ C; w
09-02. **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.! D5 U" m8 d# f t, Q
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.% _( c' _5 r( u/ J
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.
$ I B! ~6 R2 V- M: U09-05. Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.
. _ e8 b, V& n3 B% e6 n$ f2 A, e09-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch6, ch7.0 S/ n6 Q, t" T* i2 s
% _! ?, ?5 A2 ~" @2 ?$ c" E
Issue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research) S1 B% t& a9 S& u
10-01. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.' P' O9 N7 o/ }: ]8 u: y* e
10-02. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576.6 Y5 m* X; v- t& ~8 R
10-03. Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.& y0 A, P) s. B- ^0 D
10-04. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441.
/ j9 M2 k& E; C3 b2 ]3 c10-05. 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.( d* S7 T3 s* o! t5 W) {2 D; d
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.
! H( O+ n) A& V% 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.+ f+ w0 H& r* Q: h8 f; R8 |; i
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.
7 d1 z |+ D% g7 ]10-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch103 b7 S9 j3 \9 x! J
10-10. Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455.
6 o% Q6 M6 ?, e+ a& Z5 D* f8 r8 j
" t! I! q" G7 y! R4 LIssue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion]( D! ?8 f; _/ E2 [
**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 137 v# B" r6 x% ^4 U' q, [- [8 X
K & L: Chapters 9
" a* p3 c9 K4 O& K4 B; _: c8 ~8 b11-01. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759.
1 k- w$ e% {: h/ b11-02. Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218.
3 w* X0 s* A5 d3 F: t11-03. McFarland, L.A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2003).Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods. Journalof Management, 29(5), 641-661.5 D9 e$ b% R5 ]
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, 2469-2472.2 M+ G! t' w' Y0 Y" H0 Z
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.! c. ?5 K, O, \) }+ H n0 ^. f
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.
. D+ [0 g2 U' y, S! e5 T* }' f4 @) K& k1 J% N- @! C
Issue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation- P d4 m4 f( ?+ U
**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19
8 z# c9 q4 [/ f6 X" P3 c6 f! T* TK & L: Chapters 33 and 34
" G2 ~ e' U: I- P+ y12-01. **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.
/ A B, B8 L( O12-02. James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321.
: ~% `" U8 J4 }7 K$ P12-03. 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.
8 i' s, I9 {! f) A12-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.
+ p1 S- D" U% z( a+ Y% m( q12-05. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch14
6 [ Z0 F1 U2 I6 i+ [
& ?$ }5 j9 h, D; b0 rIssue 13: Testing mediating effects
" |5 v# {$ ]- r1 Y! Q3 a) ^3 m13-01. 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.( e2 G/ f z2 X
13-02. Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358.$ k' I2 \* Y; l
13-03. James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363.
! u8 t" y k( _/ x13-04. 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): 83-104.8 F; }1 R. V' A5 \
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.
" d( f% T" [% q; z T; R S13-06. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47.
/ J d6 J" ]* e5 g2 o8 p13-07. Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398.% |3 e4 X# J2 [. C
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., P+ i% z# a: Z; K7 m& i0 G
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." T. a) t6 Q/ I- |9 p9 r
13-10. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619.
% X1 R- g1 O. l K+ \2 x13-11. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158.
7 @2 y6 L+ m7 j7 |! a) n/ Y( W13-12. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181.
+ a d+ o8 w$ I' H$ S' z13-13. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62. q- Z! _$ z8 N
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.
" i7 t: W1 y: Y% I13-15. Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515.
1 p8 ]. k) o0 G; l' x' A- |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.
# ~2 y/ N* v! `+ X6 J13-17. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107.
z9 a$ r* j7 V! j+ F' P13-18. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.
% i* _9 R6 N9 z8 |( b3 f0 L13-19. 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.. _" T& M8 S9 f! E& {4 {. h
13-20. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62.
