- 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:( f. ~, \& i& m$ g+ m
http://spaces.isu.edu.tw/~RMonline/website/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=52&Itemid=66
6 d7 G% r' U- R3 @# X$ E' z) W2 u( M5 f
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。, c& P, k1 i2 m. z/ B1 Y- z( o
* e$ q6 k9 f$ ~" I- _Kenny
+ _) D' l- [" c2 a5 w" `1 H( v
3 m! q7 L1 @3 \' c+ |" U, I; u研究方法线上6 P( M+ r+ P7 ^0 C" f
1 Y. v1 x; j3 D5 q
ResearchMethodology I
& ~3 ?$ N7 w5 T1 TOverviewTextbooks! e3 h# l( z. q ] \& J0 |) j8 N! N+ h
Issue1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory % [) m' y, B! Z* C
Issue2: Theory and Hypothesis Development % S" x/ g1 u6 u
Issue3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct $ m2 q) `( b0 N
Issue4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity
* v1 J( _& b+ N9 c8 OIssue5: Measurement: Scale Development . g4 [' z: V# L& _2 Z
Issue6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
' N# m( y; l0 hIssue7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing 4 z& r" v, M& c; {* a* I$ _
Issue8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys
- D5 C6 G; h& u, EIssue9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments 2 ~* m0 K" a( F
Issue10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research ( q1 V& n# p9 v z3 V% m1 `
Issue11: Statistical Analysis and Inference" }0 I4 d- M2 z4 T
Issue12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation 4 r( g: ]. s9 k( l
Issue13: Testing mediating effects/ O% @, `% E9 ]' Y9 ~4 q
Issue14: Testing moderating effects ' c- f$ N; ]2 W6 ~: }
Issue15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
2 H5 z3 l8 B' G: C; TIssue16: Reliability and Construct Validation
6 U3 \8 r9 w2 ]& ZIssue17: Common Method Variance 8 ~% Q4 J% g/ F' B+ H2 J2 c
Issue18: Data Non-independence ( c! V" d+ U+ c* t+ E1 g
Issue19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and Indigenous Research)
3 }% @0 W9 o$ X$ ]6 R# }Issue20: Structural Equation Modeling: S- v( U+ b& q4 ^
( z) W! G, \- a6 hMajor Textbooks:0 X/ l" I1 l! s. ?$ |$ o) V" P
Kerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
( H: S0 \% V; eSchwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book]% u. B+ t. m9 N3 d
Klein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon] {0 r3 u" |6 X$ h+ M
Supplementary Books:
9 ?+ w9 s( @2 J1 ]% } V( v* A3 k7 S( cCohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon]
; V* u; Q7 R8 I* D8 UCook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]
7 ]' d0 r1 i7 Y: J2 o9 xHair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. MultivariateData Analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJrentice-Hall. [Amazon]
6 ]) d6 ?% |; E- b/ s& v( g) C+ b" r+ OPedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.! M6 ?; e* G- W' J7 X
Rogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.8 U6 n" V: q( U" n
Journal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6).
5 P, f* s0 P% e/ D" \Academy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2).
2 w. ] h/ {2 BMultivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2).) V" r- P* v |
Leadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1).
% |5 r! m, r$ S7 y3 n9 Q' CAcademy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6.) j. r& R8 y. x, j( l8 s1 [
Kreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.8 r# l. R9 M2 g% o0 v" ?
Raudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7 w$ B6 {. A( ?% F1 h. dRoberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
) y0 q8 g6 b+ f' sRoberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.: e6 g8 H2 x* w$ u
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。
' [( f4 o& r2 z2 D: z8 E b7 h: g6 v q
0 E3 c% b* T+ D1 z2 W; o( J, KIssue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory# x: w, Y6 x# M/ I- b, E) u4 T' c( Z
K & L: Chapter 1) R+ \0 T) \3 ]4 R
01-01. Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks.& P$ ] p7 T" k6 ?
01-02. Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91.6 |. I) A) c6 L0 o/ h4 C, h. O
01-03. Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 584-602.
6 ]3 T8 n( b) `& }& k3 a+ d7 H01-04. Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128.; ?2 f# @# g! y7 E
01-05. Wright, T. A., & Wright, V. P. 1999. Ethicalresponsibility and the organizational researcher: A committed-to-participantresearch perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior,20(7): 1107-1112." u! \4 K* T" N, I/ G4 v$ N8 V
01-06. Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly,41: 262-269.
. h! J4 H7 {1 U- Y- I+ [! ^01-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。
0 W! ^$ L- I. D+ b& t- V1 x01-08. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch2: 研究的起點:提問。0 g/ {7 M( b; n! k* n& c
# p, @- g3 g9 D
Issue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development
1 i! g* x# C0 T1 x, d02-01. Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2
$ o2 z0 h1 F+ R$ n: V5 ~" u02-02. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review,14: 496-515.: L$ ^. k0 [& Z2 O- r
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.
