设为首页 登录 注册
首页 中人社区 中人博客
查看: 6307|回复: 8
打印 上一主题 下一主题

研究方法线上

[复制链接]

69

主题

220

听众

2万

积分

中人网专家

Rank: 50Rank: 50Rank: 50Rank: 50Rank: 50

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

2009年度勋章

跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2011-5-3 15:32:01 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览
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:) H4 H2 l1 z( o5 ]7 X$ ^
http://spaces.isu.edu.tw/~RMonline/website/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=52&Itemid=66- ?' {' B( ^' Y

0 i# i& I# M2 V% 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。. S5 }+ @3 s9 A2 C/ j
1 X5 X+ p) ?) L( z& {6 J" x
Kenny
; y- I1 C9 b" s( n' S
; z9 ?! s9 n# w: Z
研究方法线上6 A2 q3 D# J/ k' X. _+ q" j7 D. T) ]
! B/ }8 g  a+ L, R8 J+ _
ResearchMethodology I 7 h8 U4 Y) S+ p* ?
OverviewTextbooks
  \0 ^: k- I: Q- kIssue1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory 7 W0 c- M7 L: _7 _) f5 D- O
Issue2: Theory and Hypothesis Development
) Z5 g6 F+ |/ r9 |Issue3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct # w" g' X; L! j8 n4 m1 N7 b% o
Issue4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity ) h' M6 \, W9 r( ?. z3 b
Issue5: Measurement: Scale Development 4 _7 a2 D7 B& i
Issue6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
/ L6 H2 f3 v2 G. ^Issue7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing , R4 @3 \+ b6 R( e; k
Issue8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys * d! V; D& ]( a9 M( R  O" U
Issue9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments
' `; o+ r" v) d- c: gIssue10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research
$ _0 _  i; S7 M2 A' V: C4 `1 k' EIssue11: Statistical Analysis and Inference* h* V/ W4 Y- l  V) Y( n
Issue12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation 4 o4 k+ D$ ^0 e  v4 _9 g6 z! R8 o
Issue13: Testing mediating effects
# b0 m5 a+ v( \0 F6 NIssue14: Testing moderating effects 7 `& D+ R. J& Z1 n5 T* @
Issue15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
6 A4 S7 E3 P7 @/ t! p: Q" A8 pIssue16: Reliability and Construct Validation   h7 b7 G- L8 w7 ]& g
Issue17: Common Method Variance
- R2 g2 M/ A3 _Issue18: Data Non-independence ( k0 T! q! I, q$ D) A
Issue19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and Indigenous Research) " `0 X) E  t) s' a- x
Issue20: Structural Equation Modeling
) A& n% M6 m! I- W+ ?- M* a
; N8 p. i/ e( C1 j7 F6 LMajor Textbooks:
+ m: i) v4 F) \: b) iKerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.! G1 Z8 _- D; D
Schwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book]
( d. B6 h5 u! MKlein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon]" A* F: B# }1 ^) G% T9 C
Supplementary Books:/ a$ s# N1 n! C' R8 H+ p
Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon]: C8 A  q2 t2 y1 ]
Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]
3 N3 z/ Y5 Q, t+ [2 CHair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. MultivariateData Analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJrentice-Hall. [Amazon]
; q0 u7 }+ o3 BPedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.% J% A! U. O- @$ Q6 ^
Rogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
5 u$ O: E" P/ pJournal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6).) t0 z7 E% j2 n4 l
Academy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2).
! k3 r3 u* n) H* @  lMultivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2).# k" p. r- \' l! z( s+ A) U2 a
Leadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1).
! o/ d, d0 k' P' VAcademy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6.+ E; }' ~% \  ^8 \
Kreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.8 N! \+ @2 y! s1 U2 ?  W: d
Raudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage., u& `, F6 q7 y9 l' ~6 P
Roberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
# C5 _$ s0 Y% d' r* o5 U* H7 rRoberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.9 R, y: H+ u  X) `, }- s3 s$ n4 J' H
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。
$ `1 q) H  {5 ^# V0 `6 f9 v
9 J9 {; }; n, [( A- aIssue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory4 }; D7 F7 z" |4 X
K & L: Chapter 1# x7 ^- Q; q% Z7 m6 a& s2 Y6 m
01-01.  Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks.- U( U$ S8 r. O& j% ]
01-02.  Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91.2 E5 H) ?: d0 _% \6 d# ]
01-03.  Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 584-602.) H& X' w& I) p7 O1 R" `4 {+ ^- H
01-04.  Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128.
* }1 e4 p) p/ i01-05.  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.
1 T$ j/ G* f) Y- W. p% B1 H01-06.  Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly,41: 262-269.* _% r- T- ]; y4 \+ C
01-07.  陳曉萍等(2008):Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。
& G7 g* \" I  Q4 D+ g01-08.  陳曉萍等(2008):Ch2: 研究的起點:提問。
7 W* B# d# Y' |- v6 C6 k, ^) X. C! N6 O5 I) n$ P+ I  i
Issue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development
, w1 M  ?4 J$ I9 L. C6 `: w3 d02-01.  Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2
9 P8 c4 g/ k7 [% B02-02.  Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review,14: 496-515.
3 E( p6 Y! p8 ?% `9 G- v- K2 i02-03.  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): 9-15.7 X& R. i/ ?  e. ?6 T
02-04.  Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? Academy of ManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095.
8 ?+ O& m" B1 b0 F7 _% _% y: c02-05.  Davis, M. S. 1971. That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenologyof sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of Social Science,1(2): 309-344.
( L; ~2 \  Y0 g- j' v# s02-06.  Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. 1998. Trust and distrust: new relationships andrealities. Academy of Management Review, 23: 438-458.
- g6 w3 j3 Q" D$ ]: ]. _5 a7 N02-07.  Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010.
" D) u: z' P! Q1 ^! I02-08.  Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441.
- @6 Y+ Q4 p9 R1 @& x/ c8 Q02-09.  Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. A. (1993). The motivational effects ofcharismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4,577–594.