* r" ?" S. V/ ]13-21. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445.( m6 Y9 J. u6 d9 `: i( n' N
13-22. Smith, E. 1982. Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations:Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 43: 248-259.
& Z0 N$ Z/ @' F5 {5 z9 c7 s13-23. 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.
: g9 H' L. S! S6 c- z. ?: q! R3 @' K5 S9 N* h
Issue 14: Testing moderating effects2 G. i3 Q g5 F" ?1 f! u x
14-01. 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.
( i. o) n7 q5 N; p x% q14-02. Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417.
5 b) S/ q8 c; H8 V( Q* a0 `) d3 o14-03. 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.
' `( e* D m0 L, G% \. C14-04. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. R. 2006. Clarifying conditionsand decision points for mediational type inferences in Organizational Behavior.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 1031-1056.6 q* U8 ?. C- e2 J6 W+ Z, Q; \
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.# j5 X/ f0 d3 V) i# c; D
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.- I6 \! O! F) w: K# a* {2 P( ^
2 h+ z' r* k0 L4 m+ o; L. v
Issue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
' F- j$ c7 S# R5 \% T; q& y, E+ o4 _Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19
* U. L* \. y: q9 ^- U4 oK & L: Chapters 33 and 34
3 m9 |" D3 N+ J 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./ O$ A( V- x4 l% Y4 w) i- [
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.% U/ w% s! H7 q4 h2 P; V0 z
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.
$ j% V/ o7 C" }' k2 L15-04. Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128.% n' [* s+ Z* s: h. ?* Y$ O1 x
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.& `% S& u/ V0 @" `( ]! K1 Y
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./ I# g( j5 j. v+ e& T( I3 e H1 F
15-07. Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444., D- ~; L# k; U6 T# t
8 g9 k2 h% f1 Z+ eIssue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation7 s; [5 p" P& D% u6 ` V
Schwab: Chapters 14 and 17
5 d. W% i/ X4 C$ I' FK & L: Chapter 288 G6 B$ }. |- F* S t6 O, U' l
16-01. Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87.
" ^, F3 K; @1 W' w7 X' t: Y16-02. Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical Conclusion Validity for Organizational Science Research: A Review. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 1: 164-208.3 J6 h) m/ m% A+ M" w
16-03. Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105.8 Y- Z' C" j. H) L( c3 v2 {
16-04. Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400.; k+ |1 I- T% u3 Z; A) T9 O
16-05. Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302., i- w! d8 w% D7 r8 X. R
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.
$ A; w: h: F& u9 L% n& U8 Y16-07. 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. J' f$ I$ g! D, t; ?' C6 _
) g0 \& m0 j5 h* r+ ?; d- X7 ?0 L3 ^Issue 17: Common Method Variance, `# q N$ @3 S1 }5 D! b
**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 20# t/ k0 U. w$ \2 s
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): 77-98.6 f5 J/ i6 T$ ]: u" `# I! r3 v
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.
1 j9 q! g% C" F+ n& S17-03. Goffin, R. D. & Gellatly, I. R. 2001. A multi-raterassessment of organizational commitment: Are self-report measures biased? Journalof Organizational Behavior, 22: 437-451.
* q& B2 H# e' q4 b1 n2 q* S. z17-04. 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.
' D' N. [$ e m3 L1 M# @/ p- d3 t17-05. 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 \5 z ?! _! C9 y
17-06. Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research roblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544.; j5 D0 A2 D/ W- C* Y3 U
17-07. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223.
& p) P1 u8 y0 v$ [" l6 h; h17-08. 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.
! E# n" s- o& u, I17-09. Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232.
% J( [6 K, u4 h2 r8 n
8 _& _1 M5 _! q/ D6 ~& Z; ~4 `Issue 18: Data Non-independence8 x0 H( }, Q6 d! i
18-01. Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735.! t0 J+ g: t5 F
18-02. Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75.