+ Y2 s4 X0 k( M5 L, ^% Y9 X02-04. Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? Academy of ManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095.
% s9 h3 e( J" z02-05. Davis, M. S. 1971. That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenologyof sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of Social Science,1(2): 309-344.
& l8 \. E' o x X/ M+ o# m/ ?02-06. Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. 1998. Trust and distrust: new relationships andrealities. Academy of Management Review, 23: 438-458.
( e) m" b; a* O; T! K02-07. Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010.
3 ^5 G: r V7 j; `! \) J; u* @02-08. Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441.8 C% B! Q2 s' q$ U2 S, f# _( T
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.
; |3 g$ X8 x1 [/ ?, K02-10. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.
& f2 k' v. }3 X7 f) j02-11. Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.
' y7 U, \9 A; |* |$ e02-12. Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.1 b9 O+ Q: v& m* J2 [* a& t2 _& [
02-13. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。* Q6 P0 T" @: C2 x" ~3 m, I3 p
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.& B; o4 P3 f- p, P) N$ c) Z
V7 ~3 P$ i, D+ }& LIssue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion]
9 c6 y9 Z3 L$ ^03-01. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192.
5 l( T8 K* m3 B6 X. W$ ]$ L03-02. 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.) C' j1 j- P& _5 z
03-03. Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Toward a taxonomy of multidimensionalconstructs. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 741-755.$ g# [* q6 k6 d: }' Q) p7 x. O: v
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.
( ]+ n, Y! A0 _4 g, l03-05. 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.) }& u" `# s! f v* |
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.
# B& r7 F# X; a: O4 [9 G03-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch12
- P1 U- h% I) Y- I9 Q
. Z/ a1 H1 l( @( j# EIssue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion]
( o; Q" d4 v+ V**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 8
* \) S+ J$ I. p5 O7 y FK & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28.
, u7 z+ r5 x: d G2 |04-01. Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.
0 r. _- {6 m1 R( \4 |8 @; h04-02. **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.
. i9 x" R* W: H4 F04-03. Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical conclusion validity for organizational science researchers: Areview. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 164-208.
9 Z! Z% f9 E& ^/ W& F6 _2 f04-04. Schriesheim, C. A., Cogliser, C. C., Scandura, T. A., Lankau,M. J., & Powers, K. J. 1999. An empirical comparison of approaches forquantitatively assessing the content adequacy of paper-and-pencil instruments. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 2: 140-156.
: H! p5 H6 ^, A1 c; R9 `7 U8 l04-05. Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375.
* `2 {4 ]* K6 q/ q8 {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.; Y5 |9 q8 K! p. Y- d
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.
2 a+ D# ^! D3 ]8 U& O% t% M04-08. Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96.6 Z1 A4 p1 N5 J- \% y
/ }& ]- k6 r1 u2 hIssue 5: Measurement: Scale Development* R- R/ O2 N9 J$ v9 o
**Schwab: Chapter 4) c) ~7 C# e; A; Y
05-01. **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121.- V" A- Q. F G; S" X
05-02. DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.8 W9 F1 G$ D2 a8 M
05-03. Vandenberg, R. J. & Lance, C. E. 2000. A Review andSynthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, andRecommendations for Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,3: 4-70.
: M+ D# w2 P B05-04. **Farh, J. L., Zhong, C. B. & Organ, D. W. 2004. Organizational citizenship behavior inthe People’s Republic of China, Organization Science, 15: 241-253.& M9 B f" K8 D% ~4 L/ B
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.
, {. a& n/ I s( X) l( i5 ^05-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch110 }" p3 q* F: Y4 b
( X @6 u$ r6 eIssue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research% x3 o4 X, A* [) s. T
MOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3).1 n9 _6 h: N2 G8 Q/ w6 E$ \
8 n) f. R& _0 k' v F
Issue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing: m0 {2 y( L; h3 J
K & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 59 L0 z6 g9 ^* G" @* J. I6 j* p
**Schwab: Chapter 13* q C3 }& 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.- ]; E. g% T- ?1 _5 j% A
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.
2 i$ y9 u: R* H. R1 Y07-03. **Cortina, J. M., & Folger, R. G. 1998. When is it acceptable to accept a nullhypothesis: No way, Jose? Organizational Research Methods, 1: 334-350.
5 |- x Y0 Q8 L* Y: C, }1 y07-04. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch5
& L/ q2 a9 s- x* N2 P" }) N! H07-05. 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.! H) \$ u9 Q3 ]0 K# p8 I# J
$ {3 N1 F5 ]8 S5 ~- f$ L! {7 w
Issue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys
# U) `6 U5 o) b! O( [1 ?0 O6 {& l**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 7 F) J5 D# ^ X- M9 q
K & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 290 [5 a/ o; E9 l
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.' g& s* o/ F0 t: G+ Y! y( ?: `- v
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.# h0 ]) ~0 G+ D; `" J& i
08-03. Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159.
