- 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:
6 O+ y$ Y$ S# E r: S# i& Nhttp://spaces.isu.edu.tw/~RMonline/website/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=52&Itemid=66/ ~: T: P) Y* e6 e+ m1 d
; X( z; G* F. b& v) B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。
# ]- E; ~3 A$ J
5 J. U5 Z2 X" x0 xKenny$ y% K) Y( n0 R2 _+ Q/ J* A
9 B2 T+ \* D# B9 C2 J) x0 H研究方法线上
. T3 Z- H6 Z& Q' S8 R
; w4 t' X! V/ _ g& K: k h; eResearchMethodology I
b5 ]- f4 A: R9 V. S [OverviewTextbooks
3 s# x( Q A0 V" K% EIssue1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory + j2 f; E7 { ^7 p; I% N
Issue2: Theory and Hypothesis Development * K: ]+ ?* E% D: R+ i
Issue3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct
- |( w" |# Y. B2 lIssue4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity 5 v u: N/ f& M6 D
Issue5: Measurement: Scale Development - J& B& [& j( m0 k
Issue6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research * K% r- A" M* h
Issue7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
! O0 O( Z, W. u1 E* VIssue8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys
: z- \, |5 j: U) u* r2 ~; u5 bIssue9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments
, n+ K+ ~1 K9 V: ?' MIssue10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research
4 l# R. @6 a5 Y9 I' ^Issue11: Statistical Analysis and Inference; x4 C, Z r8 Z; z% \8 i* { v* k
Issue12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation
2 N7 \% F/ j- HIssue13: Testing mediating effects* |/ L' N& B7 |- Y
Issue14: Testing moderating effects 6 g5 \9 q$ A6 o! K7 E0 l" R
Issue15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation 6 V& k7 o6 k1 [$ }9 j
Issue16: Reliability and Construct Validation , S# ?/ F' I# ?
Issue17: Common Method Variance
0 K/ I {) h$ Z- [. E" k2 B7 GIssue18: Data Non-independence ! R+ H& f* B' S7 B6 W4 ^4 M3 ?/ Z
Issue19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and Indigenous Research)
$ H; U' f0 K, b8 VIssue20: Structural Equation Modeling7 K6 Q7 f2 E) w2 z8 f* W
" N, j# @' o0 J% Y1 V. r7 A! u7 DMajor Textbooks:. i2 z, E! p+ o$ U& K# w
Kerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
* Z+ S: D) R. u: O+ c: W/ H' PSchwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book]
5 n3 H( [! i) @* K) n0 m9 lKlein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon]! U+ d1 B* R2 p/ P# a& R% K7 k
Supplementary Books:
1 `2 C" M1 d# h) J- \9 b5 uCohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon]9 c" B9 y: I1 {7 O5 V" o0 x
Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]0 M g {2 T% _3 _9 o* x- p
Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. MultivariateData Analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ rentice-Hall. [Amazon]
8 o8 I2 V- x9 \: Q" a: \Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
3 h/ Y( M9 I* P* F" O. lRogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
* |% {3 |+ o0 P @6 m: ~$ M+ d% aJournal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6).
+ N2 ~( F2 `9 E2 N' L. QAcademy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2).4 g: }1 l5 K2 P- _3 ~! ?* {
Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2).
4 h1 e/ |' }% ?3 N8 z# ELeadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1).( t ~; z. z5 U8 Q6 ?
Academy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6.7 v2 i+ [% K5 s2 K
Kreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.# I/ C" J9 ~: N& a+ M
Raudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.: w; A# ^, }. |% y! T
Roberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
4 z% `8 Q& X5 b( l ^8 ^9 JRoberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
/ M/ Y2 c& l" u! i( m. t2 G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。
% u. I5 V8 ?' J/ n* T
2 {8 n% X* j+ \2 N, H$ g, FIssue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory1 s' W8 ?* M4 [4 w& v$ r0 D
K & L: Chapter 1
0 D# g- F/ K0 P9 N: j01-01. Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks.
& H8 o4 i) o, ^; v01-02. Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91.$ D0 {0 B& C# A8 ~% S
01-03. Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 584-602.
! F. H+ J( i# V+ U+ [' R. ?" N01-04. Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128.& z" n9 V$ v6 c, }( S& d
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): 1107-1112.6 }8 J* B4 ^1 T# v5 ?% W/ s9 M
01-06. Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly,41: 262-269.
* z# @* p- p% a! ]# f$ q5 a7 h01-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。
" e O% D$ i- n2 d$ V! R01-08. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch2: 研究的起點:提問。" n& f' z% w7 [9 o# |
J4 R$ z ?3 _* X/ x, yIssue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development$ u) ?' H- o1 `
02-01. Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2& p5 i# i% O. ~
02-02. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review,14: 496-515.# q, {+ y8 Z7 t
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): 9-15.6 r* i8 g3 j, l- L( e0 Y
02-04. Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? Academy of ManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095.
