- 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:( ^' o ^/ f8 t, L, s. O
http://spaces.isu.edu.tw/~RMonline/website/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=52&Itemid=66
" [+ Z( m6 |' i! @! T
& J8 a) F; D" m0 }" z2 Y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。
0 z, {& m$ K7 F. s
e. { i8 z8 P4 i6 t+ S9 YKenny: u) Q; c! [2 r2 u5 J
! U* O9 T4 U1 ?' ?
研究方法线上( H* v% y: Z& i; E8 m- {
3 M, ~! H& N# ~) a
ResearchMethodology I
6 o4 F0 E) x! _$ _/ SOverviewTextbooks7 K+ Z `1 R' r# Z E; A
Issue1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory : w0 G# F) ^2 ^ a
Issue2: Theory and Hypothesis Development
/ I: v4 D: N4 D8 s$ ^- o1 NIssue3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct % y f! D- q! x( b2 s$ y
Issue4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity
% i! G7 J" C8 l! EIssue5: Measurement: Scale Development
* d4 x; P7 p7 G* k* kIssue6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
% v/ w; b @" {, A T# {Issue7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
' ?5 S z! n: H$ Z; x3 FIssue8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys ' i6 U, s4 z) J. W+ S8 L
Issue9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments & j8 k& B/ ^4 G7 k% E
Issue10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research ' M5 y9 o' Y- }+ L3 f d
Issue11: Statistical Analysis and Inference; w: a; z- z7 o% K* \9 c j( [0 c
Issue12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation
2 a8 G/ ]( M: {, d$ Z1 s6 {/ IIssue13: Testing mediating effects1 k# M" O) M7 `) o5 K4 ]9 r0 U9 J
Issue14: Testing moderating effects 3 o2 r3 k, F+ y2 k' P& d' E4 o1 p
Issue15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation 9 N$ U {! |" G& t- p
Issue16: Reliability and Construct Validation
3 f+ t) x, b1 r1 V3 @8 L* ?Issue17: Common Method Variance , U6 Z+ D+ n2 n) ~) l
Issue18: Data Non-independence
# r- t: x$ O, ZIssue19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and Indigenous Research)
# j( R- K9 D8 w/ k, J% y7 [Issue20: Structural Equation Modeling: [8 I9 x2 j4 q0 ?4 ]! E9 O% ?* \
* D3 @& M0 U z6 }3 Z* l; U
Major Textbooks:) d4 n" z$ V/ f \3 B; E
Kerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
, b0 ^' I `* N6 l. n. RSchwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book]
: G4 t" @& O% Z5 g. aKlein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon]% r/ v1 Y1 \5 [. s2 o
Supplementary Books:
' {4 O, O0 [+ J. HCohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon]
) Q* h& c4 i! q& y$ QCook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]
. X# p( I+ ~) t7 vHair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. MultivariateData Analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ rentice-Hall. [Amazon]
- [5 z: @0 n) K4 I3 Z' G$ J1 jPedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.* K9 D; P" m( G: Z
Rogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.7 {) [& B4 s" n4 ^5 I
Journal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6).- m# A6 ?, l" U4 @& {! @
Academy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2).
7 F6 Q8 x; q- C$ r' NMultivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2)./ P# B6 w2 S L. j" P
Leadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1).
2 ~6 W4 _' `( j: t4 Q( G9 d$ tAcademy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6.5 y+ R& n9 ?& K' R, w2 `* P
Kreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.' ]7 s1 J/ ~5 P6 B5 ?& I
Raudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3 D+ a# S4 w3 d6 dRoberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.% u1 @7 A) j% _3 b. g7 u2 H. E! o
Roberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
# j: W' l R1 X: g- W4 z8 r: r% A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。
; F+ W: S% y9 ]1 l0 {8 b7 ^' O, j# n/ I7 B
Issue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory
& N7 x' b9 M$ {* ?6 B5 hK & L: Chapter 1# Z% P# @ D- ?4 V
01-01. Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks.4 w3 l0 O' l4 F, s" n: {
01-02. Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91.
( \2 {; j0 }- k! R01-03. Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 584-602.
+ X+ l/ }9 U* J% X01-04. Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128.
# G0 I9 ]! J9 @7 w* X3 G01-05. 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.% Y) s! j. j- W0 o
01-06. Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly,41: 262-269.
