研究方法线上

Kenneth

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：
http://spaces.isu.edu.tw/~RMonline/website/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=52&Itemid=66
$ g: v7 m( A! K7 o
) u% Z& Q7 ^8 |, I& u3 p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。
. K- M0 ]9 X* G" z
- H2 Q2 _6 E5 {( D& JKenny
6 f; o3 J8 Q& J" u5 w- E1 R
研究方法线上

ResearchMethodology I
OverviewTextbooks
Issue1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory
# U& u4 M6 g) F! bIssue2: Theory and Hypothesis Development
2 x7 C# u7 V4 {3 vIssue3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct
5 e! Q. V, V! K* t7 o6 a" MIssue4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity
  }  h/ e  u: ^8 O; cIssue5: Measurement: Scale Development
: N6 u+ I# {& D8 w/ I  }# @Issue6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
Issue7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
# D% e" F! O7 e5 p- i+ M$ zIssue8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys
& p( Q0 _+ q6 M' J" d9 B" `- fIssue9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments
Issue10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research
( P% f8 ^/ F6 J/ X- lIssue11: Statistical Analysis and Inference
Issue12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation
6 k& H4 ]. e1 Z/ N. MIssue13: Testing mediating effects
Issue14: Testing moderating effects
  x& k( Y  l4 q6 I; o/ x) iIssue15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
' i; Z, l5 C8 h( x- Y" T5 ]  jIssue16: Reliability and Construct Validation
( q0 m3 E; w% ]* KIssue17: Common Method Variance
, i; V) \/ k+ g# d9 L. C' \# X1 sIssue18: Data Non-independence
. Y8 `+ \; V" k: l) O$ u! a9 v& t: m0 |Issue19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and Indigenous Research)
Issue20: Structural Equation Modeling
/ n- F0 C( s% c& j# l1 t

ResearchMethodology II

OverviewTextbooks

Issue21: Level as Knowing: Holism

Issue22: Level Fallacies

Issue23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena

Issue24: Levels in Theory Building

Issue25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective

Issue26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory

Issue27: Research Design in Multilevel Research

Issue28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process

Issue29: Measurement and Aggregation

Issue30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis

Issue31: Introduction to HLM

Issue32: Empirical Examples of HLM

Issue33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research

Issue34: Report Writing and Paper Review

Issue35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism

Major Textbooks:
Kerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
Schwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book]
Klein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon]
1 A* f; Z2 a/ V* _+ wSupplementary Books:
Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon]
% e2 y/ v9 o$ O; m0 HCook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]
( _" y* |- E6 b7 t$ l0 b( g9 h/ b  {Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. MultivariateData Analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJrentice-Hall. [Amazon]
+ e$ I. i. k7 V9 v0 p, J& N; Z: m) uPedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
7 y1 B4 A9 J6 S: _0 T3 ^2 _& jRogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
0 P2 s4 M$ D  @! |1 u1 u6 [! HJournal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6).
$ ^. a0 K. Q3 {1 h7 ^6 pAcademy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2).
  U+ F1 U9 C; uMultivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2).
2 T2 f2 r7 d' qLeadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1).
5 {2 e4 t  b; x5 x6 y/ @Academy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6.
! ^& h1 ~; q; b; z3 p- B/ MKreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Raudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
% G5 C0 ~- c/ }% \Roberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
Roberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- y) M2 j$ h; L% p% G1 X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。

