- 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
![Rank: 50](static/image/common/star_level3.gif) ![Rank: 50](static/image/common/star_level3.gif) ![Rank: 50](static/image/common/star_level3.gif) ![Rank: 50](static/image/common/star_level1.gif) ![Rank: 50](static/image/common/star_level1.gif)
- 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 w3 N) h( y: w* y/ U2 R& ghttp://spaces.isu.edu.tw/~RMonline/website/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=52&Itemid=662 z7 k% ^: Q/ w8 P3 H$ R
& I" n, N% u ]8 Q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。
, _6 F( ~4 O/ d6 R+ R6 f+ P1 E% N
Kenny. f/ W! ]9 E5 A9 ]- q
3 `+ L: o ^3 L# X- B研究方法线上
6 m2 w$ R: g& _% d/ A3 }8 k
8 [, y; _( h1 t; o/ Y. JResearchMethodology I 0 _8 c, O" N3 g' c: E8 W& T
OverviewTextbooks3 Y1 O3 i0 Q0 R
Issue1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory % I) ]( M5 Z9 ?6 J$ t1 \
Issue2: Theory and Hypothesis Development
/ r" i8 T% U6 l! ]- A! R: a* C2 EIssue3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct # Y) } }/ V+ ^, V+ r
Issue4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity : O4 ^& y1 Z6 g
Issue5: Measurement: Scale Development 5 R; G5 G8 J" G; y C$ [
Issue6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
; l5 A3 E B0 x a# y$ f) _Issue7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing & i7 X! L* l( B3 ~1 g: s7 m2 _
Issue8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys
f F k, q. Q. }% P. t" w9 B/ CIssue9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments
! ~6 ?' T/ c) R3 r9 eIssue10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research
) }0 h# r/ b W) X* [Issue11: Statistical Analysis and Inference3 i2 Z R: I2 H0 M+ b4 ^
Issue12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation 9 V/ O, S. r; U& A1 d
Issue13: Testing mediating effects
- S% W7 s. x9 h- I& v" TIssue14: Testing moderating effects % o9 }0 a; b/ N3 E
Issue15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation 9 n6 U4 ^; K, w
Issue16: Reliability and Construct Validation
p0 p% H9 i+ `. a& g6 K$ M- b5 ]8 vIssue17: Common Method Variance ! c1 s; N, Q* I+ W, y( I3 s4 w
Issue18: Data Non-independence
1 J2 R! C5 ~1 B* c- K: a' @% bIssue19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and Indigenous Research)
5 h% ~ m3 ?# N% D1 U5 mIssue20: Structural Equation Modeling
. |! x: v. V- ]! ~+ w) I5 W5 o7 S$ p
" b2 k) r$ H; j/ f" ~: CMajor Textbooks:
1 J. n. K( u6 M, A w! Q& L0 aKerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt./ V/ ^+ B. ? U( L1 r
Schwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book]
% W: Z0 k8 t- ], o% y0 x" p7 C0 G6 CKlein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon]
9 q0 t" c/ L" `3 t, W. YSupplementary Books:
% \; g3 ^. g! h* E2 B/ P# SCohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon]; L0 {( M# \1 Y% S
Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]0 m$ J. A" M) E9 D8 |" i
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 @; B0 O0 I7 G# HPedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
. {' o5 H$ E# _5 Z; t; DRogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.2 n: g% a( q' D9 g v. F* `3 ^& ?
Journal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6).* {* \1 r' ^& G( b3 V
Academy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2)./ P; y9 O: E7 A1 o5 ]" k* ~+ g% I; V
Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2).' N# V. G- n5 r" b$ ?. r6 J
Leadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1).
, d8 \; ]2 y/ A7 E8 R) \+ KAcademy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6.2 L8 x, S" o% C
Kreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.) A3 ^% p1 z7 z; ]3 |0 ^; O
Raudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7 |* ^( @- o3 ]( d7 ~Roberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
9 j- Y! M1 d/ B' Z! u2 VRoberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5 z" Z6 I+ K8 p8 Z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。" R% ]" b+ v% ~8 ^# d. q4 J- V6 b
' l/ n" ^' V( d" i
Issue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory
2 V* R7 T! \2 v g( T, i8 zK & L: Chapter 15 W$ r& i; G7 x( J& U- S
01-01. Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks.+ L+ e+ E6 W& T C2 \) A+ ]
01-02. Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91.