/ V" q: u/ J& D% ^: f: `1 ~- F01-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。- u6 h5 j! E: l
01-08. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch2: 研究的起點:提問。3 n! o. x- ^6 ?$ D& S2 J& U
' u+ t% c, G" q* x: l# @3 h0 V* Y) s
Issue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development
2 |/ D8 i# ^5 G3 M3 B' N% N) M1 q02-01. Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2
. m7 h; B, ?' ?$ i! @; o02-02. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review,14: 496-515.; ]* d% m) ^; _ U% y
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.
& v; p5 W3 ~8 i, e* U: Y02-04. Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? Academy of ManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095.
$ `" ?- v- G4 L7 e1 |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.
' D6 U) X( t: L& W02-06. Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. 1998. Trust and distrust: new relationships andrealities. Academy of Management Review, 23: 438-458.
U( e2 r# O: R7 `02-07. Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010., P Y3 a4 `# x8 u4 s
02-08. Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441.: m a; |# w; z! ?4 n3 G
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.
+ @6 m" L3 e, d1 j02-10. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.8 t' C" x6 X+ z r) ?: x s
02-11. Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.
7 G z4 s8 Q$ i3 M$ z. I7 s. J02-12. Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.
8 D; F$ j( p! V8 I; v8 X. V02-13. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。4 \; D: {' i0 P7 u( A
02-14. 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.+ p7 Z2 m, l/ ~, q, Z8 `+ r* U! [7 [
8 S' J' @1 y( P1 g' r2 m, cIssue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion]
. j6 Y1 a: Z) g" Q5 W03-01. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192.: c/ H, }, n: l( N/ g8 J
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.
7 H; @/ {0 u+ A0 V03-03. Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Toward a taxonomy of multidimensionalconstructs. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 741-755.% J& ~! e* X; l0 ^) _( [
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., P; B5 }3 Y; L% }$ Z
03-05. Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K.E. (2000). Adaptability in the workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptiveperformance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4): 612-624.* V& H0 `5 l! z {$ E1 i
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.
& ?6 Y: v) ?% V' t& i, P03-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch12; n9 S0 t6 Z: G! H* _7 U2 W
* i+ [8 d+ I+ C# K
Issue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion]
) y% D8 G) C; r7 q' S**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 82 O2 M& `* ?$ L* a3 s: Q2 f
K & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28.5 W: {' X. y7 y8 F
04-01. Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.
8 O) S, h- N- h1 {) _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.
, k9 [9 j4 p9 k6 A& G04-03. 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# Q5 K, h/ O04-04. 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.
, m) M3 E# _ _( j' L04-05. Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375.
2 D: `- p4 h/ d" _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.
1 r; E7 J1 I; p& _& w& G04-07. 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):339-368.2 i' e; w4 ~/ j& ^( u0 Y& ^% m
04-08. Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96.$ D( _# n* ]' f/ v6 t/ Z( E
1 ?1 V6 T) V8 b; u
Issue 5: Measurement: Scale Development, w" F* T; t+ @( y; X
**Schwab: Chapter 4 I; F1 ^5 |4 f5 {
05-01. **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121.+ H: i j- v. b: L- _! F9 u! C6 E- a2 |
05-02. DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage., `0 f; A; u6 Q8 B
05-03. Vandenberg, R. J. & Lance, C. E. 2000. A Review andSynthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, andRecommendations for Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,3: 4-70.
9 E+ r/ N' F. D F: D/ K05-04. **Farh, J. L., Zhong, C. B. & Organ, D. W. 2004. Organizational citizenship behavior inthe People’s Republic of China, Organization Science, 15: 241-253.
( c& @' k% a" i3 F H05-05. 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.
( A- ?8 J- B) x: S! b05-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch11
$ Z1 Z9 W. R4 _( X' n% D U
& `" k: G, j' J3 b8 q; qIssue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research: P" B0 T, V/ ?+ E
MOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3).4 s5 S7 l8 E0 t. e( B1 Y3 s
" L, h- l n9 q8 P+ u7 k
Issue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
J3 O4 Q# @4 G! X" dK & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 51 n, K3 l: P3 O2 H' F
**Schwab: Chapter 13* Y, E4 }) c- z2 P, f" 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./ s" r1 S6 p( Y* i* r
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):143-160.5 |7 w, ?* H$ p" d
07-03. **Cortina, J. M., & Folger, R. G. 1998. When is it acceptable to accept a nullhypothesis: No way, Jose? Organizational Research Methods, 1: 334-350. {0 w7 |: L$ P# u- B) S! b# n' s9 Y
07-04. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch5
1 R9 y. ^) o( z N5 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): 903-936.0 ]' u! j5 R; G
' N, M% ?. E/ f& B# _' T
Issue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys% X! S A' ~3 r9 Y7 l
**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 70 p$ d# b- V/ L# M
K & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 29
+ b% w' w5 v! I. x08-01. 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.( I+ M& K n5 ?6 X9 s3 e
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.