; [! ^+ Z* M$ n08-04. Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.8 I. h- Y% `4 o' q% v! ~2 r
08-05. **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008.
0 H2 j7 _3 }* J08-06. 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.
9 i' h; z# X& V+ n2 p: o. Y08-07. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295. C/ s6 [+ F9 u( A2 H1 \/ i/ O' q
08-08. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch8
9 b) |! W. L0 ~% G7 J3 F08-09. 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.
; g+ A5 L. q/ z2 e4 E* v08-10. Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179.+ L' q& D( d: F0 B% e
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.# c2 c2 j. s, P9 r8 r# ]! r J
08-12. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.
7 f* ?2 v% |0 O: A m1 R9 v
" m7 E6 x8 l s" S7 WIssue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments" q7 T& s6 T7 _, X* B0 A* ?
**Schwab: Chapter 6
$ c O* ]7 V) f8 W- Y6 U$ CK & L: Chapters 24 and 22
2 p3 O9 B' s5 ~7 m' k, S& @09-01. Cook, T. D. & Shadish, W. R. 1994. Social experiments:Some developments over the past fifteen years. Annual Review of Psychology,45: 545-580.
; h! X+ j g$ w9 ]% 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.
0 F5 d9 ^0 H0 O09-03. 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.
# h+ X* j. Z, m. w- x. Y2 Y! p09-04. 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.
) R, F8 X# i$ W9 y7 Q09-05. Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.# c, r/ R, r) ~- y
09-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch6, ch7.& W, K7 q" b# l- i
/ o9 y1 ]1 @, V( R# D0 K
Issue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research
) Y) U8 h! c' ~10-01. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.
& ?4 `- |2 w( n& ]3 E, }$ [, `10-02. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576.2 Y* e; p6 ?1 _/ S
10-03. Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.
6 e4 g* n# A) a4 b. O' \2 u1 l9 ?' c10-04. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441.
6 h+ y+ \/ P+ c. U10-05. 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.- L0 O! @' D* T6 m
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.
' _( Y" \0 q' b& x6 p H o9 c4 x. e u6 P10-07. Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. 1991. The dynamics ofintense work groups: A study of British String Quartets, AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 36: 165-186.+ k/ W9 O O$ Q( N6 C2 e& v
10-08. Silvester, J. 2004. Attributional coding. In C. Cassell and G.Symon (eds.) Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in OrganizationalResearch. 228-241. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
+ u/ t/ `, Z6 l L10-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch104 c( _6 [! a2 I( w/ X, b, c) y
10-10. Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455.0 K5 `. j5 P* n) z6 B
, j ~0 V x2 Q7 M# p2 W3 X1 bIssue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion]
3 L2 j' G3 X9 D z1 C1 W**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13
( d- n4 m# J5 N+ m" h, n; X# FK & L: Chapters 9
2 ~7 L, |" M4 o }11-01. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759. `; L+ I# Q1 I0 _ m
11-02. Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218.
; h6 {+ G5 J+ ?" j# k2 R11-03. McFarland, L.A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2003).Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods. Journalof Management, 29(5), 641-661.2 C$ g% t) O3 h& h, E* v' q/ P
11-04. Rauniar, R. & Shah, S. (2002). Statistical significance vs.practical (meaningful or clinical or biological) significance for academic andnon-academic research. Decision Sciences Institute 2002 Annual MeetingProceedings, 2469-2472.
8 f, \" Q9 O% Q11-05. LaHuis, D.M., & Avis, J. M. (2007). Using multilevel randomcoefficient modeling to investigate rater effects in performance ratings. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 10, 97-107.
- I1 M0 K: P4 R4 o# F11-06. 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.' \4 q9 ]/ ~8 t1 y7 Q
" {6 T: Y1 H9 X- ^9 X4 f9 E& P
Issue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation% T7 Q7 d5 N6 o. T$ d& `5 G- ]$ ?# p
**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19
& b, {* o2 H O7 C5 @K & L: Chapters 33 and 34
; c$ y \0 b. y* @- x5 x- q5 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.
4 Q/ p5 d% I. D, K0 O" v8 N3 ~12-02. James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321." X$ f+ ~ Y0 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.# H( M4 ?% \) P4 ?# b
12-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.2 ]) z; N E# b; M, | C
12-05. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch14
: N; w! O+ M4 F) W( g. a! y1 V# q6 Y4 H: h3 z7 ?$ D h
Issue 13: Testing mediating effects+ ^9 ~ m, B4 b" q
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.