- S% m- o# J& [- {' A" `/ e" A02-05. Davis, M. S. 1971. That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenologyof sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of Social Science,1(2): 309-344.# ~+ N0 ]8 d: F+ P8 }' I3 l
02-06. Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. 1998. Trust and distrust: new relationships andrealities. Academy of Management Review, 23: 438-458.$ A: n1 L% }) @ t0 d# T
02-07. Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010.& u5 O& m4 l p2 H; Y& s) N$ \) _" C1 b
02-08. Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441.
) l6 _3 C7 p( M2 ?02-09. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. A. (1993). The motivational effects ofcharismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4,577–594.8 g/ c8 h! S) y3 l$ x+ P
02-10. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.
$ G' z" E0 y) C4 N' S- F8 g02-11. Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.
) A% F W9 v. ~( }. S! |02-12. Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.
/ Y- j- Y! d; n" M02-13. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。/ L5 Z/ t+ _5 v7 W' W# Z
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.+ O; L2 D. p; l7 G4 t& h
( }$ I& _& J& g2 ^+ GIssue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion]$ ]! d8 [1 E4 V" z+ a2 Z; m
03-01. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192.
# l( [9 a9 l' f- Q1 n* G03-02. 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): 143-160.1 q! @* m0 B0 c2 P6 Y" L
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.+ ^1 v4 {3 L; Y- ]: ~" e
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.
+ H# p# A% t& b( y03-05. 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.
# a# n% G9 C- p& N$ r" h03-06. 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): 744-764.5 W2 N0 `9 h; k& u7 h
03-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch12. k( F/ a- U6 J9 ~- t- W0 {
1 n @! L6 c% x4 M% ?2 c" o0 o4 T" PIssue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion]
3 l; q! J& ]) P* G& z$ N**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 8
' u# N+ r# }) m6 l; m* PK & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28.3 T" _, Y9 \* ~6 u
04-01. Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.- f; ^1 j' s. t2 [7 T( n( Y5 x
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.- X: T+ ?; ], E- U1 s N y: R
04-03. Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical conclusion validity for organizational science researchers: Areview. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 164-208.
) S# _6 d6 j& S9 r2 S2 ^6 q04-04. 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: 140-156.5 E% t2 b' Q) L9 [
04-05. Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375.
/ P( G7 r) [; ^- G% @04-06. Lim, B. C., & Ployhart, R. E. 2006. Assessing theconvergent and discriminant validity of Goldberg's international personalityitem pool: A multitrait-multimethod examination. Organizational ResearchMethods, 9(1): 29-54.
+ X, U9 F2 _* l/ w W& \; t4 W6 @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.- o1 T* P! J5 i" f! K3 Q
04-08. Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96.7 a# F; z( o5 U) d. s
$ h* T9 d- L6 H0 L, w( X) v
Issue 5: Measurement: Scale Development
' s0 F* l* H7 O0 I0 C- [2 n! n**Schwab: Chapter 4& p; h9 H, \* I: B4 R" W0 _
05-01. **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121.9 X. [6 x2 L8 J0 [0 P
05-02. DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
( I: x& o3 }6 a+ |2 x8 H05-03. 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./ p* F" E( [# s' }7 P
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., m3 `5 q9 \! B0 t0 w S
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.; m u+ S0 [& z" g; p3 w& \
05-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch11
) R2 M- i! G; L+ h! m. g
- x) ^3 N7 K g" L! A) P6 gIssue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
8 @3 l4 o5 a# J# L; i2 iMOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3).
- q0 v& Y' Q- {" G( X8 j* g6 {* s! a% \* C7 R" z# L" v' v2 k8 y
Issue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
$ |8 x9 I$ t% _5 ~4 KK & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 5
& P2 Y% I! Q2 {/ g. p**Schwab: Chapter 13, ^- E) @7 n0 L3 p0 O1 a) B' |
07-01. **Higgins, M. C. & Kram, K. E. 2001. Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: Adevelopmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 6(2):264-288.
, I1 w! }& x' w" q" I0 B07-02. 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.
6 x8 F) w f$ C9 v07-03. **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 O1 ]$ `, S' ^1 [/ G& _07-04. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch5
7 z' r J3 u7 z" `7 u07-05. 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.
/ L4 o/ p# E* |3 H) @# v5 q w9 B" L7 S6 q* X) ^
Issue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys1 y1 i4 F; Z y Z8 q
**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 77 o$ \7 o/ } z4 v# F* E
K & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 29
, l, K \% R( r& g* 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.