1 @3 R( d7 m8 Q- ^% j# h% e02-10.  Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.3 ?8 I8 i; I. [
02-11.  Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.  o% P" E/ Z5 ~3 R
02-12.  Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.
' j# ]" ?" Z! V1 I) d0 O3 D02-13.  陳曉萍等(2008):Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。
7 M/ W+ A+ t+ {) P* p) E02-14.  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 i" k" d8 P8 Y8 I3 o7 b+ q# n  W* p7 J
Issue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion]
2 L4 V' f' M1 w  X, \! E03-01.  Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192.2 K1 Y- k  F9 s1 q# p: y6 }; `
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.
; M8 c5 h0 a! l7 z+ L03-03.  Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Toward a taxonomy of multidimensionalconstructs. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 741-755.
4 X$ L9 d! l2 d4 h, 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.
0 ]2 T. i, A+ ^5 Q) ^5 B9 R03-05.  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): 612-624.3 s6 ?8 s$ l, S* l
03-06.  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.( l5 ~, T5 f: T* G2 H5 w8 I6 R
03-07.  陳曉萍等(2008):ch12
5 o+ O8 R; R$ o% P2 F4 x0 L% u) E5 p4 [( f. t3 F2 E" O1 l: k
Issue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion]
8 L& y8 Q. y0 ?) `) l% w# V1 ^**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 8! d0 g- h* T0 B3 a! j) O
K & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28./ N" @) X: W  i& Y5 A
04-01.  Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.
7 b/ O; C7 R, D8 K6 z5 [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.
' I* |* w, E9 ?: F& x7 A04-03.  Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical conclusion validity for organizational science researchers: Areview. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 164-208.# D( X2 W' D& R* h  r
04-04.  Schriesheim, C. A., Cogliser, C. C., Scandura, T. A., Lankau,M. J., & Powers, K. J. 1999. An empirical comparison of approaches forquantitatively assessing the content adequacy of paper-and-pencil instruments. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 2: 140-156.
7 b- E& f6 K" {* A9 h6 g' s04-05.  Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375.6 Z- s. n+ B3 @5 M3 r& U
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.. S3 l& L7 Z* O
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.
  b) R* R7 O6 \9 P' j04-08.  Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96.
' [( B2 _0 G  _! W" X: G8 w
! x. n0 G' s* l3 s2 k; OIssue 5: Measurement: Scale Development6 a# L/ c$ y3 ]0 e5 z
**Schwab: Chapter 4
" `8 y9 e2 \! b" G8 v0 x% b05-01.  **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121.$ a& c  @' q9 K$ O7 N
05-02.  DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.$ `. \/ K5 Z: Z  a' {
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.
) Z' Z0 n2 C3 S05-04.  **Farh, J. L., Zhong, C. B. & Organ, D. W. 2004. Organizational citizenship behavior inthe People’s Republic of China, Organization Science, 15: 241-253.# E% L" @6 D% a* A  D" I. C, Y! {
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: 141-160.6 f1 p% D/ O  t
05-06.  **陳曉萍等(2008):ch11
" I- \5 k3 u( }5 k1 l! Q. o" k7 W* @& }5 r  G
Issue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
* F! T0 ~: w/ p0 f) s" V( oMOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3).
0 q2 s# T# p- F7 f6 g, Z% T9 c; R) U: @: G
Issue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
3 }. @4 a- I- R# mK & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 5% p9 D" S" G5 z2 w  K- |
**Schwab: Chapter 133 M6 H# b1 S" m  x
07-01.  **Higgins, M. C. & Kram, K. E. 2001. Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: Adevelopmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 6(2):264-288.! {2 E7 w1 `8 W
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.
3 t7 s7 B" o3 x! v# N7 S; n07-03.  **Cortina, J. M., & Folger, R. G. 1998. When is it acceptable to accept a nullhypothesis: No way, Jose? Organizational Research Methods, 1: 334-350.' s* _/ M. t9 v6 h2 B0 C
07-04.  **陳曉萍等(2008):ch5
0 E' ~( a$ _# t07-05.  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.
6 \. W0 A$ N9 b" `8 d8 L5 s5 D: ^; P1 R! R+ ?
Issue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys+ o+ r, C# g+ @" f8 G
**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 7
+ `1 h+ ?' q2 @: M! H$ VK & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 29/ s- s) T) d0 V7 x6 c6 N8 U
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.
$ r3 [" q9 G# [8 P# X5 {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.
1 l3 ~  E- c* h* D2 g3 y4 o08-03.  Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159.  d+ \" G+ w& ^! @6 C7 N
08-04.  Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.! Y  C+ ]6 [7 t) v4 I' u4 a
08-05.  **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008.8 j5 H8 @# G6 [9 H
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.
6 f5 |: p: t) R$ u( G08-07.  Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.
" r. w  I# q5 R6 w, ?08-08.  **陳曉萍等(2008):ch8
# B0 `9 @! I& O08-09.  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.
7 t- Q- a/ N# D/ p1 N% W* l) ]( c08-10.  Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179.
8 ~" n" K! e6 T08-11.  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.
- T, h( s$ d, p3 j% \08-12.  Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.
: J5 m! `5 ^# u/ @9 x- [2 b8 H" ]9 j( y" k
Issue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments
! L3 U" G; G' {3 `6 t7 a. |**Schwab: Chapter 6
/ ^# d9 J  N5 P) ~0 W8 wK & L: Chapters 24 and 22
* t  i( t: U* p; {% o' q5 p* H4 x09-01.  Cook, T. D. & Shadish, W. R. 1994. Social experiments:Some developments over the past fifteen years. Annual Review of Psychology,45: 545-580.
# Q: x$ D  _+ X; K09-02.  **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.
7 D5 g- ~( o4 }8 z& C- V7 _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): 837-853.9 L' I) e4 T$ J( ]$ _7 }
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.
. _  z1 g! Z, v5 Z8 C0 P" k09-05.  Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.. C& A8 F2 h3 n: }5 {9 L: Y/ t3 K
09-06.  **陳曉萍等(2008):ch6, ch7." Y+ W( V' R2 P; A2 ~5 F: F) v: K