3 J$ A( S6 Y, f" ~6 K8 g, l. v18-03. Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.
' G) O. R' d4 | Y& i; V8 K18-04. 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.
l0 A- P) Q( F8 \+ m5 y18-05. 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.) l. u3 a+ M! L, L
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.* T" D$ q" a- k& W, m/ X
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.* P+ z3 o" L& w( q. B9 G5 t- C3 C
8 l7 V2 [8 C0 C. ^( K
Issue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch)0 g9 Q$ J& j \" s4 L3 B2 Y
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 }) |0 M2 [9 ]$ l
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.
+ x1 R; z' ~/ ?; V9 R+ [1 }19-03. Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209.% J/ w+ n# o. F& a/ h- X
19-04. 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.. N* V- _+ _' G( X2 g) H0 S
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.
4 Z4 F( Z( r: A- R19-06. Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974.& G) y+ ^+ y6 p- c+ j0 x0 i
19-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151." V& i4 ?# ?! n! k4 ]% z
19-08. Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215.) {- x8 o1 g/ @
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。
: S' c' I; `* d& c! y
/ H8 r1 v" n9 v$ U2 H; r7 Z7 @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。
0 C* w# W4 a+ Z9 ]
; J5 N. t! S7 O7 t! J" [8 f4 l19-11. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰
, r: a, i7 h) n' q$ s7 Z" f8 P/ J9 m% N' o% g4 e* Y0 q
19-12. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch17
* h) f+ k1 c3 X+ v. M7 \19-13. Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oraland written materials. In H. C. Triandis, & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbookof cross-cultural psychology. Vol. 2: Methodology (pp. 389^I44).Boston, MA: Allyn Bacon.
4 Z1 ], m" L z0 k, G- M4 ]% R8 @19-14. Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia PacificJournal of Management, 21, 491-513.
# ~1 l) @% e o" I* k! y5 z
7 Y* T' w0 }$ f) G4 O# y5 g, RIssue 20: Structural Equation Modeling
' w1 D- C# N/ t8 S* C3 r2 eK & L: Chapter 35.
& Z V4 L# i1 e. H; m, D20-01. 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。8 z( p! h [0 |( r1 n
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: 323-342.2 {4 j/ y% J/ E) ^- W
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.
; J6 X. w* o* Y' [ Q: r7 J# j20-04. Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172.0 N4 x7 d1 ~( r" a) R/ Z
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.# C. D% S: _ D" G1 p0 l6 T( N
20-06. 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.
. ] o' S ~0 G6 L20-07. 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.
, I" Y3 G# ~) o+ i20-08. Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. 2006. Problems with itemparceling for comfirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 9: 369-403.0 q" Q( g# g( Y# `5 Q( T
20-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch13
9 r; ]0 j( G) H/ A3 F2 K* s5 x2 u7 ?
Issue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism8 Q1 p! F1 `3 t) i
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.8 s9 N! H5 K1 h% A
21-02. Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.& U1 m# g- g" Q, m, C$ R" f
21-03. Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14.
, G) W3 Y; Z! W; g) N Q9 x21-04. Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652.
. H- x) d8 ]4 ~0 h0 B% W21-05. Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607.! R" t& B; R1 r$ r
21-06. Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613./ c. f/ `5 p g3 U
21-07. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68).
1 @/ E% @3 R4 q5 ~6 `3 Q% |5 Y" N21-08. 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.
, M3 F. o: i7 J21-09. von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53).
! Q \% K/ r ?9 b2 n6 l4 _21-10. Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50). ]; @: E6 s' ^, L* q
: ] w. D' y7 fIssue 22: Level Fallacies
& n8 }: y' B( x6 N* W4 _) _22-01. Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73.3 _5 x4 A( e8 R( R4 f, z
22-02. Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191.
7 w' Y1 e# y8 u' J+ B0 Z22-03. **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, 122-124.6 c4 R6 A; |: D
22-04. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357.1 q9 a3 V+ H) e' w/ y
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., q$ @) J. y% K) ]" Q& K6 Y
22-06. Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777.