8 j% \2 Y8 A' a08-02. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, N. 1987. Student guinea pigs: Porcine predictorsand particularistic phenomena. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):160-163.* `5 s5 c0 M2 g* y# E$ Y
08-03. Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159.! j1 m6 Y' v5 n. k; t* {
08-04. Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.
7 c, ]6 ?9 ?. G7 Q08-05. **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008.
& i/ m& s- t- }08-06. Saks, A. M. 1995. Longitudinal field investigation of themoderating and mediating effects of self-efficacy on the relationship betweentraining and new comer adjustment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80:211-225.3 s, V; f# R- L" n6 F
08-07. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.
$ F6 I# ^9 G+ g% B& j8 f$ c* n08-08. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch8
- Q) ]. {) P; }6 @1 k' _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. q( @- D0 @. F. X
08-10. Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179.6 i- X' o3 r/ y- n4 d$ ]
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.
# A) j! c" j5 _- `+ }08-12. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.
4 \, c. {$ q1 g, j, {: B$ A6 J- E0 m1 @; o& M4 u) Q2 P% p
Issue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments& L$ v/ L: H0 {+ s: g
**Schwab: Chapter 66 @3 B) q+ i4 k, a/ ?
K & L: Chapters 24 and 22; Z b0 n1 f, z8 t
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.
7 q. q/ r |- m09-02. **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.
) F4 ]* N! l: ^" x9 M09-03. 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.: k. E: P/ O6 B- d5 X( Z: E
09-04. Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B. J., & Shamir, B. 2002. Impact of transformational leadership onfollower development and performance: A field experiment. Academy ofManagement Journal, 45(4): 735-744.# F6 W% `# l" w$ \8 R/ N, i
09-05. Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.$ V2 ]: z( z- D4 ~
09-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch6, ch7.- ]. ^1 L. ^' x: L m9 l
5 P5 l7 m+ \( d$ Y( ^
Issue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research
. j3 r+ m& j. m3 K9 A$ a2 y4 t3 t: w10-01. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.
( T( v" r( Y. \( V10-02. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576.
6 n" I* ~. e/ V4 x3 z+ C# U$ e10-03. Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.% u( {5 ]6 }- m
10-04. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441.8 O y' c. G: f4 V* d% Z- Q
10-05. Elsbach, K. D. & Kramer, R.M. 2003. Assessing creativity inHollywood pitch meetings: Evidence for a dual-process model of creativityjudgments. Academy of Management Journal, 46(3): 283-301.
/ D2 `3 ?$ D) P3 }7 E6 ^" p10-06. 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.
( {( N7 N7 @. r+ W8 z" Y. Y10-07. Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. 1991. The dynamics ofintense work groups: A study of British String Quartets, AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 36: 165-186.) \1 s; {! v3 o0 D1 y
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.
0 B4 U2 l. l6 A8 R* W3 ~) C10-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch10/ h6 x- d6 @; l2 t* Z
10-10. Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455.
0 M* Z- Q/ v6 N3 Z) c
& m. p. O. K& `Issue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion]
) _% w& M9 T9 [, V5 p" z**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13
" Y, X; X# q7 x0 b V6 A3 wK & L: Chapters 9
9 `9 }0 G' l4 C( J; d/ l11-01. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759.
. W4 `; S% c5 C6 X9 l5 @+ l, |# R11-02. Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218.
3 n. @9 e& u) ~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.
! h; N J# r- t5 l11-04. 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./ {7 O: w" j# N" d7 D
11-05. LaHuis, D.M., & Avis, J. M. (2007). Using multilevel randomcoefficient modeling to investigate rater effects in performance ratings. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 10, 97-107.4 W4 y9 R" _% U$ i. O% i) }
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, 7,151-167.5 g+ O; t2 a+ N( p, _9 b9 ~* a1 i2 K
- E) ~; d& W+ U4 o4 {" ]6 J
Issue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation
6 f# w, Q( Y4 I9 i( Y8 ~**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19" E+ K& ?; g' o4 v2 z; R3 m/ e
K & L: Chapters 33 and 34
3 ^) x9 ]) a- s2 p12-01. **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.
, M1 D P4 z# K7 e7 I12-02. James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321.5 t2 k( H) {2 i* K" u& c& t, I
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.% _. C% \2 g/ b n
12-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.
2 g- l3 D4 H1 h; w1 Y. ]6 l12-05. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch14
4 S$ D0 ]7 M4 u b) {# K) H4 T; g+ ~0 { H3 W
Issue 13: Testing mediating effects
8 {9 e5 \, y2 m' r13-01. 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.