: ~/ P; i2 h$ aIssue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory
K & L: Chapter 1
01-01.  Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks.
01-02.  Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91.
01-03.  Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 584-602.
0 p) g  d: v: [9 j01-04.  Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128.
6 v2 A* |% n) F( B; d01-05.  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.
* D9 @0 Z6 y3 `  m& @+ ^0 H  E01-06.  Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly,41: 262-269.
01-07.  陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。
, V: r, y. |4 V. Z7 s7 c: r01-08.  陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch2: 研究的起點：提問。
5 {/ m5 u# B' s+ W' z! N3 P
Issue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development
02-01.  Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2
02-02.  Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review,14: 496-515.
, L3 ]4 b9 y& L! J4 K; r- ]- G) f02-03.  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.
' ^" a, j4 A6 A6 j7 K02-04.  Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? Academy of ManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095.
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.
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.
02-07.  Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010.
02-08.  Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441.
5 C( f3 O5 q3 O5 {$ Z# T02-09.  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 h  |8 ~! f3 G3 K3 i02-10.  Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.
2 D% \8 v5 \0 s) s0 T: _% x02-11.  Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.
8 t; x. @3 y( _1 |9 D02-12.  Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.
' S% x- N9 |/ c8 l, D- d  w02-13.  陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。
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.
8 A9 \8 a' O6 k- P- Q
3 W3 t6 j7 p- R  AIssue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion]
& i( G2 d4 T  ]9 Z03-01.  Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192.
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.
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.
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.
! W% z- @, y. o' _4 C# i03-05.  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.
& @- V7 W- k% ~& \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.
- s1 n/ {% ~6 Q+ J; V+ t03-07.  陳曉萍等（2008）：ch12

Issue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion]
**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 8
0 }! O/ K: q9 y3 t8 k+ L+ ZK & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28.
. X4 d( O. E+ k- Z! u8 {" u. s. @04-01.  Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.
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.
; ?3 W% r! i/ F6 b# Q. l04-03.  Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical conclusion validity for organizational science researchers: Areview. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 164-208.
4 G, R- q5 V2 M$ c7 t5 x2 K; M7 N04-04.  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.
; Y4 R+ F. B: t; R. H0 A: r04-05.  Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375.
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.
) A* r, J( h( u9 C7 _* r04-07.  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.
04-08.  Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96.
; C- Y) O8 m0 H9 \9 z
Issue 5: Measurement: Scale Development
**Schwab: Chapter 4
' \( N, s. b/ Y05-01.  **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121.
05-02.  DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
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.
05-04.  **Farh, J. L., Zhong, C. B. & Organ, D. W. 2004. Organizational citizenship behavior inthe People’s Republic of China, Organization Science, 15: 241-253.
5 d9 T& H# i9 P! I05-05.  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.
% N6 @, A* Q0 @$ ?0 u2 N/ P1 a  ?/ A05-06.  **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch11

Issue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
MOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3).

5 G. {) F' Z) ?" D7 Q6 LIssue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
K & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 5
+ G. a- D8 p+ J+ E**Schwab: Chapter 13
07-01.  **Higgins, M. C. & Kram, K. E. 2001. Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: Adevelopmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 6(2):264-288.
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.
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.
/ ?: S, R" l# V- S; h. t07-04.  **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch5
2 r* T0 R- ^3 t4 p/ |: W07-05.  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.

Issue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys
, E" E7 C* a" @4 p) _% I- B7 ]**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 7
K & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 29
1 g; u) A, H, {7 E  _( z+ O08-01.  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.
9 k- r8 F. ^% `# X2 s) ?# f08-02.  Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, N. 1987. Student guinea pigs: Porcine predictorsand particularistic phenomena. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):160-163.
. H) T0 d- v3 v/ k08-03.  Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159.
08-04.  Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.
08-05.  **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008.
* r+ Z7 s9 M7 G  B( I08-06.  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.
08-07.  Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.
08-08.  **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch8
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.
08-10.  Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179.
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.
08-12.  Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.

Issue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments
**Schwab: Chapter 6
! ]0 y" F% n# O4 f2 \K & L: Chapters 24 and 22
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.
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.
; _  y; v4 b. o# [; y/ c09-03.  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.
/ d7 j0 Z2 p, S% \0 c09-04.  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.
09-05.  Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.
09-06.  **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch6, ch7.