7 C, x' `# l( r- Y13-02. Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358.
/ s `3 h+ r8 {13-03. James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363.! S! @6 r& C1 N8 G; P' Q" U" ~
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.) }3 y# Y4 P5 P1 w' K5 Q0 E; ]
13-05. Pituch, K. A., Whittaker, T. A., & Stapleton, L. M. 2005. Acomparison of methods to test for mediation in multisite experiments. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 40: 1-24.( k% X/ e {2 N9 [
13-06. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47.
: g0 w: C9 @4 L9 G& R) c- z# x7 }' z13-07. Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398.. K0 N1 F7 ?$ x* m: W3 a
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.
: n. } S" P: l& r13-09. Freedman, L. S., & Schatzkin, A. 1992. Sample size forstudying intermediate endpoints within intervention trials of observationalstudies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 136: 1148-1159.
4 N% j+ d! O$ e4 l13-10. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619.
) ?: E. N R- d/ O' X' B13-11. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158.
' q/ r# w0 U% a8 P' m13-12. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181.
4 m; m3 b/ ^, k) i13-13. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62.
$ r, T4 G5 O/ W* ]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.* t' |' [: S5 {, }
13-15. Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515.# u" d8 F5 E( c! {. a
13-16. Hoyle, R. H., & Kenny, D. A. 1999. Statistical power andtests of mediation. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Statistical strategies forsmall sample research. Newbury Park: Sage.
! @! S; u' {8 Q3 q9 R9 G7 z( {13-17. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107.
' p# V& E% v0 h; G) ~. ]13-18. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.0 ^( J3 s$ X" n7 C4 g( m; i
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." d% i3 [+ d' q, W; {( ?
13-20. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62.8 U p& K) m, J$ ~% F; N& C
13-21. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445.* b# B6 v1 _. E9 {/ T0 U) R/ s
13-22. Smith, E. 1982. Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations:Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 43: 248-259.
. N( w0 F7 o# W1 m9 B13-23. 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.
0 l9 p. _/ b6 p/ z$ i# _3 T# I) s( N, n- \0 z- C" q
Issue 14: Testing moderating effects
3 W2 }* g$ ~* @7 [ |14-01. Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A.T. 2002. Time, teams, task performance: Changing effects of surface-anddeep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of management Journal,45(2): 1029-1045.
3 z4 r( g9 K0 E- \6 N$ `/ [0 _; W14-02. Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417.
6 w' {% @) g: u$ |* t k14-03. 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.
) c, q5 c: T4 p: o7 {4 M14-04. 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.
m: k5 z# S) D14-05. Stone E. F. & Hollenbeck, J. R. 1989. Clarifyingcontroversial issues surrounding statistical procedures for detecting moderatorvariables: Empirical evidence and related matters. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 74(1): 3-10.
* L( b: U- s8 u+ J14-06. 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.
& M" _* N7 a! a Q
$ x+ @/ x7 V: R, g5 x3 JIssue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
3 i% N E |9 e9 V: cSchwab: Chapters 11 and 19
/ K$ z& z+ U; g% D- `) ?" tK & L: Chapters 33 and 34
( Z, E3 U' ]& L/ Q- u/ Z9 P15-01. Edwards, J. R. & Lambert, L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1): 1-22.
; N; Y9 b/ O* M7 Y$ E3 f8 M) M15-02. 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.
9 Q! a" H7 |5 V7 }15-03. Edwards, J. R., & Lambert L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12: 1-22.4 f* Y1 g3 L6 x) D: _ d9 }- i9 z- [& Y
15-04. Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128.( ]' f. D/ o, Z: A9 }
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. a5 M. @. w; W: o( o4 K
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.
/ @% h( H# }9 J \/ |15-07. Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444.8 v$ j5 u- U, I' x
* [( X1 w7 P! v0 [ V+ fIssue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation
& j6 N& q# o9 ?/ I; s7 j, Y. l" lSchwab: Chapters 14 and 17
2 c- Q+ y5 S. U) D: _K & L: Chapter 28) t4 f/ q" c& i7 Q% ?. n$ ]
16-01. Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87.: w D* y, }) t* v& P0 t: C
16-02. Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical Conclusion Validity for Organizational Science Research: A Review. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 1: 164-208.0 d D/ D+ Q5 v2 b' G% Y5 E# `+ \
16-03. Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105.
/ X1 ]( q3 k1 W4 }0 F16-04. Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400.
1 d8 r5 y, p9 `, e" M, a16-05. Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302.
, b1 H3 L1 \) W5 F. q16-06. 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.! ~$ T" f. _$ t- ?7 I
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. 3-43.5 Q9 [+ ?1 Z. C# H; z
: j3 V: u0 u# m& Z2 \/ |' A) }$ T
Issue 17: Common Method Variance- _. S b; }7 g8 R
**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 20' e |- R2 a. 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.