4 d% q1 T3 Z) B! V$ x3 T7 v) `13-02. Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358.! O P! o2 Z Q" T
13-03. James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363.9 W a7 z0 s! b) O
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.
4 [; k+ g$ @! v% g% E+ W' y9 j13-05. 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.
: n4 C: o6 y6 H N( ~1 Y. C% c13-06. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47.# I- c! e |4 I! W' B
13-07. Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398.. M8 p ~3 q: _2 v$ N- v) D
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.
' |4 G- k/ _- n13-09. Freedman, L. S., & Schatzkin, A. 1992. Sample size forstudying intermediate endpoints within intervention trials of observationalstudies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 136: 1148-1159.
2 t" ~6 _% _ \% A5 {- Y1 v) Q' ^- D13-10. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619.9 T# a. T6 @7 j1 i0 z4 e
13-11. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158.- ], D) h W; e' s( d; p$ x
13-12. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181.) [% W+ o5 [+ D, f6 a5 i1 ^# V6 D
13-13. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62.' F+ M2 x% e1 U- c& c. i* J' b* ~
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.
8 ^0 I9 d! A. B t13-15. Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515.
m' a8 H- `5 e% A6 y9 w13-16. 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.
; e4 g8 C4 E6 M* A13-17. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107.
9 _ E% C! d+ e) ]% M4 O8 x13-18. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.+ V7 M9 k( J1 E1 w
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.$ K+ }) @* D4 n
13-20. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62.
" a/ y0 c4 K' c: N2 Z13-21. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445.
: I( J# v* {3 d f1 u13-22. Smith, E. 1982. Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations:Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 43: 248-259./ ^$ k5 z5 q& d' f6 ?
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.
t& R K& O' J4 m' V& f4 g( {( }
$ u V4 U4 @, q/ s' O0 ~ Issue 14: Testing moderating effects# I/ s' ?: k% w) t
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): 1029-1045.7 \6 U. N3 Y1 u3 ?7 ?
14-02. Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417.
9 E2 w: |9 e8 l14-03. Dionne, S. D., Yammarino, F. J., Atwater, L. E., & James, L. R. 2002. Neutralizing substitutes for leadershiptheory: Leadership effects and common methods bias. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 87(3): 454-464.0 ^" G& t. d% Y1 ~& ~$ \
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.+ T# ~# G0 N5 { V/ R9 v, m0 n
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.
( H% A; p+ H7 W3 u1 [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.
7 D4 M8 d' L9 q2 Z
4 R) i# w2 s3 Y2 [' L0 aIssue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
3 l) L: G% z3 ~: L8 i' nSchwab: Chapters 11 and 19& u, I) Z5 x5 H3 q2 t) |, H
K & L: Chapters 33 and 344 `5 v' b+ V4 x. {9 i6 P" p! {
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.( q' B) A' _# m w Y" R4 Z
15-02. Bauer, D. J., Preacher, K. J., & Gil, K. M. 2006.Conceptualizing and testing random indirect effects and moderated mediation inmultilevel models: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods,11: 142-163.8 K( q9 _, o6 F8 G: W# Z6 X- T
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.
7 E0 }' |4 o# ?7 D' b4 m$ @2 `: k15-04. Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128.) X }" u: K0 V9 u: ]. x6 S
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.
: k& h& N- B/ }. ~) ^* z15-06. Muller, D., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2005). Whenmoderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 89: 852-863.
! L4 l x s9 b+ @3 M15-07. Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444.
% u' G# m( d |( R+ e; ^# w
?1 S2 Q3 N1 U5 [Issue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation$ E; Y. p. ~! J- i) [) \
Schwab: Chapters 14 and 17
2 x8 ^6 B: i& j( R. L$ lK & L: Chapter 28
2 `9 j, L: i: x2 V0 E4 y1 x( b" a+ N16-01. Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87.
) p1 q$ K" L5 W7 ^: T16-02. 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 S/ X8 H' |: `. D16-03. Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105.
0 @2 P# q$ m4 F- b: X16-04. Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400.) j) `$ Q! N9 H! d; S: a6 g
16-05. Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302.
, O* p1 O1 ]; x! @& |6 B16-06. 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 T5 Q- Y" M" |9 x& Q16-07. 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.. L& E c* l9 p1 b2 L5 p
, p9 A8 p- U" J+ o
Issue 17: Common Method Variance& ]: m( ], }& x1 e0 Y/ j
**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 20$ f0 v2 D& j6 e9 [. @! u
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.
" m" t# [8 Z5 o17-02. Doty, D. H. &Glick, W. H. 1998. Common methods bias: Does common methods variance reallybias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 374-406./ M- ^4 C2 H/ |+ E& t! p
17-03. Goffin, R. D. & Gellatly, I. R. 2001. A multi-raterassessment of organizational commitment: Are self-report measures biased? Journalof Organizational Behavior, 22: 437-451.