, V* {6 T' o( o2 m3 `Issue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research5 ?2 r: a8 J  ?4 T0 o$ I; c/ c7 V
10-01.  Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.
/ q$ Y  u% l% x+ t! E10-02.  Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576.
. b. U1 c& c0 U. ^# O% v10-03.  Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.6 y+ V. \9 L% A' K8 r; k
10-04.  Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441.
6 T4 A; g5 |4 U1 y10-05.  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.
# u# M! V9 D4 S: w10-06.  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.
9 u4 q. I, V7 Y+ Y! t* ?0 x10-07.  Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. 1991. The dynamics ofintense work groups: A study of British String Quartets, AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 36: 165-186.
4 u% h% v& X+ M10-08.  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.* I: J/ U" m0 y* o5 n
10-09.  陳曉萍等(2008):ch10! D' I" `6 r( @) T. i* g
10-10.  Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455.
! P5 c2 i4 y  b, {* P
8 Y2 Q% `( K) C8 qIssue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion]% g& I1 I/ D; t" b6 L( D6 }0 W" W4 J
**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13
% U2 @5 e! k: \' j3 h  z9 g! [K & L: Chapters 9) I  A2 m& \( Q7 T
11-01.  Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759.
+ r( \/ t+ O) m  P( A11-02.  Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218.4 W$ f. W4 u% A! k( p% t
11-03.  McFarland, L.A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2003).Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods. Journalof Management, 29(5), 641-661.
  Y" C( N, }) d- ^, g11-04.  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.
  g1 [$ z' x2 C2 k" L/ i11-05.  LaHuis, D.M., & Avis, J. M. (2007). Using multilevel randomcoefficient modeling to investigate rater effects in performance ratings. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 10, 97-107.
$ A# j+ S' n9 n11-06.  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.% g, ]; P8 w6 ?; {5 e3 \