; D1 @9 r2 ~. H [. P01-03. Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 584-602.4 ?" F( v0 r) {/ h9 D
01-04. Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128.) b. N% Y" Y: q" U& ~
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.
1 n! j7 y- `0 V& }: O. `) O01-06. Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly,41: 262-269.
. j, Z. t# Z: a1 D$ {01-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。
& G" N& J) s. K01-08. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch2: 研究的起點:提問。4 Q4 E( G Z; Y6 G" \, E6 w
6 V' p* I# F3 v! c; K
Issue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development; W# k D, A$ z
02-01. Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2
. q$ ~" W# T1 j% m3 p5 x$ c02-02. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review,14: 496-515., w' a0 V3 J8 l8 n, b
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.
+ d2 q3 u& n" p9 t! T+ R02-04. Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? Academy of ManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095.
& ], r# x* W5 e6 E5 g* Z2 ^02-05. Davis, M. S. 1971. That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenologyof sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of Social Science,1(2): 309-344.5 z1 ~$ j3 G9 O4 p
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.
2 s9 F- \3 T$ d( t. u0 e02-07. Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010.
$ p, A' u1 U8 e6 j: v1 k) N9 h02-08. Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441.
* ]9 \# t0 B/ X! S" E0 L( b- q02-09. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. A. (1993). The motivational effects ofcharismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4,577–594.
7 \" L' F9 J- Y( K- @02-10. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.# H& Q6 ]# h( `& g6 O) ^7 i* C
02-11. Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.) B3 }( i1 s6 h8 U
02-12. Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.* B. J0 m# U, M3 s0 `5 U
02-13. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。% @' F' P5 R. X6 C) u0 c
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.! F& L: K0 n% z8 Z: j/ B
! K* K( q( l1 D, D& qIssue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion]
8 d$ w: a% [; v9 B! t6 `) D% C03-01. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192." Z5 M3 I- z' Q2 T0 _; h
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): 143-160.1 [: F4 ]9 P: i. L8 g
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." d5 [+ k# A/ T: r( B* b# N1 X
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.
$ u3 f* l7 I1 `$ X6 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.
& K! ]2 [8 m0 N03-06. 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): 744-764.2 R- l+ b4 C1 ~' W' b, v6 \: p! E
03-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch12% G+ Q) S, q* M4 Y' }5 w8 P7 @0 F8 I) D
- f; d" H( B4 P& Z; E3 UIssue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion]' ]7 S0 V9 _6 x6 _1 q9 M
**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 81 y$ I7 U) i6 h3 p, z' @
K & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28.7 @ U3 T8 t$ E0 b
04-01. Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.; @# X+ M q- S' S, y( O# i* F
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.9 W4 D/ c% i- o, ~
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.+ X' F5 A+ F+ O: M% j( t
04-04. Schriesheim, C. A., Cogliser, C. C., Scandura, T. A., Lankau,M. J., & Powers, K. J. 1999. An empirical comparison of approaches forquantitatively assessing the content adequacy of paper-and-pencil instruments. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 2: 140-156.3 i/ p% ~9 p% {5 e; g1 s& o
04-05. Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375.
! i4 j+ b" E* v% m* p7 X `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.
( x5 Z- q7 F% F" C) s04-07. 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.
3 e3 |) |7 P2 Z8 K2 K04-08. Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96.
' h6 l( ^5 S" T4 N' `5 Q+ C& K9 }. h: q6 a2 g
Issue 5: Measurement: Scale Development
1 k, |8 w8 o1 K( G**Schwab: Chapter 4
+ R% S! ]* R# u) W3 w- e6 @05-01. **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121.