. K/ F- B+ H1 T" r1 \# x) S
. A( h9 r' s m' o" dIssue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena
% J) B" R, W9 q8 O1 K9 K. s1 V23-01. James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112.1 I" S' T; f# g
23-02. Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller.
8 }; h/ z: t: J* [: [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.
9 R+ ~. C: ^/ ~: v) l23-04. Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540.5 [8 P. G1 c* F& W+ Z( u
23-05. **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53.
% \- q, w! H- P* y0 ~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.+ K! L6 M, Y+ B* k! t/ p
23-07. 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.$ x# o- G% U7 `* |& Z' ?; }- C
23-08. 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.
$ \' \- x1 C( w6 X f/ ~23-09. Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42.& N, L) }; S1 y
23-10. Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348.
9 D" N7 h, `! P23-11. Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.2 h& e6 E) @ d8 D
23-12. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.
7 [9 J$ e- D7 v23-13. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. 1981.Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 501-524.3 Q( Q- @: v' |* u
23-14. **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974.0 B, H) Y+ A0 G2 B% A9 l
8 }+ C c. |1 K4 Z: b/ H
Issue 24: Levels in Theory Building
! B# T* r0 a, A+ U2 s# l24-01. 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.; z' B# k$ y. m t/ o) B% k6 N
24-02. Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248.: Q5 _/ T R' @9 h9 W; t
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: 346-357.7 P& Y7 [$ a2 U6 L: p4 A8 D6 f5 N
24-04. Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229.
" H N( [4 F* ^8 ]7 w24-05. George, J. M., & James, L. R. 1994. Levels issues in theory development. Academyof Management Review, 19: 639-640. (Critique of Klein et al., 1994)) f2 {1 I2 {; r; o. a/ K. `9 ~ l% E
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)
( t% i! I9 S8 G" ?- g3 w24-07. Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.
) D9 c) E4 z* m24-08. 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.
1 N5 t: Y* U% @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.
, U8 C% i B9 w- Y# Y1 Q H. c24-10. 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).
! C$ B0 u( L: d, G& R8 F. E1 q24-11. Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201.& L( g( |( H) l+ K! A( U
, u3 l; u6 J/ d
Issue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective
! P! u* M! [% p+ L0 n25-01. **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922.& U! h- X2 T2 M2 X6 j
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.# _- n9 a5 C, R5 E) n
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.8 r- o! W! A9 a; c$ l
25-04. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338.4 y) w! }; L, F0 j- t
25-05. Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610.
, M4 f8 N& z) {% C1 O25-06. 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.' Q$ U9 E0 r2 x+ ?, \3 N1 {' t, 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.$ w/ s& Q& ^8 z" T4 u
; F3 a9 o3 H0 R, F! n J: x2 q
Issue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory
! e- }$ { r! y/ C7 t U; b26-01. **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.
- S/ Z3 O3 A, s26-02. Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307.7 c( t& \' e2 u5 x, D0 d8 ~
26-03. Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346.& z# o L$ L* v5 u- {* e6 D& l
$ m9 e$ v2 `$ x. t
Issue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research) j6 ]+ U4 e% P9 R/ k. }% Y
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.
9 x$ c, x9 M) e9 F0 k$ S27-02. **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.! f9 i7 M$ W0 M4 I, P1 `* X6 v5 v
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.
8 I; p* S$ l; ]! Q8 d" c) R5 R, j
/ s2 e" F) s% J5 F% u/ YIssue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process
8 I/ g. F3 c. s5 V( m7 c5 R( C28-01. 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.
! y' _# V2 K* S28-02. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253.