1 [5 [8 `# i) P% zIssue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation
  ]  t9 q4 K! S: n3 Z9 S**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19; u+ P* }4 V! I; |2 M* C
K & L: Chapters 33 and 34% u- o8 @# W: L2 I
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.# T, g. T) {2 O3 L( C
12-02.  James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321.
0 m  G, v3 u3 }; S12-03.  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.: m5 f! R1 j' u/ T. o' {( A& ]+ U
12-04.  MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.  ^# |& \1 O) y4 o: b
12-05.  **陳曉萍等(2008):ch14
/ q, T& Y% ?: o7 x
3 |% S$ X# T% x3 K" fIssue 13: Testing mediating effects
# v+ l0 r% Y  R7 m5 D/ E13-01.  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.
) w8 o$ D! `/ T5 x) g# \* K. W+ ^13-02.  Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358.% x6 G5 d- ?/ Q$ p. B( X
13-03.  James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363., T' T$ o5 `& T  \0 S
13-04.  MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G.,& Sheets, V. 2002. A comparison of methods to test mediation and otherintervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1): 83-104.
& I% A& ~  A" w) M7 \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.  b( w; z& q& N: W9 `* A
13-06.  Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47.
' Z0 t- \" o- w; w" Z  \* b" c1 U# S13-07.  Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398.  ?  ?8 K8 a5 l2 k5 i& x
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.
- H$ ^2 R  Q( o. M9 m13-09.  Freedman, L. S., & Schatzkin, A. 1992. Sample size forstudying intermediate endpoints within intervention trials of observationalstudies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 136: 1148-1159.. t6 {6 m/ N/ H+ s  M+ U9 Z1 z" q
13-10.  Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619.
; e" w( [& C: s13-11.  MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158.& y: [: f$ |9 t6 O; k* `  ?7 r7 C  U8 B
13-12.  MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181.5 w1 i+ k1 `. V& T
13-13.  MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62.
( g) a  P3 _7 ]3 m13-14.  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.
7 H) z3 w( a$ N3 s& @; G+ T0 w13-15.  Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515.
3 p( Y9 P, F) P7 F, ^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.
4 S& @! V5 F6 o# D13-17.  MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107.
: M4 ]/ I* E: _" u6 l% {13-18.  MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.2 C6 H5 W3 |. M1 Y% ?; J' S, b1 `/ B
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.( Q2 o/ I# r  N. c. Y; x  f
13-20.  MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62.3 @0 y0 g9 V- D# [7 N
13-21.  Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445.5 U( X, _" K$ t5 \: G- i
13-22.  Smith, E. 1982.  Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations:Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 43: 248-259.
8 a0 `* `4 F+ o3 I$ j' l8 I0 U; `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.
+ r4 B7 ?* L6 d9 ]0 T  ~+ M0 c9 s5 ?2 t/ M2 h% S5 E+ @& {& W& d3 }
Issue 14: Testing moderating effects
2 t+ Z5 ]2 C0 Y14-01.  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.
% w6 z1 B2 @. T+ s! H14-02.  Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417.
  o  P' Y9 P( H0 Z14-03.  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.
0 h' u$ U# K9 U  u0 \) T( W14-04.  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.
1 N( y$ G4 Y6 O14-05.  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.' s* @, i0 A% E: R9 E
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.
8 o- d( R7 p, Q- Y; L" p1 G
! c( c  R7 L; H3 PIssue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
- o4 ^; w9 M8 K+ F/ |& bSchwab: Chapters 11 and 19* B$ @3 _" T: h/ R* W' K$ I$ q
K & L: Chapters 33 and 341 {3 R$ J7 V# i' d! v, K9 B0 h
15-01.  Edwards, J. R. & Lambert, L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1): 1-22.5 J% A6 b6 k1 j6 E3 l
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.
8 v$ Y% M/ c9 E9 P1 }/ e15-03.  Edwards, J. R., & Lambert L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12: 1-22." V+ ^4 H. s0 o! p
15-04.  Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128.! `  b1 W4 x) a( {
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.- B6 M. i9 _  N0 Y5 \/ t
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 j  I5 E9 U1 k, i. H15-07.  Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444.6 W/ H+ v2 K& g4 z