( D/ Z- i! Y' Y$ U) W6 R& u05-02. DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.8 X$ r* m# s0 p
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.; \2 `. w0 n+ m+ i/ b% C: Y
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 q, G$ _! ] J
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: 141-160.7 B8 A/ x$ n' e( P; c
05-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch11
. u/ ^2 f0 W* P: N7 i7 d3 \2 ^+ V/ |, V/ Y- E6 g# S
Issue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
. D' M% H# z+ H4 @MOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3). s8 T! i7 J: C/ ^$ t) C
w# A5 S7 D- A9 S$ ?' N
Issue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing. R1 U& @( L1 ^ a6 X
K & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 5: _6 M. A6 ]. y6 f; W1 \
**Schwab: Chapter 137 K n6 E- [" z0 l8 c
07-01. **Higgins, M. C. & Kram, K. E. 2001. Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: Adevelopmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 6(2):264-288.
/ f, t5 X! T$ T( u07-02. 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.
" V6 p, E+ y) D+ s5 C d07-03. **Cortina, J. M., & Folger, R. G. 1998. When is it acceptable to accept a nullhypothesis: No way, Jose? Organizational Research Methods, 1: 334-350.$ d. }8 h+ g: I6 ~2 W9 L0 H$ ^
07-04. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch5
: k3 z# q4 l' z; B) h2 K9 ` B% M, Z07-05. 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.
3 g( H" C* `7 S: M! u3 {+ i0 e# v ]" s0 v7 H2 S u. `, N) B
Issue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys! g1 }/ p8 \- {* i4 |& m1 m% j/ X
**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 79 ^; f5 C7 e/ Y6 ]" E
K & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 29 {2 d7 `4 a- ^ i' d, ~7 m
08-01. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, N. 1986. The “science of the sophomore” revisited:From conjecture to empiricism. Academy of Management Review, 11(1):191-207.
" P9 W5 P( F. a7 L- K08-02. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, N. 1987. Student guinea pigs: Porcine predictorsand particularistic phenomena. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):160-163.
: _- }- }7 h4 r* l- Y08-03. Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159.
0 Q% a% g2 b0 F9 v; H08-04. Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.& U1 x0 A: u1 b: B/ a: k$ I
08-05. **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008.
( H) }. \$ m9 {0 r! M/ D6 A08-06. 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., ]' G3 G+ m; ?: R- v
08-07. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.6 u" u ^1 Q6 F' L
08-08. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch8
# P3 @5 ], q N& K08-09. 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.: e6 P0 }4 J3 w. d1 V
08-10. Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179.: H( e) T9 W0 F# _9 ^/ Y
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, 141-157.9 N) G# }5 r* k7 x- A0 I6 w) C
08-12. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.7 r9 q% s$ _, ?
! W) D7 k/ e( f4 b; v. L( b
Issue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments
7 z5 ]7 _7 @" a5 D**Schwab: Chapter 69 E7 `% ?, l) s( ~1 f0 b B
K & L: Chapters 24 and 22& t m, c6 n0 L" t/ d1 S
09-01. Cook, T. D. & Shadish, W. R. 1994. Social experiments:Some developments over the past fifteen years. Annual Review of Psychology,45: 545-580.
' A: E6 o% r0 k7 E; z8 D. d09-02. **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.
8 R" b8 ~& N* |, p09-03. 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.- a8 r7 M1 p: _3 o* {( }
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.$ ^" q Y: D, _6 p7 h
09-05. Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.
, Z; ^ s b$ z9 t09-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch6, ch7. t4 E1 M, E% T+ p5 X
% G% H1 N9 g! O5 n9 [) I, N# n
Issue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research1 G; C+ o z9 {9 I
10-01. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.
4 j; p7 X# u, E+ Y10-02. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576.8 w" i) F7 d: H
10-03. Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.
7 v) s3 o. E( ~2 D$ T1 w10-04. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441.% n* n Z+ q+ V+ P% u4 }. A% H7 i
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.; S6 P V; D: N$ n1 ]
10-06. King, N. 2004. Using interviews in organizational research. InC. Cassell and G. Symon (eds.) Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods inOrganizational Research. 11-22. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
# k/ i' g) L1 U( a# _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.. w: }) `7 w; P. K
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.
- z: w; ?9 I; x2 K* K10-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch102 Y6 x1 Q3 w1 U% @
10-10. Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455.