8 Q/ W L2 ?& {$ l- G28-03. Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453.4 }8 I8 S8 Y& J! j# z- A
28-04. Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773." O3 @8 D8 }2 }3 N3 h. d. M# }- H/ Z
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.. w7 {0 T7 f3 a. F% ?( \& ]+ ~
- S9 P9 }2 G6 P& J3 c4 p8 {! NIssue 29: Measurement and Aggregation1 ?3 b# a& m) H* q: D
29-01. Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765.
5 U9 N4 X+ ]8 o, m$ k, J% R% P29-02. Burke, M. J. & Dunlap, W. P. 2002. Estimating interrateragreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5(2): 159-172.. I. n. Q! u. q6 s7 ]5 t
29-03. James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229.$ p4 {7 k" h! O- ?8 e4 e) t- r
29-04. **James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimatingwith-group reliability with and without response bias. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 69(1): 85-98.- r8 t8 o0 s9 L) a
29-05. James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1993. Rwg: Anassessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 78(2): 306-309.2 G' X9 [! X W8 Q! `4 O' `
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): 161-167.9 l* d6 H7 }& ^ P( l
29-07. Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582.# g; j4 u& y+ E: ] @% b" N C2 q
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.5 A4 l+ \; P6 l! Z* v/ y& G- P7 |
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.
$ ?7 n7 x! ?' I( G1 }' G) P3 [29-10. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563.
/ P* e" f k. D) e+ @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.( u1 T" {5 } N
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.
; P5 [* s5 |2 y# ?, z1 m5 E29-13. Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373.
0 o9 `& A) A; E3 i, h0 ^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.( {. d/ n5 y$ C
29-15. 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.
0 L' ~/ e/ N P3 m( J6 n29-16. **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 P& u. j$ G7 S, s, M; t& Y$ T8 Y29-17. 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.
6 y8 Q6 e# }$ M29-18. 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.
+ I& b A) V$ T m/ c- Y; b29-19. McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46.
) _+ [6 b& B% s( x9 G( p9 T/ y29-20. 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.+ J3 }. i3 B0 i& S1 ?1 V( c7 _
29-21. Burke, M. J., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. S. 1999. Onaverage deviation indices for estimating interrater agreement.Organizational Research Methods, 2(1): 49-68.2 i, k! ~( T1 }
9 c: p% Y, u" ?( j6 [1 T' o
Issue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis, ?( u7 X7 R8 h; D, S0 d
30-01. Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395./ Q* `4 z, J* E, N. {
30-02. James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424.; B9 c$ u$ q; B3 b
30-03. George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.
1 ]. U2 T& w* g3 T. J30-04. 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.
0 [" U" R/ w+ y6 _% x30-05. 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.
3 l) O A* E- L' _8 W) p( C30-06. **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.; b3 d1 Q& V. o! @
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.
! m4 c% Z5 `* T F30-08. 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. X2 i! b! e7 ]% _
30-09. Dansereau, F., Yammarino, F. J., & Kohles, J. 1999. Multiple levels ofanalysis from a longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 24: 346-357.7 L9 @+ g& b: I$ 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.
0 T: a( I5 D! W( i5 w( k5 L4 K0 V3 v& J6 V I1 ]; m. K
Issue 31: Introduction to HLM 4 d1 J# w" o% C* `8 g- C
31-01. **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744.! f, s) `6 w# _' [! W" X
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.
b% L0 ^6 C, i! r& w( ~# H31-03. **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641.- k; N/ g; X$ e, 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.
0 e7 E$ l. O1 h. K* x) Z
4 i: Q' V6 F5 z3 TIssue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM
; A: E; c u# r( w32-01. Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297.. l) a5 @$ b6 L. `4 O
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.; P8 {$ O- k; \/ @6 T; O: R7 m
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: 805-815.4 |0 h) \1 y. Y
32-04. Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33.
0 W) I! A3 W" a( {1 ]: m32-05. **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94. ~8 h, |3 @" u
32-06. Glission, C., & James, L. R. 2002. The cross-level effects of culture andclimate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:767-794.5 q- p, T9 Z% S3 P
32-07. Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522.