2 l+ I, ]) Z4 m) t+ g1 Q4 |Issue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation
5 W* i" p- k5 Q1 h3 |# `& ]Schwab: Chapters 14 and 17
0 `2 ^6 Q$ W6 ~7 EK & L: Chapter 28& z9 h. Y% Y! g3 i1 H
16-01.  Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87.
+ @8 u: o% y9 l: x& |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.
) B; p" b: [/ b3 T16-03.  Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105.
) f" s) A4 K( O. {16-04.  Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400.$ W; E, d- g0 w$ x
16-05.  Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302.
6 v' t: R9 P& G7 H. V8 y' H; D, D. V16-06.  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.. o3 {! \8 [( ~8 S" S
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.
! q" |4 G2 A2 u2 d( N; l8 l  m' X6 {. l3 `
Issue 17: Common Method Variance
0 K* E7 ?( n6 p& \3 l$ N( e3 k**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 20& g5 N2 O6 r8 S+ c
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.; y7 G" m7 l6 D
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.
  A3 s# M: i3 ?7 q" z  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.# |+ c% [3 m( f2 x$ s4 F
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): 525-530.8 l3 Q) D) S& g8 B  J5 W
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.
& |5 g. ]) F- l0 C  e) m; P) y17-06.  Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational researchroblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544.
  X3 b& ]* U2 {1 u! t: i+ F17-07.  Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223.( K  n% B2 [9 _! e. ?1 }2 W3 E
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.
) {, {6 r# L; D/ Q17-09.  Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232.% a/ l4 W7 t6 H: a  U- F
1 ?7 D3 o$ N: c
Issue 18: Data Non-independence8 o6 m* K! l, J5 c0 D
18-01.  Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735.- z* O! t; o3 y, \
18-02.  Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75.0 v6 u% E! ~- s: v* N# Y6 z0 }0 U
18-03.  Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.3 J1 R# Q4 l  f: C7 U. j
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.
2 K4 w- ^/ _* B1 x8 o18-05.  彭台光 & 林鉦棽 2008. 組織現象和層次議題: 非獨立性資料的概念和實徵. 組織與管理, 1(1): 95-121.
6 i. L4 @4 x! S3 R8 E: _1 s18-06.  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.  Y7 R7 q$ d8 ~" G
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.
( ]1 l+ |- O( I2 u0 |7 F2 E
! S3 [  _! n/ w! {Issue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch)6 C/ R; g! ~0 y" Y  x
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.- t7 Q% |* I' J# x- L! `) m+ M, A
19-02.  Boisot, M. & Child. J. 1996. From fiefs to clans andnetwork capitalism: Explaining China’s emerging economic order. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 41(4): 600-628.4 `& h2 L# O4 a9 A0 f5 _, D
19-03.  Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209.2 K, G7 x0 G( L8 p! K; E
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: 471-488.4 {" m7 u, k" t9 h; E
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." l) N3 ?% s% W  {: Z
19-06.  Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974.' w: H% }5 e1 G2 s9 a, U! ?7 }
19-07.  Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151.
6 c* r# z) ~/ }9 y19-08.  Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215.  u; o9 z# R) n6 u
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。9 e2 q8 G. {; Z+ j+ k7 I  Y
2 F/ X, d$ Z+ z7 L9 ?6 \$ ^! ^) v
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。
+ Q0 a. M) N1 V  t: n7 n/ U* z) X: I! ]. |8 `8 ]# O, Z- T- H
19-11.  陳曉萍等(2008):Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰
% a$ X1 W1 `# n8 L+ t3 L
8 w8 o. p2 T8 Q19-12.  陳曉萍等(2008):ch17
3 s: x: p# R2 m& a% J* Q  O19-13.  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.
% }% c/ U5 U# I19-14.  Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia PacificJournal of Management, 21, 491-513.
9 C# p. @( T7 W. Q1 M# T6 k
9 }: |! i2 j5 O# cIssue 20: Structural Equation Modeling
) M# G" L5 j( vK & L: Chapter 35.
0 i/ A' t& O: e9 a20-01.  林清山 1984。「線性結構關係」(LISREL)電腦程式。中國測驗年會測驗學刊31:149-164
3 @3 Q; K) H( H# M" J8 P. b- O  Z20-02.  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 H' d( Z7 X+ u& W6 V
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.  u+ L0 k/ z  W7 O: p& k4 C
20-04.  Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172.
, L7 d" X% d# u4 T20-05.  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.$ V2 I( e3 w% Z5 P0 W
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.
1 L# w! w4 W8 @0 _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.* i0 ^; `; q/ m; Z
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.' e3 ^% y8 I$ b: F; d
20-09.  陳曉萍等(2008):ch137 ?& N/ c3 N/ ?& \' f% m
1 @3 ?7 _+ F0 L5 K
Issue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism% [; _& U. M; L" [8 [4 [1 A, n
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.
1 @9 r% m8 w( G4 T4 g! y21-02.  Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.
7 U1 {' |5 z8 s% g' t2 g0 e21-03.  Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14.; h3 U/ ~8 K7 t! f. N; f/ B" [- O( i
21-04.  Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652.
& P( j9 d% C3 p3 y6 G21-05.  Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607.
9 I8 S% H& K7 J8 k# }% i) K21-06.  Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613.
: x- J9 j' y" y9 P. k4 n21-07.  Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68)." j7 k; |. \: \( ~# @+ x7 ?; m
21-08.  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.
2 x5 ]5 K) R/ ^6 b6 ?, N8 j21-09.  von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53).
: d# j( [! Y9 k( G* ~. ]21-10.  Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50).
) E& s8 {& D7 Y( o/ m2 c% L$ Q( n: R2 r
Issue 22: Level Fallacies( [6 x& v7 A( |& d" o! U) E+ N
22-01.  Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73.
, k0 ~  B9 @' X- \' _- R' A8 ~  ]& t22-02.  Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191.
2 y# C5 a7 t! q1 ]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.
, C3 v: E$ t; K9 H3 q22-04.  Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357.
" U. T9 I6 q# H5 t/ o7 G5 x- z22-05.  **Schwartz, S. (1994). The fallacy of the ecological fallacy:The potential misuse of a concept and the consequences. American Journal ofPublic Health, 84, 819-824.6 Z- |% K; J1 M' p' G) y
22-06.  Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777.9 c! S0 R6 X- L8 h( ]/ `6 X, v' G* i