$ x9 l; E. b& s" _) i08-03. Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159.% y& I7 h. X& m/ w4 N% x. l
08-04. Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.% X W* |5 `9 X" N m
08-05. **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008.
' O/ X/ ?( u" Z0 |" [. o% \& M08-06. 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.
; P* s! Q8 ^5 @* z6 l08-07. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.4 |, S+ W. z1 a4 ^
08-08. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch8. p2 k1 A' S+ [, F
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.$ q8 Z3 f' J9 {( @
08-10. Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179.4 o* }" r( ]. X% Q' V
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.
4 a9 k" q5 t5 g" X. r" [- @08-12. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.( q; ~, i2 e) p1 ^
* @* U3 @ k1 L! X+ |" KIssue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments
. \2 `% a/ h, e/ u**Schwab: Chapter 6
& y$ N- n2 C$ l$ mK & L: Chapters 24 and 22
4 \/ X: k8 x% U& S09-01. Cook, T. D. & Shadish, W. R. 1994. Social experiments:Some developments over the past fifteen years. Annual Review of Psychology,45: 545-580.+ |, g+ p% u" ]% i4 p, g
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.; Z1 a9 s1 ~+ I$ F0 t2 P
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./ p# d& ]$ z e: i7 J- O, I
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.$ e3 R/ G, }9 ]$ S' I ^$ j- X( s
09-05. Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.
- b7 \& M8 }: I; | K09-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch6, ch7.
; D5 p x; H) u9 i w5 x
% D5 K+ }, p1 x0 A' jIssue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research
7 t9 O9 I: Z7 l5 \' i10-01. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.% b7 I% r7 Y$ H! f+ C6 M
10-02. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576.
: }) O( [' m- E6 a10-03. Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.
# N5 k u1 b- D" c10-04. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441.
5 U' S& P+ n7 G3 p, [10-05. Elsbach, K. D. & Kramer, R.M. 2003. Assessing creativity inHollywood pitch meetings: Evidence for a dual-process model of creativityjudgments. Academy of Management Journal, 46(3): 283-301.5 T+ W! e0 [ h) J
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.
k" W* b2 E% @6 @+ r ~4 H% t10-07. Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. 1991. The dynamics ofintense work groups: A study of British String Quartets, AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 36: 165-186.
1 b$ x; n; n. F9 G0 S7 Z10-08. 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.
! F% ^; g1 l; p10-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch108 O# D" E2 ]8 ~: Q% S* `
10-10. Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455.
) i9 f' v" q D! X v* U+ B8 N
) g a, Q8 Z$ w6 a- j. w/ kIssue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion]
7 h" |. {7 M9 w1 \8 \" N' G**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 135 C6 v+ c' A- r; @# `, i
K & L: Chapters 9
0 S( q* M P+ j/ w; E11-01. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759.
h/ L; N( C. q; P# H* ]- T$ X6 T, [11-02. Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218.
% d' [7 o' U/ _) Y11-03. McFarland, L.A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2003).Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods. Journalof Management, 29(5), 641-661.
6 p4 l5 t+ v: a, l: W1 }, i11-04. 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.# R3 }' _/ q( \$ Q7 \1 b7 M! R3 V1 q
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.
% }/ [" Y% F6 j9 v0 Y11-06. 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.
" u6 Q8 P9 ?- E5 \/ R5 J6 u! x
( Q+ J2 X( A' q4 S2 rIssue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation
: F* C) W3 ]4 b**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19
7 ?& _# s+ [% \K & L: Chapters 33 and 34
4 F |$ u. Z5 I/ { n1 c12-01. **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.
) B( W0 X0 z4 b12-02. James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321.
3 { Q% \( u U1 |* C* \12-03. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. R. 2006. Clarifying conditionsand decision points for mediational type inferences in Organizational Behavior.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 1031-1056.) k4 W* _8 J0 J# j. J
12-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.6 E3 p! m! c. X3 X7 T1 J4 c* b
12-05. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch14
+ p2 |1 b. {1 c" O% e
7 i, W( z: I/ @/ D7 bIssue 13: Testing mediating effects, E5 g6 O2 h( r5 A- R3 ^ b3 k0 ~2 w
13-01. Mathieu, J. E., DeShon, R. P., & Bergh, D. D. 2008.Mediational inferences in organizational research: Then, now, and beyond. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 203-223.