2 c0 K& A8 ], Z( w/ f32-08. Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255.
4 q9 N5 F* {4 P/ u9 X2 |4 m32-09. 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.
3 {* C! P3 o3 z3 |' P32-10. 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)
, W. @9 }0 g) t: p3 n, s* ]32-11. Sacco, J. M., & Schmitt, N. 2005. A dynamic multilevel model of demographicdiversity and misfit effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2):203-231.2 u! \4 E6 W8 Y9 A9 b7 X8 A
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.& z+ N5 ^- x0 o6 L% y1 `
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: 343-365.9 p$ X u7 `- c! z% v6 d: |3 }% I
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.% X% P& r. S6 G* u
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.& O) s0 D5 ^( {7 Z, ~& A4 `9 Y
3 j. E. e0 s+ F' U ^
Issue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research8 a' O, X, k. `7 M" {
33-01. Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571.
; q" B; v; F$ {33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582.
1 H, O9 V$ z5 X4 S2 C* J) n33-03. 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.
( \ q) q3 q8 d0 _' @4 t4 ^& O33-04. 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.9 ~. N, U& B6 ~ n; A$ ^4 ?
33-05. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. E. 2007. A framework fortesting meso-mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior. Journalof Organizational Behavior, 28: 141-172.
2 k2 O8 y0 m! j$ g! _ O7 m33-06. Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277./ J1 r8 c' B) P5 Y9 q
' u# e$ r) G3 ?1 j) Z( Q
Issue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review, p3 Z) ] u3 j! D" a, ^/ ?
Schwab: Chapters 15 and 219 [7 J. @# {% e' G- M) L
34-01. 應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信
h7 V$ r) _( Z5 V M, R34-02. 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.
% @) L J/ N. a, b2 Z3 @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.
9 A G- p% Q1 {2 [' j# @34-04. **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout).
) {$ l6 J* C0 ]34-05. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515.3 Q4 l7 Q; R1 F/ |6 D# Y
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.
) G4 S( r f' R; ~4 ] p% J34-07. **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6.4 I& t# b5 a* R2 V0 D
34-08. Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164.7 r# r, T* m% F3 T# x+ ~
34-09. Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307.
" u5 m3 ^6 \8 i0 K* S% w34-10. Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92.
1 F. d3 f- c" s) J! X. I4 H
+ ~& l" V6 t# HIssue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism# Y& O' H- `0 ~1 W2 V2 V
35-01. **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。
6 Z; ^: ^) }* p& l9 U' T水流花靜---科學與詩的對話。
1 B! T+ _) S8 K; p& CP.121~139.台北:天下文化。+ X: @2 w8 K: _4 x8 ^0 ^3 k7 I
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.
, r6 H5 j- S( X9 M/ j. z35-03. Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242.
& u" j# `2 m+ t, N* _' R35-04. Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.8 U! G$ _) O: n; U: \* o
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.* j' [1 b( N5 n4 X7 E6 H$ [* k: {
35-06. Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312.7 J. H/ S: _; t% ]1 q% O; i
35-07. Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2).
, ?9 ^* h- o9 R1 m$ E% k6 X8 T35-08. Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620.7 [7 z, L$ r$ q6 v
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). z% o+ N7 ` V( U2 o' }5 ^" Z
35-10. 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.
( H" V' N+ H* v* f4 h% p. ^# Z35-11. Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158.
: T0 e# m5 V+ _6 c35-12. Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44.
( G$ _9 i. ]9 A35-13. Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.
s; {6 X* x% Z, Q+ |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: 202-220.9 o0 m$ J5 d/ A4 t( I
0 V* m- x+ k. m<<End>> 本帖最后由 Kenneth 于 2011-5-3 15:37 编辑 % r1 ?0 u- L* h) h3 V" [
* u7 R, J R! A! G |
|