" }/ y5 \& y3 R" y' n+ fIssue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena) D$ d9 w& }' c. f' z  u- w3 e; e
23-01.  James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112.5 |! L1 X4 Y8 P. F, o3 R0 W- y
23-02.  Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller.
9 r& W: D- E- u" J, F23-03.  Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Doherty, M. L. 1989. Integrationof leadership and climate: Examination of a neglected issue. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 74(4): 546-553.  P- s  I- i' Q8 t. }
23-04.  Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540.
* A) [- L7 u' N: f6 b' J) X23-05.  **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53.. u& C& H; @( x
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: 1-38.8 P& @" j' S+ J8 `4 H1 B- n
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.
  f5 X: Y7 K  X2 g23-08.  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.
4 h7 ~5 V4 [8 o- W6 ]& }& d23-09.  Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42.# x. c' P) w7 b; }# }+ Z
23-10.  Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348.% D$ K# f* p1 y+ p9 s6 O0 Y" u" U
23-11.  Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.( |! _* n6 L4 v  K& X
23-12.  Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.
5 c. o3 H2 P) K3 n23-13.  Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. 1981.Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 501-524.
# D: c+ d7 O$ |2 }23-14.  **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974.  k2 U+ a& E" {, ]$ A
- q" H9 I/ U( L1 P3 l: ]: _/ V+ m
Issue 24: Levels in Theory Building
. x: w! d' d1 c24-01.  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.
* N; }' o3 a3 Z# c  e24-02.  Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248.4 w4 t% E# y# L% k
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.! O) C  h' B$ ~4 b, v: @
24-04.  Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229.# o+ q, H  J5 q# E6 [  @
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): t3 u" m; _* ?
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)' `7 Z$ y7 N: N; t% p! h
24-07.  Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.6 N2 a' c! _7 W& a
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.
7 R9 _5 H* r0 ?* g* r24-09.  Glick, W. H. (1980). Problems in cross-level inference. In K.H.Roberts & L. Burstein (eds.) Issues in Aggregation. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. 17-30.% h6 p1 p0 \! z" F
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).
/ |. K5 B7 r: ]( `, T, G! e24-11.  Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201.
4 s9 m+ m) s0 B
% c( M$ @( q' S  E$ FIssue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective4 w* R' G3 B8 u8 U' \
25-01.  **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922.
2 R" y* t8 X8 _% a) m* y25-02.  **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.% S4 {6 s0 \1 j+ a
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.( m7 {$ Z( N+ j* k9 ?" L3 I3 n+ O
25-04.  Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338.2 c, ~, _# `  Y( n
25-05.  Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610.% c; `# W% `& L' B+ {
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.. W& v" ^1 |4 s8 K/ X( g! t
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.
6 E7 J+ ^! O: ?! K
" b" f7 {4 M; f0 m. _9 I9 |8 KIssue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory
8 v1 R# G+ \0 ]# p& V/ x2 P  P8 u! t- V26-01.  **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.
, W  R. b: b+ x$ J0 E: J6 l26-02.  Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307.+ Y1 D" }9 V  o
26-03.  Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346.
/ _/ r4 V- e8 s! G1 C( h
- x) r* F& S5 s0 {  \Issue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research* D# [. Y+ k" |1 n( b5 ~$ U' }8 F2 w
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.
7 T; y) z; F6 y9 {3 y9 o, l& n" l27-02.  **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.
3 s9 r# ]& K. \' d5 i27-03.  Kline, K. J. &Kozlowski, S. J. 2000. From micro to meso: Critical stepsin conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research. OrganizationalResearch methods, 3(3): 211-236.
& l! O! K7 u' e. U  E
; g8 C7 u; h) w7 K: @$ x2 IIssue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process
7 x% i) B( A2 `5 {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.! j6 [: Q) i! H! Z
28-02.  Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253.
7 C( i* w3 r6 g" C4 S; q  I28-03.  Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453.
) O+ G  S7 Z& i' z$ b) Y6 R28-04.  Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773.7 Q( }4 B$ z6 K' a
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.
' a  X" Y) Z5 [# I' q8 ]2 y
6 W- S# A4 T. O9 rIssue 29: Measurement and Aggregation
" Y) z4 z& ?9 [9 k5 r! W3 C29-01.  Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765., s2 d( a  n, ~6 }, }
29-02.  Burke, M. J. & Dunlap, W. P. 2002. Estimating interrateragreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5(2): 159-172.4 S$ t3 U' M; R2 G" H
29-03.  James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229.
" X) S6 e3 H% }" A/ H# O& {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.
! X$ l9 O0 a% n! b/ j% o! d29-05.  James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1993. Rwg: Anassessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 78(2): 306-309.3 \7 ~7 I/ s7 b% L
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.
# O$ n: m' y' {  w  d( g3 a29-07.  Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582.2 N# a9 _  J* p$ ^7 E
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.
0 @( X6 f8 T, g. Z4 M29-09.  Campbell, D. T. 1958. Common fate, similarity, and otherindices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities.Behavioral Science, 3: 14-25.' C5 g: c1 j; j' {
29-10.  Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563.
* h9 l% g6 K$ C7 [1 }6 O29-11. 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 H9 E/ ]4 _3 Y* _6 z
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.
( G4 l- i0 |; A0 \4 [9 M0 I1 R29-13.  Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373.
3 R1 _6 Z1 u+ s8 p& U) Q* j29-14.  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.
, D6 r. @6 B7 q2 L! w0 z: l29-15.  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.
- Q( G3 M! d- ?# U2 ]29-16.  **Castro, S. L. 2002. Data analytic methods for the analysis ofmultilevel questions: A comparison of intraclass correlation coefficients,rwg(j), hierarchical linear modeling, within- and between-analysis, and randomgroup resampling.Leadership Quarterly, 13: 69-93.
# h5 G1 q, Z8 N9 N! f4 `29-17.  Lindell, M. K., & Brandt, C. J. 2000. Climate quality andclimate consensus as mediators of the relationship between organizationalantecedents and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: 331–348.1 L* k2 ]% Z1 t, H/ w. r2 ]7 b
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.
. L- e$ ?) c0 t29-19.  McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46., z* S% m: i: {) p8 ~" C
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, 306-307.4 A" w, f0 ~# t3 B( P# ]
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.
# Z/ M9 k1 E0 g6 _6 ?5 T7 X% ~( Y5 ?0 I& N" R8 b& t
Issue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis5 P* m) B; x- B- S$ V
30-01.  Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395.
+ F4 X/ ?1 b, U, {/ K9 L30-02.  James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424.- h% d( Z  ?3 W' R
30-03.  George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.
% u8 g1 T$ o; o7 Z4 d8 u5 B30-04.  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.' ^9 a$ [6 c+ p
30-05.  George, J. M., & James, L. R. 1993. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups revisited: Comment on aggregation, level of analysis, and recentapplication of within and between analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78:798-804.
1 U% }( a$ |0 T; v30-06.  **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.
1 v- t9 l9 s+ z$ x4 O7 v5 c30-07.  Leung, K. & Bond, M. H. 1989. On the empiricalidentifications of dimensions of cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20(2): 133-151.0 E1 n2 l9 ?, O7 J- ^
30-08.  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.
" V4 J/ `, r& @# J30-09.  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 a3 N/ U+ c/ }  W3 W
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.
7 t4 I5 `6 S+ n; L2 k" O5 g; [% v: H$ m) Z4 t4 E
Issue 31: Introduction to HLM
! E; O* R$ f* \+ k. h' \! U9 y5 d31-01.  **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744.: Q/ [3 Y6 ]1 |; n
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.
. R/ D& s0 o8 l1 K31-03.  **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641.1 @: ]5 R/ d7 O; S- t5 ^' }2 [
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." u! o8 e2 Y+ Y' K2 O( D