' l) J5 s" W9 g; D2 o13-02. Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358. S( E2 W2 N7 l7 ]* H
13-03. James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363.
1 D" R4 b( t6 ^9 u13-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G.,& Sheets, V. 2002. A comparison of methods to test mediation and otherintervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1): 83-104.
0 @3 h6 G2 R8 \) f% i) a13-05. 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./ i7 U7 y v; N# v0 l0 G
13-06. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47.
% F \0 }* @4 E9 N2 A z13-07. Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398.
2 J! ?. _5 G3 ]" w i8 S13-08. 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.4 l+ c c. R [
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.
2 A- R" I n" G8 t13-10. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619.
& H8 Y% |( F0 C# n( _* D+ o% {13-11. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158.. P5 Q7 @- a* D% W
13-12. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181.
# m& \0 q6 S1 `& G. m P, P0 z; C$ ]13-13. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62." f4 t/ s4 Z7 v: c5 N. z/ Z% c; Y1 j
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.' c+ s3 X& N5 q& |7 s+ v# q0 ?0 ~
13-15. Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515.9 z9 s3 p7 X$ Q5 h/ J1 \6 f1 _
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.$ s: B: w+ K8 B3 n# S; M G
13-17. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107.. F. t7 ]! M, ~8 S
13-18. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.4 M7 X( O! x8 R
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: 83-104.9 Q6 X V5 b' r3 v$ W
13-20. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62.
# U* c! A, E) P' R# d }13-21. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445.
" @# Y2 K1 w1 k* o8 {# _5 W& u13-22. Smith, E. 1982. Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations:Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 43: 248-259.
( N* ]# X W; _0 w. w% z8 C13-23. Sobel, M. E. 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervalsfor indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.),Sociological Methodology 1982 (pp. 290-312). Washington DC: AmericanSociological Association.+ `8 K( p' W. B; H2 N3 F
3 S& P4 f/ B1 l! f Issue 14: Testing moderating effects
& Z/ w" g3 R1 l3 g. ]% o14-01. 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.
* f/ M' q$ [/ D3 L14-02. Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417.
% ^! Q! ~! f. x N" Q14-03. 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.
4 E: I6 f) {8 Z2 z% B14-04. 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.
3 w. r4 b( O( |# |) K14-05. 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./ |5 S) H+ o. [) q
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): 3-23.4 A) O$ a* `9 [ G
7 F$ I* ~7 h6 R4 dIssue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
+ b- I' E B/ ]" BSchwab: Chapters 11 and 19& E% E0 @" ^7 `4 e) b( O
K & L: Chapters 33 and 34
: G, _& J7 `; a) J* n$ c15-01. Edwards, J. R. & Lambert, L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1): 1-22.; x' |) U/ w, | d! |( Y; W0 p
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.; D% o& E* {4 V8 N( n
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.+ H3 c7 v$ _1 A: k
15-04. Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128.
& Z( ]# d S4 [. ~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.
$ c; O6 E! v0 w! X$ c" N15-06. Muller, D., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2005). Whenmoderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 89: 852-863.
" k! z* h4 K$ A9 q15-07. Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444.
3 g2 r4 x6 @0 A! L. ^$ ]9 G
( O7 y3 m/ e* G9 qIssue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation9 }. B, [. x2 A
Schwab: Chapters 14 and 17 E9 X2 D4 Q; O: a& }8 D9 F
K & L: Chapter 284 N$ m. `- G$ ?' C) |
16-01. Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87.& G% V& X _ {& c, p6 [
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.
1 A$ b# R7 ]; [' e16-03. Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105.
# w; a% h6 a" {, n& C16-04. Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400.
, F$ n% a! c( a/ l# `16-05. Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302.
7 U. p! d0 n+ ]( r( W& `- c16-06. 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.
, n( C# `4 ]5 }; Z% E16-07. 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' h I7 d( C+ v1 H2 g$ d
6 d# {9 p& N% L4 G: XIssue 17: Common Method Variance0 z: C9 u8 ~0 t; `7 @8 m
**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 20
: g" G$ J7 o: W17-01. **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.