& D( T7 ~2 H" S' E: D17-04. 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.: p5 X# l8 c# }( d. ]
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.% H! [! }" o( J( n7 P8 ?
17-06. Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research roblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544.& c0 J( A6 [6 R" P% |) C1 O1 ]5 {' D
17-07. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223.
8 h- P; V+ r7 x/ o* i17-08. 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., L+ a) m. A6 U) o, H
17-09. Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232.
2 h& b) Y& ^4 L: S$ T
- m. ?- Y' w* @( @, }. RIssue 18: Data Non-independence2 @% U* R( W1 q
18-01. Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735.
: W5 M( G# X3 K: ]5 X# P18-02. Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75.; k; E7 M8 H9 s! J4 @3 Y
18-03. Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.
8 e/ w% L5 w% j% M) r" f9 n! x8 a( d; Z18-04. 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.& m$ O8 D4 P8 C$ C" ]$ A
18-05. 彭台光 & 林鉦棽 2008. 組織現象和層次議題: 非獨立性資料的概念和實徵. 組織與管理, 1(1): 95-121.
. a4 {. f r! C& [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.
5 ~6 p+ L, o+ M3 O- }18-07. Kenny, D. A., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Livi, S., &Kashy, D. A. 2002. The statistical analysis of data from small groups.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83: 126-137.4 }/ ?8 K+ Z. j
; y9 q4 I/ a. V# Z9 M
Issue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch)9 o3 s6 I3 D% }9 X6 J* J
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): 61-74.1 {( D1 K: E7 G2 ]; p( `9 m
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.
$ y2 p* O4 l4 `# v. T( q2 O% i- q19-03. Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209.
4 S: G1 D$ @2 c0 y+ f9 F/ H/ b+ F19-04. 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.
5 Y# \5 M2 A3 o3 n19-05. 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.( e3 T6 H: @5 W9 C2 f8 \4 {5 b% X
19-06. Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974.) q7 O9 A, x: G+ D( D
19-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151.
1 s. i S& P8 M; c0 F/ O W0 h; S19-08. Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215.
! Z% v% c5 a* Q+ x0 m2 j/ i19-09. 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。$ V( }# C$ @+ _% W, Z
# t' z+ x9 x% d0 Z19-10. 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。
( `. p0 q) r' O( {( w
* t- m1 A2 Q7 Q3 q6 @5 O19-11. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰! `9 J j( x6 J g
) H! U6 B. Y0 ^5 N2 w19-12. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch17
# V4 j) m& | P: f19-13. 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.. q* o' \# I# w+ A5 S" v) S" h: e' n
19-14. Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia PacificJournal of Management, 21, 491-513.
( w# u6 L& a$ f% J, [ j% K1 ]" z) i; h6 A! t5 W
Issue 20: Structural Equation Modeling2 k, C' h( P0 s: d4 a
K & L: Chapter 35.) W0 f+ s# D2 N1 \1 J' L X: F
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。2 g& [" ], ^5 Y2 U5 Z; ^
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: 323-342.4 D9 l% z% H! P/ S* \; j
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.
4 |7 U# C& S' ~2 S3 q% i& P0 n) y20-04. Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172.
' ?. A; k( p. q! w o3 }1 ?" r$ e20-05. 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.- ~9 l% n4 _) T# O( B! \
20-06. Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. 1994. An alternativeapproach to method effects using latent-variable models: Applications inorganizational behavior research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3):323-331.
2 i0 m7 Q1 h5 w* s' a20-07. 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.
: g) ^! U. y0 u& K4 H/ |5 g* n20-08. Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. 2006. Problems with itemparceling for comfirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 9: 369-403.' R: h/ l. I9 v6 w0 F
20-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch13* P* |1 T; _3 P& a- U. U
# [2 b: |& G6 ?, r3 yIssue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism
% \0 T* M0 a9 D9 U21-01. 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.
5 _& Q7 D3 b5 O. ?21-02. Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.
( U/ x1 \5 y4 p; U& H21-03. Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14.% m1 j5 l& E8 `
21-04. Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652.8 k* P6 B3 q+ S7 A
21-05. Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607.5 E4 u8 P4 ?1 v" {
21-06. Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613.
3 s+ ?7 p( Q7 j21-07. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68).
9 p$ Y1 B l+ ` `" l7 U" \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.% O" c9 B0 {3 ?& i
21-09. von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53).