- X0 t7 a! W1 jIssue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM
- R7 @5 T7 P7 t2 Y5 y32-01.  Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297.  y: F5 B! |" I
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./ l3 g7 h" J5 |0 w7 h- _# ^
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.
& k. q1 j! j( Z. t; d32-04.  Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33.2 x! c2 X( _% G6 k. R, Y5 Z
32-05.  **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94.
) S; S, {5 {! R2 [' e32-06.  Glission, C., & James, L. R. 2002. The cross-level effects of culture andclimate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:767-794.
6 H# _2 A% v% ?3 F$ _; {32-07.  Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522.
6 R8 W: @' a3 B4 z8 I6 G& m32-08.  Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255.
( y8 X- p  j& u' }32-09.  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: 775-793.1 ]( S( d- F5 i& p4 L
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)
6 X( z* Y% o5 t5 J! ?) @32-11.  Sacco, J. M., & Schmitt, N. 2005. A dynamic multilevel model of demographicdiversity and misfit effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2):203-231.
3 r6 h9 A1 b) u32-12.  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.
3 D$ @% S8 E+ G( o; X$ A32-13.  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.& Z9 m  h% f4 @1 y4 w5 y6 F
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.
9 L" j: X% n+ F) W32-15.  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., `5 k( R7 h3 k  }1 H7 g  x2 l