; j w6 `5 A% m$ e( F17-02. Doty, D. H. &Glick, W. H. 1998. Common methods bias: Does common methods variance reallybias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 374-406.
0 o; ^4 h0 b/ b- z8 S7 U# y17-03. Goffin, R. D. & Gellatly, I. R. 2001. A multi-raterassessment of organizational commitment: Are self-report measures biased? Journalof Organizational Behavior, 22: 437-451.
# E E- p- O- r/ c/ c9 ^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): 525-530.2 ^, Q: m* S0 \# u/ ?; v+ j
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.
9 P$ Q! D7 M3 f8 d; Y' `- |17-06. Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational researchroblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544.; S1 p( V" K0 q* a
17-07. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223.: W& @% H1 Q) B3 O) L* }- s" y
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.
4 J9 A! L+ z) `$ s5 w5 k17-09. Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232.
. e& ~/ n" f9 B" l5 V m
, p6 Q( R+ k1 R) D* R4 QIssue 18: Data Non-independence
1 h4 c/ s v; n# p8 T! {2 V9 j18-01. Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735.: d+ M1 p" N. l3 F# a
18-02. Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75.0 b+ c. [' {1 ~0 ?
18-03. Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.
R2 M8 A, M; C5 ~7 F18-04. 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.
! |: ^8 S- q; D' v$ w18-05. 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.; U, [, {4 C5 j) Y8 P& M6 e* A
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.
- z: ]9 y: E( V: u18-07. 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.) i( Y5 H' j4 M5 b3 A! d7 A- e
" G! A9 c4 N! R% \( _2 O( tIssue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch)
9 \* E& ^6 z) s) ^! b19-01. 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.
6 H( b' {* S2 m' b19-02. Boisot, M. & Child. J. 1996. From fiefs to clans andnetwork capitalism: Explaining China’s emerging economic order. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 41(4): 600-628.1 }9 l2 J: X$ E7 S
19-03. Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209.+ n! h7 v- j& B' t( [
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.* W. z8 p: s: f5 P! w$ p |, ^9 R
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.
* g; p7 k* n; T/ c z19-06. Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974.
9 d- k' k3 z+ Z( `* T+ R19-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151.+ T8 T0 C- C& d: {5 F+ y
19-08. Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215.
4 O! h8 z1 y; K7 l19-09. 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。, m+ O6 V. o$ f$ M" y
- ?+ ^3 |: e2 E
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。 w$ z/ z2 N* [/ b" D0 S0 M2 d
6 ]' E: X1 C" {19-11. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰
+ K$ H; T/ u+ q1 n; P: I) S* I" h/ q2 r
19-12. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch17, f+ \5 D: L! P5 L0 A9 Z8 W
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.) H; _' s3 L. A' ^' s8 }, \
19-14. Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia PacificJournal of Management, 21, 491-513.7 _, V$ j) o4 w. `( z) a
6 B# [5 u1 T' D. K- f% D+ G1 ~
Issue 20: Structural Equation Modeling
4 B N. ^1 g! E6 @ V2 C- cK & L: Chapter 35.
6 ?. E! x! c6 T+ T20-01. 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。( k$ ]% V& J/ B6 H* U
20-02. Feldt, T., Kivimaki, M., Rantala, A., & Tolvanen, A. 2004.Sense of coherence and work characteristics: A cross-lagged structural equationmodeling with managers. Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 77: 323-342.. p- Y( ?2 i" W
20-03. Jonge, J. de, Dormann, C., Janssen, P. P. M., Dollard, M. F.,Landeweerd, J. A., & Nijhuis, F. J. N. 2001. Testing reciprocalrelationships between job characteristics and psychological well-being: Across-lagged structural equation model. Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 74: 29-46.
. H8 V$ d; Q% S& A5 W3 Q6 w/ m2 c20-04. Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172.
) Q5 C$ s. ^# w* p4 J) 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.
/ k6 q8 {8 _8 u2 y8 u! H20-06. 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.
! _; I3 }3 X2 P/ Z$ O# u20-07. 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." O" n2 l8 n) n5 o9 e, W! R! g* F$ _
20-08. Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. 2006. Problems with itemparceling for comfirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 9: 369-403.
- t6 W9 r& f" r4 r20-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch13
+ J* J/ X; a9 o% x. O7 @3 l5 `
+ h% R5 c/ w8 z- F$ aIssue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism
3 u3 [: ~" m; ~" F. v* `7 c21-01. 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 J9 x; T0 i# e21-02. Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.
( M5 V s- R) o1 f+ {1 b1 n21-03. Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14.* L( `2 b6 P5 r5 h! u" L
21-04. Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652.8 M# X' z/ d$ g6 c$ f* H# Z
21-05. Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607.
9 L A: }8 A- W$ v/ T2 [21-06. Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613.
! {5 `8 {/ Y/ C4 J: D6 k; K21-07. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68). w- B$ P' ]0 i o, |+ E
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.& Q' [" M0 \8 E+ n i
21-09. von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53).& [# a8 n, [( y& ~: q9 U
21-10. Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50).