5 o$ l1 F3 O  S# j2 E: QIssue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research
10-01.  Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.
! }& x3 r9 e# v7 B8 Z: f10-02.  Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576.
10-03.  Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.
8 c# x  I* m& a! S5 x) B: a. Q10-04.  Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441.
) B: o$ Q- w6 |6 y, T1 M, X( }8 s10-05.  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.
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.
10-07.  Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. 1991. The dynamics ofintense work groups: A study of British String Quartets, AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 36: 165-186.
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.
10-09.  陳曉萍等（2008）：ch10
9 \' l0 q1 y0 v) _10-10.  Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455.
7 n4 ~! K+ Q( ]! v' ?/ |
Issue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion]
5 w( O; Y7 F( @. Q/ _. H**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13
K & L: Chapters 9
11-01.  Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759.
. s& z- ~6 v& N7 i7 u& B, Q  S# D11-02.  Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218.
11-03.  McFarland, L.A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2003).Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods. Journalof Management, 29(5), 641-661.
, @0 G1 W( [/ a* ]$ Z7 x11-04.  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.
$ S5 I3 h! w% f/ D( q1 y" T# k11-05.  LaHuis, D.M., & Avis, J. M. (2007). Using multilevel randomcoefficient modeling to investigate rater effects in performance ratings. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 10, 97-107.
11-06.  Cashen, L., & Geiger, S. W. (2004). Statistical power andthe testing of null hypotheses: A review of contemporary management researchand recommendations for future studies. Organizational Research Methods, 7,151-167.
2 z) _# I* S" T2 m3 U% U3 G
Issue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation
. X4 c3 D0 v3 o1 t8 A1 w**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19
& ?8 {7 k0 a( H  r7 Z! y" I0 _K & L: Chapters 33 and 34
8 U. {0 ^3 Y; E/ {/ T5 x12-01.  **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.
. g  f$ \2 R$ ^1 _1 u) c9 ?12-02.  James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321.
/ y* i  o8 w7 V3 ]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.
12-04.  MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.
) |* H  n! |7 Q" s; F12-05.  **陳曉萍等（2008）：ch14

% M& [8 c+ w7 U$ c$ nIssue 13: Testing mediating effects
9 a% l4 M8 {2 _! A2 W5 T13-01.  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.
13-02.  Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358.
, H5 L' k5 {, `# [  X! J! u13-03.  James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363.
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.
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.
6 g( \1 L" w; z% D13-06.  Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47.
13-07.  Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398.
8 c( x* }3 G7 \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.
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.
& t4 k) g- K  Y13-10.  Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619.
( d5 s( y- M3 D' V% a13-11.  MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158.
9 Q4 o: {8 ?' q2 K/ T8 B13-12.  MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181.
13-13.  MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62.
$ o1 G6 r, y0 U13-14.  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.
13-15.  Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515.
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.
: ~: Z. t- A: {' K& t" r( D13-17.  MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107.
0 {. A( T6 t. [8 Y, n2 F. m13-18.  MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.
1 u, l$ e% Q6 r9 M! t13-19.  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 ]0 M$ Q! y  e% s! d% x, w0 a9 X13-20.  MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62.
% I% y5 ^- f5 Q# J% ~* J' [( |13-21.  Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445.
6 V  V: a$ k0 b( ?13-22.  Smith, E. 1982.  Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations:Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 43: 248-259.
13-23.  Sobel, M. E. 1982.  Asymptotic confidence intervalsfor indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.),Sociological Methodology 1982 (pp. 290-312). Washington DC: AmericanSociological Association.