6 D: [3 o! F. o B. A: ~6 Y21-10. Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50)., ^; J' v# b) Q' z
4 E: v8 }" g( y# k; j( jIssue 22: Level Fallacies
" I4 A4 S3 ?/ W$ I) k2 F; F& ]22-01. Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73./ c! ?1 |; F1 c4 u
22-02. Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191.3 \7 p0 d b& t
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.( ]0 t9 ^2 v+ q @
22-04. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357.8 ]4 I, s6 @( I* U, a
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.
: L- @" s3 W* ^$ r8 W" d22-06. Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777.3 j6 m" z6 f* S
N. I: A6 m1 a2 sIssue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena
" [. }0 O$ f$ k23-01. James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112.
( J: b- Q M' X0 O* W7 j23-02. Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller.2 d" G; b4 ]1 a+ [5 p1 O* g% k0 s
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.
4 D& n& P$ n1 A) [. i6 C8 h: C23-04. Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540.
0 X$ j6 O7 x7 p' V9 N23-05. **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53.
M" U* ~ e8 S; a) I! O T23-06. 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: 1-38.0 g: e4 |7 w7 k$ M( N: }8 v0 X
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.
e, J* t& T$ m1 e/ O$ v23-08. Horwitz, S. K., & Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects ofteam diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic analysis of team demography.Journal of Management, 33, 6, 987-1005.
3 v' ^# \# Y, N; F1 h23-09. Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42.
! K7 u s0 t& i23-10. Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348.
# p& v8 _- I$ K8 t ~ y8 s23-11. Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.0 z6 c3 E7 o+ e P" K; z
23-12. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.
- a9 t2 W5 U/ L4 C7 @' U/ l2 q23-13. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. 1981.Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 501-524.7 X8 [* j8 M4 p) Q. x( N+ \
23-14. **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974.5 m& {4 ?$ I/ ]2 o! |4 q
) p. ]% T7 K( h3 J4 U8 \
Issue 24: Levels in Theory Building3 L& M1 ~6 H# b
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.
5 H' J5 L$ k* z( W2 K! [" b- t24-02. Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248.0 t) h! h" r( _1 V- {
24-03. Dansereau, F., Yammarino, F. J., & Kohles, J. C. 1999. Multiple levelsof analysis from a longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theorybuilding. Academy of Management Journal, 24: 346-357.3 {" R } K! M9 a$ Q+ M0 w
24-04. Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229." ~9 l8 z0 P6 Q. N
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)
7 O ?- k' V. n( B9 }. S! o24-06. 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)/ x+ v+ V6 f. C9 _$ }% l6 ~
24-07. Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.
( k) ~+ u, J) l3 X$ K24-08. 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.
6 ^. L/ L6 _ T `% Q: d24-09. Glick, W. H. (1980). Problems in cross-level inference. In K.H.Roberts & L. Burstein (eds.) Issues in Aggregation. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. 17-30.* Y- O }, F/ e
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).7 ^) K+ K+ L A0 m/ K9 ~
24-11. Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201.3 ]: _3 U0 g4 a, A' ~& l0 _6 L
/ b% ^1 r7 f" P: e! X
Issue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective
( C U" s, [' w, u6 L25-01. **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922.' q9 v) |& i* o5 O' B8 q
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.
7 M4 R) [ l" H, o( |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.
7 r$ N7 M% k' \1 ]8 Q+ f# k25-04. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338./ T5 S# \7 _. h
25-05. Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610.1 T$ n. a8 N r5 c- c0 B
25-06. Tosi, H. 1992. The organization and the environment: The E/Olink in the model. The Environment/Organization/Person Contingency Model: AMeso Approach to the Study of Organizations. 29-66. Greenwich, Conn: JAI.4 @! {: l+ \0 F0 L# [) g$ j
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.+ {9 t- h: J' f& `5 n% s$ a
0 T' X( Q9 o7 L* Q+ R: K
Issue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory
' C- p/ e } c/ x# q: L' g26-01. **Kozlowski, S.W.J. & Kline, K. 2000. A multilevel approach to theory andresearch in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K.and K, 3-90.5 n% z2 C! y& x$ W9 ]9 _
26-02. Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307.: X5 @- b- ~+ B
26-03. Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346.6 l' x+ T- j# H8 p8 S
, U) a. T7 Y4 j" {' X# I* I
Issue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research% Z5 Y+ p; d; ?! V U0 w) J& ?
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.- s, \) j+ T8 j( D* n+ u
27-02. **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.0 _. {7 u$ b& F2 j1 z& o* ^. P: ~
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.$ a2 M$ `8 ~* B7 J& m
# F0 S$ Y3 \! Z: P0 X! S% w* q
Issue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process
: g5 A' W a1 `2 Q1 `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.; u: }% ?6 L* [/ U; m0 Z* |
28-02. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253., \; {0 p4 W/ a; D, Y
28-03. Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453.- q" @1 e' @/ S0 O0 J$ s* X
28-04. Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773.