$ G4 r8 i' @& J ]/ {, W17-02. Doty, D. H. &Glick, W. H. 1998. Common methods bias: Does common methods variance reallybias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 374-406.( e1 ^3 t! I. w. F2 Z
17-03. Goffin, R. D. & Gellatly, I. R. 2001. A multi-raterassessment of organizational commitment: Are self-report measures biased? Journalof Organizational Behavior, 22: 437-451.
9 F7 T9 C& A2 O4 O* Y, n% a/ A17-04. 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): 525-530.7 d& P7 H; V9 e# t( A
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.& }3 i/ K, ^* V- Z( k& D2 L
17-06. Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research roblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544.) \+ F& M5 |5 i$ q; d, C+ \ q. r
17-07. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223.: o" @4 s# i5 n6 p7 ?
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.
! y n# N( z* o5 m" F- F17-09. Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232.
; G9 K/ s+ ]( X( G% Y( ^: i: j) e% k9 O' s0 Y" E
Issue 18: Data Non-independence
4 O( b1 M, A, E0 r0 R0 R2 r# l G18-01. Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735.
; s* n Z q8 R7 F18-02. Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75.
& o- H4 l8 {" Y/ b" p, G9 Y' c18-03. Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.
7 Z* U4 g5 l5 t18-04. 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.# p4 z. s0 r$ W, y
18-05. 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." t: P2 u) j! d5 x
18-06. Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. 1995. On thelevel: Homogeneity, independence, heterogeneity, and interactions inorganizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 20: 7-9.: s7 t ]7 E$ Q# i8 C
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.
5 O2 r0 V, G) c. h( T/ u
& X$ x3 W: O& ?2 j- sIssue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch)
+ S$ b, O- i1 v& }5 `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.
9 I8 K& ~ f0 E2 w1 j19-02. Boisot, M. & Child. J. 1996. From fiefs to clans andnetwork capitalism: Explaining China’s emerging economic order. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 41(4): 600-628." H3 g. X5 p* W
19-03. Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209.- u/ b% l; |' v0 P' t5 k. N$ u$ ^
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.) J2 [% G4 H8 {* e1 L1 n9 C" ]
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.$ d1 x5 b! w$ K; u$ w/ S) `# B1 {
19-06. Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974.* l2 H( O M4 i: u" t6 q9 Z
19-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151.
# G1 A; A2 m6 `19-08. Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215.
8 \- p8 U' d: d6 q+ U19-09. 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。
3 ~9 u9 s' [3 o0 X6 [; r- u7 i) a H, A
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。: j3 y& P6 V3 I& s9 h( B2 ?: _4 \
, v6 ]# Z2 _' T" A2 ~5 A P N19-11. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰
. Q# g Y# @) t7 _4 K" B, Z- M& P
- v8 Z* p2 g4 i6 |$ x; H19-12. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch177 I3 a; u; M( r- o) X- v% x" g) M
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.* g3 a' A9 z( b8 h' l
19-14. Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia PacificJournal of Management, 21, 491-513., O' j* |6 i8 t+ v A1 W2 c7 ^
$ d3 N0 C" d+ l% d9 o% b" mIssue 20: Structural Equation Modeling. |7 z% a& ]8 J
K & L: Chapter 35.
2 v4 M6 B( h- u( H; s' l: ?20-01. 林清山 1984。「線性結構關係」(LISREL)電腦程式。中國測驗年會測驗學刊,31:149-164。
! \' d7 A4 {! z G H20-02. 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.
4 U5 {- b8 G; b20-03. 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. o4 V- T& c% z2 c+ M
20-04. Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172.
, x7 r v# B: \* W. i20-05. 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., ?& a, c }! T/ ^+ I
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.# j8 p5 G1 m+ \9 O- P; L
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.( @6 T5 F; C) E' `& _- [* s
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./ y. g1 S7 o# P, q4 Q
20-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch13
6 K8 z* T/ P }9 M
2 T# _& ~1 F3 nIssue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism. Y3 @) f' T* n! d, u f; H
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.
/ C1 ]2 k4 E$ T; e1 G; B21-02. Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.
$ P! d0 P9 u0 @4 f1 V, j21-03. Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14.
5 @' F: c) X+ o21-04. Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652.
( Q, q( O- O: O9 O9 z& ?21-05. Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607.
* W' q& B# L5 @8 _0 n' t21-06. Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613. @ H9 b! ?# o' E1 ]! B! G2 v( J
21-07. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68).
; o+ T( o) s+ e T0 o+ E- p5 ~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.