Issue 14: Testing moderating effects
, d2 M% e% D& t7 |: W/ _2 c! }6 A$ Y14-01.  Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A.T. 2002. Time, teams, task performance: Changing effects of surface-anddeep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of management Journal,45(2): 1029-1045.
: P* B9 j( x8 Y/ _14-02.  Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417.
: [8 N; p4 Q* ?' y14-03.  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.
14-04.  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.
14-05.  Stone E. F. & Hollenbeck, J. R. 1989. Clarifyingcontroversial issues surrounding statistical procedures for detecting moderatorvariables: Empirical evidence and related matters. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 74(1): 3-10.
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.
) _# Y. _$ m% m3 J7 {
Issue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19
* y) ]' ?9 S* U, C! h4 k! x, k( sK & L: Chapters 33 and 34
15-01.  Edwards, J. R. & Lambert, L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1): 1-22.
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.
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.
+ D  p5 Z4 @0 H+ k15-04.  Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128.
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.
9 n+ u0 y/ L7 P( n; h/ B8 [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.
2 C# g$ |- D7 e- I2 K15-07.  Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444.

1 r2 e& O5 j5 U2 c& SIssue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation
1 e6 m* N& z% d  USchwab: Chapters 14 and 17
K & L: Chapter 28
16-01.  Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87.
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.
/ v1 x2 b5 O6 \5 S9 ^16-03.  Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105.
16-04.  Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400.
0 u. ^! \6 H. `. C; a- `; V16-05.  Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302.
6 ^0 }' \% z- B: r8 Z" }5 U16-06.  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.
5 i* e3 Y8 Q) c# g. d3 `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.

8 a( |& B7 B5 Q. C/ a: YIssue 17: Common Method Variance
**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 20
9 x; G7 E8 `" W/ o0 m, I5 |8 Q17-01.  **彭台光, 高月慈, 林鉦棽 2006. 管理研究中的共同方法變異：問題本質、影響、測試和補救。管理學報，23(1): 77-98.
6 r( W/ m4 T* d7 ]$ j17-02.  Doty, D. H. &Glick, W. H. 1998. Common methods bias: Does common methods variance reallybias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 374-406.
9 w& {" f, f! P/ n# u4 C/ M17-03.  Goffin, R. D. & Gellatly, I. R. 2001. A multi-raterassessment of organizational commitment: Are self-report measures biased? Journalof Organizational Behavior, 22: 437-451.
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.
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.
8 D1 C8 _1 h+ W$ h17-06.  Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational researchroblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544.
17-07.  Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223.
6 l: ]" J& t4 d0 ~4 z17-08.  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$ y0 x  j2 h  l. ^) N17-09.  Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232.
  l0 Y+ \6 R$ c/ @1 g! b! N" A- ~: l
" P+ O3 o+ i( p* ~Issue 18: Data Non-independence
18-01.  Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735.
/ U5 v# L/ z/ j, _18-02.  Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75.
' ]/ S! d7 g% J9 k% [  P0 w1 |1 U18-03.  Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.
18-04.  Bliese, P. & Hanges, P. J. 2004. Being too liberal and tooconservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they wereindependent. Organizational Research Methods, 7: 400-417.
9 h+ V9 I- f/ s3 o18-05.  彭台光 & 林鉦棽 2008. 組織現象和層次議題: 非獨立性資料的概念和實徵. 組織與管理, 1(1): 95-121.
7 M3 v( G% S' L% ^  @18-06.  Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. 1995. On thelevel: Homogeneity, independence, heterogeneity, and interactions inorganizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 20: 7-9.
1 @* E+ V0 E- j% F( [* V/ J18-07.  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.

3 i6 o6 b  O6 j/ O* s3 R( M- cIssue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch)
5 Z7 F4 e& O, N, w/ p$ ?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.
19-02.  Boisot, M. & Child. J. 1996. From fiefs to clans andnetwork capitalism: Explaining China’s emerging economic order. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 41(4): 600-628.
19-03.  Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209.
! ^5 h+ P8 w# K% s( q* }( q3 [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.
. o; Y& H. J* k* v0 L% X) F/ l19-05.  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.
% d6 M% ]( ~% E5 }# E! z( c19-06.  Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974.
! H9 _2 G3 h" W, ~) R) S19-07.  Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151.
19-08.  Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215.
19-09.  楊國樞(主編) 1993。「本土心理學的開展」 (本土心理學研究第一期)，台北：台灣大學心理系本土心理學研究室。

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。

/ f, j" Y9 n% |" b# |7 E+ ~: X19-11.  陳曉萍等（2008）：Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰

19-12.  陳曉萍等（2008）：ch17
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.
19-14.  Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia PacificJournal of Management, 21, 491-513.