2 `# n9 y# f) q* }
& t D* e) g: E. X* HIssue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion]
6 E/ D z9 O+ Y9 O4 Z**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13
6 u1 B. N+ r. o" y& EK & L: Chapters 9
, ~' a2 Y$ n& |3 U/ B5 i# I11-01. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759.
9 x* h% s ]% `# U% ^$ V: `1 R11-02. Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218." b$ R+ w( D: w. X/ V( `8 `- N# l% |5 ~
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.: z% W$ c, a: l" ~* ]- I
11-04. Rauniar, R. & Shah, S. (2002). Statistical significance vs.practical (meaningful or clinical or biological) significance for academic andnon-academic research. Decision Sciences Institute 2002 Annual MeetingProceedings, 2469-2472.7 J; b3 k; x [$ i
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.
, X1 p) p8 F% F1 Y. \ a# c11-06. 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. V5 _; t+ q1 S. o2 _3 @
2 V: X7 y- Z" k; {0 C# k; c2 g* ]4 XIssue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation
9 U" z% p% \. d! E# \**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19# K7 I/ w; Q1 n: j1 ?7 q
K & L: Chapters 33 and 34
7 u3 k/ t& _; d# ~6 s2 D& o12-01. **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.
+ `; ~/ r/ \9 `. V12-02. James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321.
% S* p) R; e# k: c12-03. 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.- z X" @9 l% e0 e+ K
12-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.
5 i7 G) t1 {( `( k12-05. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch14
1 S! Q# K( C! o% F* H F
1 i9 R0 X# _% ? C8 `" ZIssue 13: Testing mediating effects9 ?2 R) o% p, u: L2 B* f
13-01. Mathieu, J. E., DeShon, R. P., & Bergh, D. D. 2008.Mediational inferences in organizational research: Then, now, and beyond. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 203-223., Q! j% `+ `% Y( s
13-02. Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358.
4 }+ J1 W( K. d; D4 ^* m13-03. James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363.6 X; T( \+ g* i7 k. f6 ]- f( G
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. P: v* M5 m0 z% o# h w# z0 ?
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.& `2 N. ]5 _" E/ J" Y+ i a
13-06. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47.
3 P7 E1 \' w/ x3 o13-07. Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398.) s- h* x& ~4 B- {7 G; n
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.6 V/ {0 U& a) N- a
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.
) y% t3 q1 B" g13-10. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619.
, q* ^/ l+ o+ |! P- W) G13-11. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158.# F# Y0 @0 A( B- Z9 G+ ^4 h8 p% p' r
13-12. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181.3 E: d( }+ ]; m' M) C1 L
13-13. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62.
6 D" T! }8 X3 R9 l3 [, P13-14. 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.
# u+ Y/ P6 h" C7 l7 _3 j2 a% j8 A! k13-15. Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515.
: L5 l( r+ ~4 y4 r. 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.' A j5 e3 N D
13-17. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107.9 d- a$ w6 P# c5 e+ T: k- e
13-18. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614./ }2 d A2 ~- {) t1 j, t
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.# G2 j2 q) i' u8 z
13-20. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62.! t5 s" z: e1 M6 i
13-21. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445.7 ~% E. o" D; 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.
. C2 A4 a8 r6 v& t13-23. 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. H4 n, T3 ~! P
0 g4 r% O/ a! P7 q( _ Issue 14: Testing moderating effects
5 O) |0 w0 v, A5 n14-01. 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.
0 m& s7 p- A7 f4 R! B' U14-02. Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417.
3 z9 z) c, X( }14-03. 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 a) K$ h# O# d; T0 u, e14-04. 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.' k4 j" d- V$ s8 j
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.
$ `& x9 S+ i0 @( E; p# H14-06. 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.
l' t; D* [. T: ~# u+ t9 N1 h; G2 [6 G
Issue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
8 A, T& c4 H, _( E, M' ~6 tSchwab: Chapters 11 and 195 F+ V- B/ W5 P" [# `
K & L: Chapters 33 and 34
4 @; ?% s( U9 ^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.
1 ?0 X5 u8 h: {# q15-02. 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.