* g4 {+ l4 q! d8 l# V
: U1 r# p/ L* @- w+ x' R5 r3 qIssue 22: Level Fallacies
2 g2 X! s) [) {2 O/ U- ]; @22-01. Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73.( V% U6 ^. R% E3 z4 Q, S: X
22-02. Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191.) R- S9 E- N+ e6 ]
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.. @ F! x4 {6 E/ T+ g. J: z: o( j3 F
22-04. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357.' a! |7 S0 \! _* Y
22-05. **Schwartz, S. (1994). The fallacy of the ecological fallacy:The potential misuse of a concept and the consequences. American Journal ofPublic Health, 84, 819-824.+ {( {1 i9 w$ e9 f) ]' e* b
22-06. Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777.' @$ r4 E1 ~8 r/ \
, I6 m n0 i2 J& I7 e; hIssue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena6 u( K0 Y, J6 f/ A+ W- A5 X
23-01. James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112.
6 S; w' r* g' H6 I. n8 K23-02. Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller.
$ f! C1 S0 l* J: H: u* F* W5 N) Z23-03. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Doherty, M. L. 1989. Integrationof leadership and climate: Examination of a neglected issue. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 74(4): 546-553.1 G) P; m* Z8 x' J( ?
23-04. Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540.8 o: j' b* |$ `' U6 v9 ]
23-05. **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53.
' I! u; h4 M% n4 R2 C4 p23-06. 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.+ D0 `* p& [( t. M0 H S- T
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.) p5 t; v$ T) Z/ H9 T& v1 t
23-08. Horwitz, S. K., & Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects ofteam diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic analysis of team demography.Journal of Management, 33, 6, 987-1005.! K3 K$ e+ w" r x) x- i
23-09. Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42.. z! z# Q; R- O, e. d
23-10. Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348.) f3 }9 a2 S5 C
23-11. Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.
2 b& Y2 K* |8 \0 |2 z9 M8 g23-12. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.5 e" W# o& q% T0 H5 ]. l2 N9 f6 k: V# E
23-13. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. 1981.Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 501-524.
5 {9 y3 Y9 Q9 K& [* k% y23-14. **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974.
. `- E/ q. s0 `) G$ B" I7 x$ S: t0 t. ^8 Y# Q& v7 p- }
Issue 24: Levels in Theory Building
# v: y& W8 ], j5 o6 k6 }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.
3 z7 o! E, l* ]2 O; G2 ~$ I& M P24-02. Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248.' Y+ z3 u/ ^; w! ^; l6 B
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: 346-357.9 K: }1 D: C3 R9 h+ H8 R1 h
24-04. Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229.% X8 ~7 H$ M: {' @+ F. y* Y
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)
2 E) O+ Z. M4 |) a) }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)" b7 i1 b0 D+ |- w
24-07. Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.
4 m+ t, q3 d; D9 {" n% 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.- l) |% o) z; S1 `& u
24-09. Glick, W. H. (1980). Problems in cross-level inference. In K.H.Roberts & L. Burstein (eds.) Issues in Aggregation. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. 17-30.
# [9 Y' I( N) E6 I, K. e5 z+ \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).* t+ v B3 q; s+ h- _' q
24-11. Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201.
1 U1 @6 ?0 |8 @ d
! O& B3 z5 @$ w0 r5 t8 SIssue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective- z8 Q" H6 Z- t* S* W6 m, I8 m
25-01. **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922.( q: w8 C9 p' P+ R+ V9 A
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.
B3 {% m& j5 [3 H1 |8 H25-03. 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.$ x6 ^9 P1 U$ |3 f2 [
25-04. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338./ Q8 N2 x+ }- W
25-05. Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610.
* x0 K$ ^$ p* G& G25-06. 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.; M8 s9 o$ L1 A/ R
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: 55-110.5 z6 J, b7 ?' F$ w, s
+ D7 Q3 t& m8 R" U
Issue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory 7 ^$ O9 ? H8 R% T
26-01. **Kozlowski, S.W.J. & Kline, K. 2000. A multilevel approach to theory andresearch in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K.and K, 3-90.+ }8 W: G- ^# x! ^
26-02. Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307.
3 K! P5 ~2 V G2 a( u26-03. Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346.3 i4 H- @; b( [9 M, M
; L2 X4 Q W' A( b4 V
Issue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research
6 w3 U' j! t: v3 X$ l M27-01. **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.
" u$ X' c: ^" P7 x* e7 B9 Y; a27-02. **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., ]2 u; @; q* k
27-03. Kline, K. J. &Kozlowski, S. J. 2000. From micro to meso: Critical stepsin conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research. OrganizationalResearch methods, 3(3): 211-236. Q g" M. C; G" k
5 A5 M5 E+ _* ]- g) h3 z- z ^
Issue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process * }5 J E& F3 q n+ n0 i+ W" y
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.& [3 l- Z! P6 ^; m) }
28-02. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253.