( `% N% O9 \# y1 [' I) VIssue 20: Structural Equation Modeling
K & L: Chapter 35.
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。
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.
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.
) Q# G0 w; u) F' G20-04.  Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172.
: H3 p  S: a$ I: a7 n8 A$ G" n: _20-05.  Lytle, A. L., Brett, J. M., Barsness, Z. I., Tinsley, C.H.,& Janssens, M. 1995. A paradigm for confirmatory cross-cultural research inorganizational behavior. Research in Organization Behavior, 17: 167-214.
5 c; ?: }. L1 x9 I' o20-06.  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.
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.
* y5 U1 M! \- l  ?. E0 t% |! |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.
20-09.  陳曉萍等（2008）：ch13

Issue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism
: ?0 a, c4 h2 r5 L% s  ^; ?. E: d0 S21-01.  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.
21-02.  Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.
21-03.  Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14.
21-04.  Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652.
9 m7 x0 E/ e: O0 ~21-05.  Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607.
; C9 Y) Y  E4 I21-06.  Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613.
) S5 w1 I1 q( }$ u4 Q21-07.  Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68).
6 J3 H" h) d& m& @$ i! z- u# g21-08.  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.
, s+ w% `1 U/ t21-09.  von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53).
21-10.  Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50).
- |- z" k. b$ l7 z& D/ N* M5 @
Issue 22: Level Fallacies
4 p) h3 j" u1 x; h5 q; n: u4 w" K22-01.  Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73.
+ v. o/ L& {+ g9 [' s22-02.  Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191.
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.
22-04.  Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357.
  F% H% M  }# @; Y  u22-05.  **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.
22-06.  Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777.
% T/ e# q: b; f" q
# ^! z. R: m* r9 iIssue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena
+ x6 o$ a$ a/ }# {3 S! Q1 i23-01.  James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112.
23-02.  Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller.
23-03.  Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Doherty, M. L. 1989. Integrationof leadership and climate: Examination of a neglected issue. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 74(4): 546-553.
7 R9 F6 C) q. r5 M23-04.  Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540.
5 f/ _* H  ^6 c* D5 x; l23-05.  **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53.
23-06.  Johns, G. 1999. A multi-level theory of self-serving behaviorin and by organizations. In Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior,21: 1-38.
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.
( W6 R! i5 Q7 _4 x9 {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.
% M2 B0 @9 f! z* Y" q23-09.  Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42.
23-10.  Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348.
/ a# k. v( b% }23-11.  Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.
23-12.  Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.
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.
23-14.  **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974.

Issue 24: Levels in Theory Building
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.
" N: F! D8 c/ s24-02.  Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248.
" M1 E1 s# U% e1 _  D24-03.  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.
: H6 F8 g# c% r7 A1 @1 V+ \5 d24-04.  Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229.
0 ]/ O7 ?% S; j) a' u# B2 }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)
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)
8 f0 I! L/ z, C0 I- _" f! U24-07.  Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.
24-08.  Mossholder, K. W. & Bedeian, A. G.. 1983. Cross-level inference andorganizational research: Perspectives on interpretation and application.Academy of Management Review, 8(4): 547-558.
, p  \8 A  F0 S24-09.  Glick, W. H. (1980). Problems in cross-level inference. In K.H.Roberts & L. Burstein (eds.) Issues in Aggregation. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. 17-30.
% c  s" r. w4 _5 T! c1 a24-10.  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).
24-11.  Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201.