; a C% M& Y3 L. z28-05. 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.
& }! U Y0 `5 u5 J. s2 y6 N5 ^% c7 E8 k8 z/ ~
Issue 29: Measurement and Aggregation" ~8 c, y; n5 u3 l- W
29-01. Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765." R! R/ S; {5 p$ ~# Z6 V2 f
29-02. Burke, M. J. & Dunlap, W. P. 2002. Estimating interrateragreement with the average deviation index: A user’s guide. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5(2): 159-172., u: m1 _; k8 m
29-03. James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229.& X3 r% H' ~3 }6 }( q/ P
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.
( I+ x6 N* ]% {( O29-05. James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1993. Rwg: Anassessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 78(2): 306-309.! C4 r1 ]$ H; B. t, R4 b! K( ?
29-06. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hattrup, K. 1992. A disagreementabout within-group agreement: Disentangling issues of consistency versusconsensus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(2): 161-167.
# E; j+ D$ y% t' \7 n; s2 q9 A29-07. Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582.
" l$ C+ c$ V+ P4 i- x- S4 t29-08. Freeman, J. 1980. The unit problem in organizational research.In W.M. Evan (Ed.), Frontiers in organization and management (pp.59-68). NY: Praeger.
& U0 w( o3 D; ]% U: z w29-09. Campbell, D. T. 1958. Common fate, similarity, and otherindices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities.Behavioral Science, 3: 14-25.* c* t: `/ k: z% l5 w" T% t; p
29-10. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563.
/ o, f X+ ^9 K$ ^1 }9 a0 \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.
! J: `" O9 A# n5 @6 n5 `1 P29-12. 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.
0 } d4 ]$ [ y- ^* E" u% M/ g29-13. Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373.
4 Z/ a7 b% q( _" S6 g, N( B/ ]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.
! R7 M, [) X1 z, O4 q S29-15. Bliese, P. D. & Hanges, P. J. 2004. Being too liberal andtoo conservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they wereindependent. Organizational Research Methods, 7: 400-417. a+ ] z# Y+ L; R# O) J, w3 y
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.- J: k y: A& \' 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: 331–348.5 a: E7 b! I2 }2 q* l
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.& ?) U1 @" |% p4 ^3 G
29-19. McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46.: y9 k$ g* h8 r9 |
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.; d% B( H5 \3 `9 p
29-21. Burke, M. J., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. S. 1999. Onaverage deviation indices for estimating interrater agreement.Organizational Research Methods, 2(1): 49-68.9 B* i3 c( g! Q6 j
# b/ ~0 e* V5 D1 w, P+ U
Issue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis
; T$ V$ ~$ C6 X# Q30-01. Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395.; T( [! {3 r* z0 s
30-02. James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424.8 c$ N0 O6 L) t
30-03. George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.
' D) d" c) A% v5 I# s4 P N0 `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.
3 D* P: Z/ J% _2 S M. q30-05. 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." _; ~" u% n; G1 ?8 e( t! W. R* c$ c! [
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.
9 T- T# `- k. ?+ S1 Z; b, g. H30-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. H. 1989. On the empiricalidentifications of dimensions of cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20(2): 133-151.( f5 n; \" E; `6 v+ f% 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.& Z. g$ J# h n4 C
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: 346-357.1 B( F% Z2 I) C* k5 |4 N9 j1 ^
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. 512-553.8 @ f. C( _% o4 q
4 Y: G9 q, X2 e9 X& W+ b8 l( g7 K7 \
Issue 31: Introduction to HLM
" A2 i# T2 V- |1 Y( m. T31-01. **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744.
+ I3 t* |5 J0 i' f. r+ W% f, r31-02. Hofmann, D. A. & Griffin, M. A., Gavin, M. B. 2000. Theapplication of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K.& K. 467-511.
9 g3 i( \' w0 f# Z1 ]31-03. **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641.
" o% m4 l# N) ?2 g5 i$ a31-04. 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.
: c7 H+ ]0 ? F% S8 W ^& {7 O4 A0 B5 B$ ?2 N. y
Issue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM8 O# v U- g- a$ d0 G, e
32-01. Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297.8 l1 f& x( f- f6 \4 \# A: `6 e
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.
1 F- ?: c: Y4 o+ C7 c32-03. 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.( F: q0 u, {* f; Q& N
32-04. Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33.
& X0 e; {* G o32-05. **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94.
5 H) s6 F( L0 U' r2 P4 m" G32-06. Glission, C., & James, L. R. 2002. The cross-level effects of culture andclimate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:767-794.