$ \7 t) ?5 f. Y1 m# r28-03. Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453.
0 C; o8 E, Q$ a; J5 ?28-04. Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773.' J$ Z: r1 Z# O
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.
; x) p6 c6 s1 H5 E
! e" P3 a/ ?+ S1 tIssue 29: Measurement and Aggregation- f' Z* I6 z8 m0 y1 f( X
29-01. Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765.
, S2 l7 @7 T3 W- _$ c. w29-02. Burke, M. J. & Dunlap, W. P. 2002. Estimating interrateragreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5(2): 159-172.' D U% Z) i6 t
29-03. James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229.
$ d2 t, G' A* y4 k0 X9 ?* o* N29-04. **James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimatingwith-group reliability with and without response bias. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 69(1): 85-98.' p- _. W4 v3 t
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.
9 \# a! k0 U( F2 z29-06. 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.
' t; k8 z l7 x' N' ]7 w29-07. Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582.
: j( ?* b) A4 _% r29-08. Freeman, J. 1980. The unit problem in organizational research.In W.M. Evan (Ed.), Frontiers in organization and management (pp.59-68). NY: Praeger.
, o0 h, x; g3 T29-09. Campbell, D. T. 1958. Common fate, similarity, and otherindices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities.Behavioral Science, 3: 14-25.
" J0 O* Y3 D) P, |8 `9 Q! {1 J* G29-10. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563.6 [7 k& o; c6 I# e
29-11. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. 1989. Interrater reliability coefficientscannot be computed when only one stimulus is rated. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 74: 368-370.6 j" h$ a+ V: P& f3 V
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.) y# p) d6 G6 i) \8 D: q- X
29-13. Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373.
* G% J# N& v- a) {" T. `29-14. Bliese, P. D., & Halverson, R. R. 1998. Group size andmeasures of group-level properties: An examination of eta-squared and ICCvalues. Journal of Management, 24: 157-172.
2 o: w* v0 h4 u k29-15. 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.
# W' j$ m: {' ]% W: i2 O- w* H29-16. **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." [: U F: s" {' x2 [7 t
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.
0 C! C/ M @5 J. [# P0 _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.
6 p* c/ h0 H( I# }: k# M0 f29-19. McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46.6 N' p% H/ t$ C7 @/ v$ R- W
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, 306-307.5 T6 G# H; t' i) ^7 Y" d
29-21. Burke, M. J., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. S. 1999. Onaverage deviation indices for estimating interrater agreement.Organizational Research Methods, 2(1): 49-68.8 m2 W& k) H3 m' v" ^1 @8 p8 O8 ~
) e' g7 T, X/ `6 V" ?1 M( DIssue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis
5 }, M$ X1 }0 v& H9 i30-01. Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395.
* @. [) }0 i% X/ |3 ]30-02. James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424.) [+ j B/ X- j! Z) u
30-03. George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.
6 n2 p: Y! T4 m8 @1 ?7 ?30-04. Yammarino, F. J., & Markham, S. E. 1992. On theapplication of within and between analysis: Are absence and affect reallygroup-based phenomenon? Journal of Applied Psychology, 77: 168-176.
$ I6 g8 v" B; I/ F7 k& S- n30-05. 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 h( x0 W5 s* V& B$ z7 s8 `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.* B' r$ }4 e# r; d1 U
30-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. H. 1989. On the empiricalidentifications of dimensions of cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20(2): 133-151.6 r! b/ l# Z" F# H
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.# U* d% |9 l7 o/ Q y t9 s; |
30-09. Dansereau, F., Yammarino, F. J., & Kohles, J. 1999. Multiple levels ofanalysis from a longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 24: 346-357.8 _0 R% i2 [0 _: e: x& p7 d, [
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.! [4 { o/ E T ~
$ J0 |$ C# ]+ GIssue 31: Introduction to HLM
2 k1 _* ]+ [' {31-01. **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744.
2 n6 W( E) o9 L. Q. A; D& D) o31-02. Hofmann, D. A. & Griffin, M. A., Gavin, M. B. 2000. Theapplication of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K.& K. 467-511.
# ]- d4 t2 M& j) n# S" c* y31-03. **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641.' Y+ C/ s" i m& Q3 N5 Q
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: 3-16.1 y3 h5 k Q2 ~' B( D
# Y1 O$ s, S$ z6 a8 o: a. lIssue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM0 w8 K( \8 P2 v3 y) w" l4 M5 I8 P
32-01. Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297.
0 ], w$ A6 @5 d! a `9 |2 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.
/ ?; r0 g! u2 g* C1 e& [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.