! @2 Y) Q# h9 Q3 b! ~+ D; E15-03. Edwards, J. R., & Lambert L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12: 1-22." V& ~, E% E0 _ }, f
15-04. Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128.
5 b9 J6 U% `5 p15-05. 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.
* M. o! B, j/ m" t8 k' o+ k15-06. Muller, D., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2005). Whenmoderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 89: 852-863.+ f% G: A; _2 E& Z' j
15-07. Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444.
9 M; ^3 B( A7 o; o+ g! C- @1 B- {0 H+ p q! [
Issue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation/ O8 t$ C* C; l. J3 _6 |
Schwab: Chapters 14 and 17
# o; {2 x% C/ u8 L, E( Z lK & L: Chapter 28
, `% _! Q# ^( X16-01. Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87.
4 {: {3 L% P) p3 {/ V5 [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.
6 A5 u T8 _* X% C8 G# d! p16-03. Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105.
1 Z# c- x3 x9 N: s5 W: G0 O16-04. Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400.
3 |7 R9 [0 S; q16-05. Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302.# {) o( r; h: a8 i% z- R
16-06. 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): 385-417.6 b# e) O( L* a
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.. {0 W! a7 o# C4 b5 O8 B) w; Y6 l
: ~! g7 U- H0 ?
Issue 17: Common Method Variance
/ @; \0 E1 x: w8 f3 R& [0 {' N**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 20" Z" x- y! B$ l7 B6 d3 \8 d8 @
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.
7 L: U+ C$ a# ?0 E( }* p17-02. Doty, D. H. &Glick, W. H. 1998. Common methods bias: Does common methods variance reallybias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 374-406.! j5 k4 G; X# Q8 f2 x
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.
& h9 z% k. b0 B. P17-04. 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.
- ^ m+ Y6 H; y. I& [! G17-05. 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& @) t9 ?6 n, S8 q
17-06. Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research roblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544.# b% Y0 ]: \$ p( P4 B1 `9 L
17-07. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223.# j+ f# R9 b1 Q
17-08. Spector, P. E. & Brannick, M. T. 1995). The nature andeffects of method variance in organizational research. International Reviewof international and organizational Psychology, 10: 249-274.
& P/ t0 J$ n1 G# w17-09. Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232.
6 x {7 Z% d+ W. i5 |. `% U
# W8 }- ?! S: b" \( M: y5 i( bIssue 18: Data Non-independence7 n; b7 X9 \- M$ ]$ @! {4 Y0 m$ V, O
18-01. Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735.
1 d1 L' g* j4 C8 E( I18-02. Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75.. q0 J# e0 }& K/ a! L* v; I4 |
18-03. Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.
& g! o$ @- n F% L% N18-04. 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.
; ]+ e) _" ]! j6 f3 c% v3 L18-05. 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.
5 \! i2 v8 g& C9 [/ m18-06. 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.
2 c: a+ h8 ?% l0 u! ?# ?* X- z/ G6 [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.
! i0 C1 u; `9 W- m7 I% l9 d/ k0 z0 c$ X
Issue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch)8 R( Y5 ^8 I7 F4 [0 n
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.
3 B/ J" [! D: x# L, T7 ?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.
$ h/ P( ]3 v* n3 }" [7 Y19-03. Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209.
" L6 F" ]$ m4 w. Y7 U' U' 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.
/ G/ J1 Y+ b/ @: ^, f" j19-05. 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.
9 s; y, p8 Z: K/ @, p19-06. Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974.3 S* h" x5 k [8 h Y
19-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151.9 P) U. H& M/ a; ]6 O; g
19-08. Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215.
9 {7 T1 d) z. S. i5 E19-09. 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。6 c6 i* G8 T" _ V% L6 b" L0 g
6 M0 I' i4 e' E6 {' B' \ f+ l19-10. 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。
0 ]( M) g4 }2 N3 N: b2 g9 ^' k, O; ~" C( { x% l
19-11. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰
f" P' H" m) X+ Q9 Y! w8 N4 J; Q" P. ?) ? j5 g
19-12. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch17
2 y( L4 H" ?1 z19-13. 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.! o1 G( \$ [6 R+ @5 c4 Z8 m: K
19-14. Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia PacificJournal of Management, 21, 491-513.. `# X- m: z4 q w: y4 z, r
$ r5 p; P" {% }4 ^$ h* t5 t' h
Issue 20: Structural Equation Modeling# M/ s% k$ G- F% m8 o
K & L: Chapter 35.