0 I6 q( H; n. fIssue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective
9 l. [# Q6 p* \5 Q25-01.  **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922.
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.
25-03.  Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. 1982. Toward a macro-orientedmodel of leadership: An odyssey, In J.G. Hunt, U. Sekaran, & C. Schrieshiem(Eds.), Leadership: Beyond Establishment Views, Carbondale, IL: SouthernIllinois University Press.
. Y$ j# Y# j, w3 |25-04.  Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338.
: \* Z2 d  V; W. P1 W1 t25-05.  Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610.
, F4 v- C: x0 ?" ]( y! \3 }25-06.  Tosi, H. 1992. The organization and the environment: The E/Olink in the model. The Environment/Organization/Person Contingency Model: AMeso Approach to the Study of Organizations. 29-66. Greenwich, Conn: JAI.
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.

Issue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory
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.
; N' v& d" z" C! P- G26-02.  Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307.
26-03.  Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346.
% r7 V7 h) n# M: j5 `" t8 W
Issue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research
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.
) ^; z1 T- S3 w' X27-02.  **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.
( u5 u( g' F2 Y27-03.  Kline, K. J. &Kozlowski, S. J. 2000. From micro to meso: Critical stepsin conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research. OrganizationalResearch methods, 3(3): 211-236.

; ?( z; {/ T6 W/ W! ^1 `& D/ VIssue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process
, h/ U) |: R+ t# e- |7 Q28-01.  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.
28-02.  Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253.
0 X* @9 e4 B) p, ^, b; b% O0 M28-03.  Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453.
8 X  x: y$ c, P  P9 S- M28-04.  Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773.
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.
9 D7 X$ L- C& d6 q0 s: F
Issue 29: Measurement and Aggregation
1 ^. O) B& G: K9 ^29-01.  Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765.
% v7 X4 p7 U: f. X- U9 o29-02.  Burke, M. J. & Dunlap, W. P. 2002. Estimating interrateragreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5(2): 159-172.
29-03.  James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229.
29-04.  **James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimatingwith-group reliability with and without response bias. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 69(1): 85-98.
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.
$ Q/ y' B" P1 g* d0 i1 x2 r29-06.  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.
4 I; {2 P) |  Z6 X- f  Z, m- Z29-07.  Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582.
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.
$ l7 Z( d9 A" f  R29-09.  Campbell, D. T. 1958. Common fate, similarity, and otherindices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities.Behavioral Science, 3: 14-25.
; O  |/ z9 N4 P* @5 R" ]* j29-10.  Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563.
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.
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.
29-13.  Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373.
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.
29-15.  Bliese, P. D. & Hanges, P. J. 2004. Being too liberal andtoo conservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they wereindependent. Organizational Research Methods, 7: 400-417.
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.
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.
( P6 h8 A' ~/ C  z% s8 F29-18.  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.
29-19.  McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46.
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.
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.
% k8 {. ]* _2 ?* S* v( h5 Q1 f9 W
4 k  @1 }7 M7 j2 y$ w3 V( l) p- iIssue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis
30-01.  Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395.
30-02.  James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424.
, C# A( C" d+ ~% q30-03.  George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.
2 ~7 U. F7 g% s2 c30-04.  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.
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.
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.
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.
$ U* w2 O1 k; {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.
" C8 H8 w9 U8 ]5 X# d; R4 L. a; {2 t30-09.  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.
+ B( X4 j9 S) Z0 {1 s30-10.  **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.
  L* @& i' p: o
' c# X9 y) s4 uIssue 31: Introduction to HLM
4 Z- V# I" `) f( Y4 {4 d, A5 W31-01.  **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744.
31-02.  Hofmann, D. A. & Griffin, M. A., Gavin, M. B. 2000. Theapplication of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K.& K. 467-511.
+ p3 }% _" f$ W0 r31-03.  **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641.
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.
% D+ p) e5 F+ t" ~/ x
5 w- S4 y. I" s3 @, y( tIssue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM
32-01.  Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297.
32-02.  **Cole, M. S. & Bedeian, A. G. 2007. Leadership consensus as a cross-levelcontextual moderator of the emotion exhaustion-work commitment relationship. LeadershipQuarterly, 18: 447-462.
; U0 E1 H6 q; a8 P32-03.  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.
32-04.  Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33.
32-05.  **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94.
* c/ w+ F" Z! Q- q5 f5 X32-06.  Glission, C., & James, L. R. 2002. The cross-level effects of culture andclimate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:767-794.
6 H0 A) p1 X( N1 n% Z32-07.  Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522.
32-08.  Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255.
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.
9 {# ~1 k: ?7 t' x32-10.  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+ `+ T9 E! W$ d5 C32-11.  Sacco, J. M., & Schmitt, N. 2005. A dynamic multilevel model of demographicdiversity and misfit effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2):203-231.
" y) s- P$ a! _! N( \' I32-12.  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.
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.
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.
+ m) |$ i$ K3 w# j, [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.