9 D- R, o. s. O% b21-09. von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53).
. g- v5 ^- O' T$ x3 Z2 m21-10. Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50)., `2 D! R% @0 W
. ^- h; e2 U$ \. r9 c7 n5 KIssue 22: Level Fallacies0 A3 |' e6 C& H
22-01. Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73.
7 p: ~, B) r( p& H$ Q, j22-02. Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191.0 i+ W% }& N2 X, r" d9 f+ G; {5 s
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, 122-124.2 m2 B; j6 _. b s" W; g+ a6 v
22-04. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357.
" ^5 j$ Y+ k" ^0 l" o+ K( ], t# Y22-05. **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.! G. h, F$ u& \0 E* ~2 b: [. Z
22-06. Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777.# M: I3 w2 }4 i3 ?
$ L4 f* ^2 g1 k! Z Q
Issue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena( K3 s0 c; @ u7 I! k; u
23-01. James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112.
! i+ v, r7 l3 T( ]6 a% v8 _23-02. Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller.
3 G1 w0 p# _$ ]% k23-03. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Doherty, M. L. 1989. Integrationof leadership and climate: Examination of a neglected issue. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 74(4): 546-553.0 I8 b5 M$ f a( c2 U- y
23-04. Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540.) w5 J# C6 k( o: M( f4 W0 \
23-05. **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53.
$ G v) J# a) a23-06. 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.
( }# n% Y5 |/ M% Z) P& M1 G2 Z23-07. 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.
k m- h; \ y, ~5 e8 V23-08. 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.
* [, ?) C% w5 N# X23-09. Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42.9 Q7 y% V! ^) m) ^! L
23-10. Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348.
% t; p0 u$ i7 o+ A23-11. Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.
$ Y% d% B% B$ R' U! q* D23-12. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.
/ i0 f t8 b2 U( t. Z23-13. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. 1981.Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 501-524.
8 j% F/ O+ M7 w0 c23-14. **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974.
- o6 r* l/ s/ r& j& G1 q6 J4 K0 v9 I! l# o
Issue 24: Levels in Theory Building/ r3 a8 m, Y& n" V8 }# }
24-01. Hitt, M. A., Beamish, P. W., Jackson, S. E., & Mathieu, J.E. 2007. Building theoretical and empirical bridges across levels: Multilevelresearch in management. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6): 1385-1399.- f1 R9 Y2 h+ h: J
24-02. Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248.( c8 X9 L% t. V
24-03. Dansereau, F., Yammarino, F. J., & Kohles, J. C. 1999. Multiple levelsof analysis from a longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theorybuilding. Academy of Management Journal, 24: 346-357.) x' C* F c: N
24-04. Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229.
/ ^! [% F& o3 A) l1 L24-05. George, J. M., & James, L. R. 1994. Levels issues in theory development. Academyof Management Review, 19: 639-640. (Critique of Klein et al., 1994)7 G' _* H" P; G; z0 q% }' H* v
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)4 a- p3 x ]4 m3 P
24-07. Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.
5 y7 |- k5 t) k$ H5 D: n24-08. 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.( K M3 P4 ]* D. m5 m% m5 |- ]* G
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.
! R& Y5 D; @5 H4 r24-10. 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).
* a% r/ i% t8 L0 \2 d+ x24-11. Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201.6 r# ~6 L& F4 X% B& J5 K% z5 z
@, e( ]+ p" n0 t( @0 X* t; S* i; U2 EIssue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective: I4 a( }1 L) g9 c, P2 Z* r
25-01. **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922." i# ?# Y" O$ y5 Q8 {
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.
9 K B+ I: j/ w" v4 p2 v c8 q25-03. 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.7 Y, |! ^3 ?9 |3 A
25-04. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338.- q8 b* i ~* L
25-05. Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610.
- O2 {1 @5 u) r25-06. 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.
/ |' \$ I' ^) S25-07. 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.
$ ]# K5 G m' r; o7 K; `* D, }/ ?6 ~
/ L6 Z5 t# N6 v& o; g9 d4 H6 _Issue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory
% c3 [9 b) m O) r1 {9 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.
- x9 [6 R9 J; k; z& C' f5 I26-02. Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307.) m, G- Y; k4 s' F' J3 N. x7 M
26-03. Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346./ @. U% [) m; Z' {- B$ a3 ~
4 ^/ D- U7 @3 F* P" h, Z7 c* RIssue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research0 o8 v9 E# Q. |, H
27-01. **林鉦棽 & 彭台光 2006。多層次管理研究:分析層次的概念、理論和方法。管理學報,23(6): 649-675.