' R( x2 d( H9 C7 T. HIssue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research
' h7 q% }( y; m: X2 E5 K33-01.  Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571.
9 o) E9 q% X  J& g. W, Y33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582.' c) t; Y  u! T+ i
33-03.  Dansereau, F., Yammarino, F. J., & Kohles, J. C. 1999. Multiple levelsof analysis from a longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theorybuilding. Academy of Management Journal, 24: 346-357.# W! X2 N3 u  X/ O9 m' a
33-04.  Chen, G., Mathieu, J. E., & Bliese, P. D. 2004. Aframework for conducting multilevel construct validation. In F. J. Yammarino& F. Dansereau (Eds.), Research inmultilevel issues: Multilevel issues in organizational behavior and processes (Vol.3): 273-303. Elsevier: Oxford, U.K.3 P  \" l* `8 r0 Y, y
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 L9 q4 n& e5 v+ b1 A33-06.  Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277.
4 E; A% j6 S0 O, Y! h  @
6 J* z- K3 l) x( B8 FIssue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review! d3 w- G# G# ?
Schwab: Chapters 15 and 21
7 ~3 Q7 j7 h9 G8 o, ?34-01.  應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信1 C) f6 ~# e  K6 v6 Y5 T* ^
34-02.  Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Colbert, A.E., & Rynes, S.L. 2007. What cause a management article to becited—Article, author, or journal? Academy of Management Journal, 50(3):491-506.
0 H) b0 o  S( z- B# f7 f34-03.  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.
+ J# k9 c. ^) G+ V7 Q, Y) ~34-04.  **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout).! i9 ~) {8 V: z% ?8 B. B
34-05.  Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515.% P& E3 ^2 F; O4 w+ X$ V( ~
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.$ D" r/ E3 }% E+ H$ u
34-07.  **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6.$ j0 @8 F. k+ B8 M& ]5 B9 x2 K
34-08.  Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164.. R, J4 f4 \0 Q! p) o8 w; X: K$ ~' m
34-09.  Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307.' U/ x$ G$ ?4 c! C" D5 F
34-10.  Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92.
1 a+ L* Q1 h' U& s' P( y2 u6 i
4 G5 d# A, K  u+ ^) B6 TIssue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism( `4 p7 W4 E' f- t
35-01.  **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。  s0 B8 V( a, z0 V
水流花靜---科學與詩的對話
  x0 Z5 Q3 w% v+ E6 ]( E: FP.121~139.台北:天下文化。$ y' W" _  V( 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.' a( H2 S8 z0 a, a
35-03.  Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242.: b, Q7 q! S: i1 @
35-04.  Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.
7 o' r. j/ x9 K5 o5 H% V  v$ B35-05.  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.
9 D6 Y7 ?. O3 |7 C4 k$ B4 N- O$ A35-06.  Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312.9 m7 N- x. X2 V+ E! \: \0 o" R7 ^2 ?
35-07.  Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2).
: p! m' L. z/ ]35-08.  Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620., M1 Q# z8 o" I' a
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)0 L1 }9 N4 M3 ?/ b. P) i
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.
5 g+ o8 s- Y  L+ G& B5 D; ?35-11.  Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158.
: L4 v: O) A: n35-12.  Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44.: P5 `; W0 c  Y+ G3 W- f
35-13.  Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.+ m2 L$ _0 n& f/ Z& V: _! c
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.: V, j7 Z' d$ V, w( T$ k
. s$ c. I. H+ {* `* H' I. v% l
<<End>>
本帖最后由 Kenneth 于 2011-5-3 15:37 编辑
& x4 C' d/ q5 A1 v- E- U3 I/ j0 [5 |8 G' K; i

33

主题

6

听众

7709

积分

贡士

Rank: 15Rank: 15Rank: 15Rank: 15Rank: 15Rank: 15

注册时间
2010-4-15
最后登录
2013-9-16
积分
7709
精华
0
主题
33
帖子
610
沙发
发表于 2011-5-4 00:34:09 |只看该作者
是彭台光老師的課,內容看起來相當充實。
回复

使用道具 举报

0

主题

5

听众

1321

积分

秀才

Rank: 5Rank: 5

注册时间
2010-6-27
最后登录
2014-7-25
积分
1321
精华
0
主题
0
帖子
27
板凳
发表于 2011-5-4 16:53:25 |只看该作者
向Kenny致敬!
回复

使用道具 举报

4

主题

6

听众

577

积分

秀才

Rank: 5Rank: 5

注册时间
2010-6-29
最后登录
2024-12-5
积分
577
精华
0
主题
4
帖子
53
地板
发表于 2011-5-5 11:47:45 |只看该作者
好的信息来源,谢谢kenny!!
回复

使用道具 举报

0

主题

6

听众

990

积分

秀才

Rank: 5Rank: 5

注册时间
2010-8-2
最后登录
2014-7-22
积分
990
精华
0
主题
0
帖子
16
5
发表于 2011-5-9 21:16:49 |只看该作者
非常好的研究方法学习资料,thank you Kenny!!
回复

使用道具 举报

0

主题

6

听众

67

积分

书生

Rank: 3Rank: 3Rank: 3

注册时间
2011-4-20
最后登录
2012-8-30
积分
67
精华
0
主题
0
帖子
2
6
发表于 2011-5-16 15:57:30 |只看该作者
谢谢kenneth老师:)
回复

使用道具 举报

1

主题

6

听众

23

积分

书童

Rank: 1

注册时间
2011-6-16
最后登录
2012-9-19
积分
23
精华
0
主题
1
帖子
5
7
发表于 2011-6-16 22:28:42 |只看该作者
非常感谢Kenneth老师,您真的太伟大了。向您致敬!
回复

使用道具 举报

3

主题

5

听众

43

积分

书童

Rank: 1

注册时间
2010-11-10
最后登录
2014-6-6
积分
43
精华
0
主题
3
帖子
14
8
发表于 2011-8-6 19:29:46 |只看该作者
回复 1楼 Kenneth 的帖子' {: x2 V6 y; T5 p3 n* n* [

% |0 Q8 q- F$ t! n, Y你真是太伟大了,拥抱你!!!
* r6 V# {2 T2 [, v/ p+ D   
回复

使用道具 举报

7

主题

10

听众

439

积分

书生

Rank: 3Rank: 3Rank: 3

注册时间
2014-8-10
最后登录
2016-2-29
积分
439
精华
0
主题
7
帖子
61
9
发表于 2014-8-25 19:29:15 |只看该作者
哇,这个太好啦,非常感谢
回复

使用道具 举报