. Z! m: T+ {3 Z: Z4 B& e$ ?Issue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research
. |& `) Z3 J* l" r: ~1 H1 j33-01.  Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571.
33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582.
; F6 z+ w: m: L( l! M+ v33-03.  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.
& m- o. Y4 U9 A2 ?, l; \2 t33-04.  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.
33-05.  Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. E. 2007. A framework fortesting meso-mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior. Journalof Organizational Behavior, 28: 141-172.
33-06.  Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277.

) w. [$ q$ v9 VIssue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review
# |0 y8 {+ T! nSchwab: Chapters 15 and 21
. J7 A) y& g8 u& p. i# Q  \34-01.  應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信
3 B* z2 e( E" C' V% I! M34-02.  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.
7 F! h% d' |" {4 \" e34-03.  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.
34-04.  **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout).
( c3 o: b  A! s) M6 X' h+ q34-05.  Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515.
3 }. i6 z; z& y6 D  Z2 v1 x, 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.
34-07.  **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6.
, R7 x2 Q! e0 o! Q1 C0 ^34-08.  Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164.
34-09.  Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307.
$ m% `; L0 Y+ l9 S2 M1 e34-10.  Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92.

: @. O$ p/ _% {) t6 S( rIssue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism
35-01.  **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。
水流花靜---科學與詩的對話。
P.121~139.台北:天下文化。
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.
' t+ i8 @; ^0 W& q* d' O35-03.  Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242.
  D7 G1 K# R6 {: u+ N3 k- C7 L35-04.  Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.
6 P/ T6 A) e& R+ Q0 a  o35-05.  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.
35-06.  Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312.
35-07.  Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2).
( n  [" P3 e+ q7 r, L35-08.  Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620.
: V- J' `' {" d; T3 o; B! Y35-09.  **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)
$ Y6 g' r# c7 M& _3 m$ v, E35-10.  Vandenberg, R. J. & Lance, C. E. 2000. A Review andSynthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, andRecommendations for Organizational Research. Organizational ResearchMethods, 3: 4-70.
6 K8 n' z& ~9 I" h) c35-11.  Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158.
35-12.  Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44.
2 B+ l0 ]* j: l8 E35-13.  Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.
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.

<<End>>

$ t" e/ X: ]2 B7 K' m. Z* i2 q. v
( ?% E% ^& N4 F; [) ^4 [

jkliang

是彭台光老師的課，內容看起來相當充實。

houhuiqing

向Kenny致敬！

rockymu

好的信息来源，谢谢kenny！！

motech

非常好的研究方法学习资料，thank you Kenny!!

kisyorange

谢谢kenneth老师：）

reddyrunny

非常感谢Kenneth老师，您真的太伟大了。向您致敬！

spring607

回复 1楼 Kenneth 的帖子
( Z9 c! I: t6 |; [; q9 m
你真是太伟大了，拥抱你！！！
' b: @( ~! H$ P! a% ?: f   

kangfei1060

哇，这个太好啦，非常感谢