; v7 f) i% l( V- K27-02. **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.
( R' @! |( K' _9 h; Q M27-03. Kline, K. J. &Kozlowski, S. J. 2000. From micro to meso: Critical stepsin conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research. OrganizationalResearch methods, 3(3): 211-236.
3 ?% ?: D1 H8 \) f; L9 z9 w- f2 A' s9 V. l
Issue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process ; }8 v' x* N; c
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.$ P% W( `9 P; N) f P3 T9 `
28-02. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253.
p9 q' t7 O9 n28-03. Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453.
$ W. V" m+ |2 G3 U6 h9 L6 A28-04. Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773., f6 A- v8 z6 h S0 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.& v, R e. R! o# ?8 F( b& d
2 h: h, P9 W1 U% J2 x; s
Issue 29: Measurement and Aggregation
0 l" M/ I5 N& |2 p9 A( s: A29-01. Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765.
) x8 x% S+ u7 u, S" b29-02. Burke, M. J. & Dunlap, W. P. 2002. Estimating interrateragreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5(2): 159-172.
% h9 o+ L% a- V0 O* m; B29-03. James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229.
$ ^. J+ u2 a7 @( o. |& l29-04. **James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimatingwith-group reliability with and without response bias. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 69(1): 85-98.8 O( f* r X9 z' e: f4 E
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., ]& Z4 a* N2 y0 f( B! @; {+ _
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.' V; b+ c4 j% T: l, X8 L2 `/ ]
29-07. Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582.5 x( w! {0 c1 w' \! |( n
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." ^2 ~1 v( b0 Y: t( D4 r
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.
1 U6 L9 M1 C3 C; m; A- m( P- r3 `29-10. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563.
/ i# z3 J2 L. I% {2 _- C29-11. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. 1989. Interrater reliability coefficientscannot be computed when only one stimulus is rated. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 74: 368-370.
( p% G4 A! p7 D* ~/ ?% s! ~4 k29-12. 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. P# U, \& H" Y" S& p1 v
29-13. Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373.
7 Q' s# L/ U+ N0 p# t# X% e29-14. 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.
& s S- C' C9 s29-15. 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.. y. Q( o( f) a0 m* j7 h
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: 69-93.5 `" {7 G: ]; ^
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.. T8 G" y7 _- |! e, D: z
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.; X& B% s; r9 l. I
29-19. McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46.% e% B# q! B: ~4 p7 o$ Z
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.; z7 ]! B) J" C0 i/ x4 {. U
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.
; P; r6 X: }- p$ V7 O6 _& }& M
Z% ^: S4 I) YIssue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis
! M: z, H( q/ K1 W4 y30-01. Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395.
9 @3 t; b8 b$ X' h1 |& o30-02. James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424.
- }/ W% q( T# l9 T30-03. George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.
# X' s. T2 {8 e$ r. v, _: S30-04. Yammarino, F. J., & Markham, S. E. 1992. On theapplication of within and between analysis: Are absence and affect reallygroup-based phenomenon? Journal of Applied Psychology, 77: 168-176.
# X$ J: v& Q1 R5 W! F% 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, 78:798-804.0 O, f# Y* P5 C. s
30-06. **Chan, D. 1998. Functional relations among constructs in thesame content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of compositionmodels. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 234-246. o: s, B1 b: G d
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.
% W4 B h" p* U* v9 ?) n1 |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.
# t) m2 ^ l4 V' R: H+ k30-09. 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.$ u; r9 e8 |) }. n" z
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. 512-553.1 W& M) V4 U8 d! w% @& X+ w8 k
1 u9 l. m7 L/ V) r! G p! RIssue 31: Introduction to HLM
% h7 @1 X; y; ~, r9 B31-01. **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744.
6 c! J* l; h- u h4 a31-02. Hofmann, D. A. & Griffin, M. A., Gavin, M. B. 2000. Theapplication of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K.& K. 467-511.: a7 T' j, v f; M$ p: q8 V
31-03. **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641.
7 g: G+ J- A( D/ I31-04. 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 r3 F+ G- z# X
& L* ^6 i) N- `0 Q3 eIssue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM5 d6 K! J) Z: Z2 `
32-01. Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297.
; ?1 K G; I$ E32-02. **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.
1 s6 Y2 ?8 W) t; M32-03. 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.