; c' ?/ [! H5 n/ n32-04. Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33.
6 N. V, v# |9 I32-05. **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94.4 w; K; i- C3 g; D; W1 R: Q
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.
3 g- R8 {8 n$ e6 T( |2 }+ c, h32-07. Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522.# e; `1 X3 A+ W% R! v/ b
32-08. Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255.0 Z! k& X6 W$ t) s7 Y" Y; E0 t
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.
6 }: D8 M/ @9 J, |, v$ y! C32-10. 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)
7 c; N# K+ o8 _$ a32-11. Sacco, J. M., & Schmitt, N. 2005. A dynamic multilevel model of demographicdiversity and misfit effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2):203-231.
7 K3 @+ U. p6 r7 g: e% O32-12. 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: 951-973.2 H! O! Z7 K. M# b! a5 q
32-13. Steward, G. L., Fulmer, I. S., & Barrick, M. R. 2005. Anexploration of member roles as a multilevel linking mechanism for individualtraits and team outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 58: 343-365.- s) N1 R, \ u) z' s, L/ v% s( e
32-14. Vancouver, J. B. 1997. The application of HLM to the analysisof the dynamic interaction of environment, person and behavior. Journal ofManagement, 23: 795-818.2 G$ B1 b" e& c. x* p
32-15. Whitener, E. M. 2001. Do “high commitment” human resource practicesaffect employee commitment? A cross-level analysis using hierarchical linearmodeling. Journal of Management, 27: 515-535.
6 O+ ]7 A' r( x7 b/ V' `7 f
* s/ {" C( P4 F; P# {Issue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research
% N1 z' s5 B' p; Q; u33-01. Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571.* _" N- ~# i; o7 R" A
33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582.
( A" N! `/ n. i8 i" V5 }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.
4 S; P) [+ V$ I$ c- ?$ V33-04. 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.
* M9 U8 _2 o6 ]& X! H7 _7 I9 Z33-05. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. E. 2007. A framework fortesting meso-mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior. Journalof Organizational Behavior, 28: 141-172.$ O! L8 k+ A" l6 H. B# f
33-06. Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277.4 }1 w2 L0 @& t# e
; ^" t$ m8 l( E# D( c& x$ `Issue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review6 v, H) Y8 k5 W
Schwab: Chapters 15 and 21
' d0 z/ X; J0 p- B& ?34-01. 應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信
3 f* ?3 ]3 P. q. x; ^: O34-02. 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.
% B! I, G$ Z! S+ ~4 j- m1 M5 S) F9 T34-03. 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): 9-15.6 o! S' Q7 I9 j$ T/ N1 J' ~
34-04. **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout).
% Z; m5 P- }5 Q. Q$ z( D2 L34-05. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515.5 @# i3 Y$ o* U6 B' b
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.5 [; @3 X; o' ?& Z$ N1 _" Z+ I: D
34-07. **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6.( ^+ _5 H$ o6 U- R3 r
34-08. Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164.; j4 u6 d$ Y5 q2 R# I, x9 \. `
34-09. Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307." ~5 B O# v0 N: F- P L
34-10. Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92.! }, }9 [5 ]! \" A: `
; z: y$ b8 L2 [( ~, A8 I
Issue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism
! i9 J$ g# e) z! Y" \1 Z35-01. **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。
% D. r, o/ |" d+ J$ n) p9 U水流花靜---科學與詩的對話。/ H" g% ^' ]) l* F. l
P.121~139.台北:天下文化。
+ ?% Z, Y5 }# j% L9 {$ `8 q. Z35-02. 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.
, X! v S3 X, j/ R' B35-03. Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242.
8 E/ @# [1 E3 p) A: m35-04. Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.
0 H. r. m3 | T8 J2 N# c35-05. 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.
0 J" Z) N. f: h35-06. Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312.
6 n7 D/ d N1 [$ i. R0 ]; K$ s& [35-07. Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2).
; B$ O4 I. @* [" [' R. ?1 S, j35-08. Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620.1 Y: H1 r/ F3 {2 E6 G
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 T1 n8 h; h p; S j/ t35-10. Vandenberg, R. J. & Lance, C. E. 2000. A Review andSynthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, andRecommendations for Organizational Research. Organizational ResearchMethods, 3: 4-70.4 {' g" B- Z/ F1 ?
35-11. Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158.
; M T0 ~! T$ L6 v3 i% u+ T/ O35-12. Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44.
3 T1 l- ~$ b2 b0 f5 _35-13. Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.1 {4 z/ ]9 K# T+ Y0 `0 A
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.* c6 J) s8 d H( m
# m2 o& d7 p/ Z" N2 ]6 D<<End>> 本帖最后由 Kenneth 于 2011-5-3 15:37 编辑 2 @. d* }3 {9 ^6 F
" ^' I I# i& F3 N" T: q4 b
|
|