1 s+ ]: P: i, c3 |9 y0 L32-07. Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522.4 [; k% I' h' c6 x& E M) Y
32-08. Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255.. v. c/ E) t( G q
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.( A& g; a0 u1 O2 N" S) l
32-10. Paris, L. 2004. The effects of gender and culture on implicitleadership theories: A cross-cultural study. William H. Newman Award, Academyof Management meeting. (Award given to a single-authored paper based ondissertation)
. p% b2 P7 T: n7 h( i9 m32-11. Sacco, J. M., & Schmitt, N. 2005. A dynamic multilevel model of demographicdiversity and misfit effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2):203-231., j* L& T" h# _* m( {; w! y! ]& V
32-12. Steensma, H. K., Marino, L., & Dickson, P. H. 2000. Theinfluence of national cultural on the formation of technology alliances byentrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 951-973.
# X5 B* A! K: |3 Z# Y7 l32-13. 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.# Y+ f* P, d7 R9 `; {7 n
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 o" d$ u1 H' m& k4 j/ k
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.
$ m& D6 |0 Y+ p* l
; _& e# ?2 ^4 n4 L _& [5 ]Issue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research% E. h# z; N0 {$ v8 d+ W+ e7 a
33-01. Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571.( \, \/ L1 O$ A& D
33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582.' V3 M( w4 R" T7 ^6 U
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.& ~1 w( F9 L" s; ^
33-04. Chen, G., Mathieu, J. E., & Bliese, P. D. 2004. Aframework for conducting multilevel construct validation. In F. J. Yammarino& F. Dansereau (Eds.), Research inmultilevel issues: Multilevel issues in organizational behavior and processes (Vol.3): 273-303. Elsevier: Oxford, U.K.
# h, w3 i/ R9 p5 g1 ]' p" T5 R33-05. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. E. 2007. A framework fortesting meso-mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior. Journalof Organizational Behavior, 28: 141-172.! w/ I7 |1 _0 p4 }$ m
33-06. Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277.6 w" V4 N& K; t( P) |. T* w
# ^6 J; H6 ~- b& q( | J
Issue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review& v) d. H* d: y% o, A. v* v
Schwab: Chapters 15 and 21; E- I# ~' T2 q: {
34-01. 應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信
$ a p2 y% p" K' e34-02. 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.
/ m, x* X0 \3 j1 Z7 H34-03. 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.
L0 _: w0 ~3 Z3 H34-04. **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout).0 Q; x6 S0 P0 K
34-05. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515.
: J& j7 o. J! ^ F8 M. E34-06. **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.) x! O \5 j4 Y" b$ U
34-07. **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6.$ U& I# i& L' |$ a
34-08. Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164.
q( o+ x+ A6 {& P! _34-09. Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307.
$ i \( E% p2 Y% H+ L34-10. Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92.
+ Q Z- k4 @' ]8 r H& C4 L- v0 F# r: y: q( a
Issue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism2 M$ C1 Y; I5 N
35-01. **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。
" \. X% a( {* f9 v+ c5 `水流花靜---科學與詩的對話。9 d! O8 C) g0 b3 Y$ S5 ?$ I
P.121~139.台北:天下文化。
2 a4 W9 T' t6 o35-02. 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.1 o6 c1 L) D! \8 o+ u, `# n1 ^
35-03. Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242.
( t0 l/ p7 |% }! q- p35-04. Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.: y+ I! i7 X4 h- ~
35-05. Canella, A. A. Jr., & Paetzold, R. L. 1994. Pfeffer’sbarriers to the advance of organizational science: A rejoinder. Academy ofManagement Review. 19(2): 331-341.
& n/ @* q$ E/ K* V# V) _; E# p1 s3 B35-06. Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312.
0 c: y$ W$ a- u1 M4 w# S* G35-07. Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2).
% |8 Q4 |. a) i' O) E5 c ]6 y35-08. Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620.. B. Q$ a; ^# G+ y2 ^
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)2 E) L( V$ {* W% V$ v
35-10. Vandenberg, R. J. & Lance, C. E. 2000. A Review andSynthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, andRecommendations for Organizational Research. Organizational ResearchMethods, 3: 4-70.
7 l M% f6 t; M& o35-11. Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158.
0 c0 I5 m2 L( m( M( r35-12. Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44.2 D8 q8 e/ o+ m8 h! w3 A
35-13. Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.6 z( K! Z9 i! z3 x: J0 ^& S& G
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.
- s& m4 @1 o9 e" j" R# d
% C3 I+ q( F# Z" x" Z3 Z n$ Y1 N<<End>> 本帖最后由 Kenneth 于 2011-5-3 15:37 编辑
8 |! f; g* x3 ^6 O3 M+ k( J! ~, V+ S' F7 b. l. h- S
|
|