, c- F" w+ o* g# ?; G3 J32-04. Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33.: F3 {6 d0 I/ _2 Z4 k8 W
32-05. **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94.; c* E" u! ^. z) O) i+ S
32-06. Glission, C., & James, L. R. 2002. The cross-level effects of culture andclimate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:767-794.0 z5 m5 v( I: ]. g; C3 U
32-07. Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522./ Z) m: @- K* L
32-08. Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255.
6 y9 H8 a% a$ ~2 \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./ P5 A# v% E/ `1 r( }. ~
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): a/ X& `! F1 C& B/ M
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.
9 e: C1 \9 f4 \- q; t32-12. 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.
/ b& }2 Z3 S! p1 E* X9 c p32-13. 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.
& I% d5 |0 c* t" L: }4 p4 L( L% r32-14. Vancouver, J. B. 1997. The application of HLM to the analysisof the dynamic interaction of environment, person and behavior. Journal ofManagement, 23: 795-818.
# S) E- B5 f" _. P32-15. Whitener, E. M. 2001. Do “high commitment” human resource practicesaffect employee commitment? A cross-level analysis using hierarchical linearmodeling. Journal of Management, 27: 515-535.8 \( U' }8 V6 d. M
, o7 R. I/ K6 {% c* v, |" vIssue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research
% N9 t: b9 b! H8 J$ p; V1 K33-01. Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571.$ y+ x, [4 m T! ` U: ^3 f3 N; q
33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582. z A$ L3 ?# } _9 d; J+ d* l
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: 346-357.7 z! Q. A# ?9 e
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.. r+ }# |2 `: O5 n. d5 g
33-05. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. E. 2007. A framework fortesting meso-mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior. Journalof Organizational Behavior, 28: 141-172.
8 ^9 K" Q) z* r' i; n+ v. M9 z4 `2 z33-06. Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277.: E) S' m% n6 a- t: @
: A8 K0 I8 \9 gIssue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review
2 e# n- |' q7 \' V6 eSchwab: Chapters 15 and 21
; @- H1 N4 |" x9 y' P0 }34-01. 應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信
" R/ ?: n I4 w; n34-02. 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.) {+ \" Y3 D* q; G8 B! V2 `
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." u4 ^4 f& b/ ^
34-04. **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout).+ `1 Z# r' Z! m; l6 A1 {9 X
34-05. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515.
' Q/ R9 J) i& H e2 Q; k7 h$ ]( W34-06. **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.
* r& }3 x) f- [) x. F# D34-07. **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6.
- r: M6 n1 W5 l- r% y" n34-08. Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164., [+ e ?! J& g' Z* r; ^0 u
34-09. Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307.
& q* }6 h, ?+ K34-10. Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92.) M3 b& c" h% T
- H1 u4 [ z7 U1 i1 s8 T/ _ kIssue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism
8 M3 H, O6 b3 R' T35-01. **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。8 e9 }, R" o! ?$ E8 P
水流花靜---科學與詩的對話。' s+ \- p" ^2 V6 I& Z
P.121~139.台北:天下文化。! T' A7 l- G( X% }2 M
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.: |7 S9 I @6 S( c( r: u4 I% J, U- N
35-03. Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242.
: y' I% I8 d6 m3 e- x35-04. Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.
9 M# Z- o4 g* Y4 O0 |7 {& P# ]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.& a/ P3 P) \( x' d
35-06. Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312.4 ~3 h2 E6 W* G* E! B7 |$ S( o
35-07. Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2).
& a' G4 b D3 X, M1 q( b/ `$ C35-08. Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620.
% x$ a1 k% E( h, U- D) ?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)
8 M4 S+ v1 O; l35-10. Vandenberg, R. J. & Lance, C. E. 2000. A Review andSynthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, andRecommendations for Organizational Research. Organizational ResearchMethods, 3: 4-70.3 \: v7 _) [! k/ h6 ~8 I( b* [
35-11. Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158.
6 [7 P( R- {3 i. z( n35-12. Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44.' Q8 w9 I: E8 F" s
35-13. Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.
5 t9 ?5 E, m5 Y; b9 n- d5 J* ?' j35-14. **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., D/ E1 w. t- `9 K) c* j G2 Z
) Y8 w+ ?5 l" O$ i% o<<End>> 本帖最后由 Kenneth 于 2011-5-3 15:37 编辑 ! h+ f/ A' N& d _, {# y7 ] h
Y! z5 ]& M$ Y+ q9 w |
|