7 R& `6 X9 s4 g3 J) K1 @7 i20-01. 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。+ N$ x4 g( ~# q: M+ Q4 u5 |
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.
* [, |5 }- Z8 N% r0 O1 v20-03. 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.* g) x4 Z8 y! I) N! z( R
20-04. Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172.1 j8 L% H! U. {3 S3 _
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.& Y% `) c* z8 X7 o2 O2 J
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.
( l7 f- @: T0 Q: L2 w. {# @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.
: s0 f: T8 D$ \! Q9 |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.; R; F( ^( q( J( S$ L& ]
20-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch13$ y7 z1 G# V/ _1 T3 f4 l: c- w
n# G3 ]" d8 F: [
Issue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism% x3 j5 Y$ f5 h% O2 i* ~: V1 _
21-01. Courgeau, D. 2003. General introduction. In D. Courgeau (Ed.), Methodologyand Epistemology of multilevel analysis: Approaches from different socialsciences (pp.1-23). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
& j! U; }/ \+ h( |0 w7 R% m21-02. Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.; Q9 j, |: P5 `; p6 x
21-03. Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14." L. C. R$ Q+ y" l, ]/ h9 f
21-04. Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652.* L' ]- m1 M$ J2 Y
21-05. Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607.
* \6 L8 ?$ ~ T( K* i21-06. Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613.
- h2 o/ \5 U/ x2 r: u21-07. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68).
: H; M( U3 ?, l% n! @( a) `21-08. von Bertalanffy, L. 1972. The history and status of generalsystems theory. In G.J. Klir (Ed.), Trends in general systems theory(pp. 21-41). NY: Wiley.
, ?9 g$ R/ `& z21-09. von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53).
$ h1 @2 v! I5 L: T, ~7 |21-10. Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50).2 k, u% r5 L6 M C
7 ^% ~7 V. s# p7 K8 t4 @' [7 _Issue 22: Level Fallacies7 z0 N y$ A1 o
22-01. Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73.
7 S) \& b& k. K5 t22-02. Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191.$ r) Q+ Q" m( F, v0 P7 b; v
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.- v7 @6 D+ }" z; W2 }: A" ]
22-04. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357.9 F0 f( {& [$ q: c
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.
& I/ {: |) ~4 J2 H# l. |/ Z22-06. Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777.
8 t1 Q: h5 i B* M4 Q6 ~# n9 U( F4 |# a. _ j+ A, c
Issue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena9 n6 a4 d# ?" o h- C
23-01. James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112.
1 ]4 _9 B I! o23-02. Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller.; T$ a! }, e: m! G" a9 K b
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.
) b: U# @, K# n; k* R23-04. Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540./ h2 d7 e* T6 O
23-05. **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53.) F1 q* A6 G" E+ u
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.) Y0 d7 M1 @" K) B9 Y: d5 H
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: 189-239.6 _" \; r" b# s! g# c# A+ z& u
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, 987-1005.2 d8 M; z1 Q* u- g! L* t) p; E
23-09. Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42.
) C9 l7 q6 d) D) C( B23-10. Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348.
. o5 t5 ^2 k R+ o23-11. Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.
& @2 Q. {$ O$ l# }6 f, u9 F23-12. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.6 k5 W+ _) q- C3 Y8 r X7 R+ r
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.
$ p4 D9 _/ I. U' I! Y0 a0 F, b23-14. **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974.8 t. V% D8 ]+ d" g5 x
( ]( F% B- m' F- B' C$ `Issue 24: Levels in Theory Building
7 `; A4 o- t! Y7 W: I24-01. 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): 1385-1399.0 Q, f1 O4 x" j9 a
24-02. Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248.8 R4 ]. m3 c5 P" z5 ?4 L% [$ {& S, z* H
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.
+ A1 Q" X- x2 i& f- l24-04. Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229.' O* Y. c* Z3 n3 E/ \
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)' M" a( P* {+ y! P4 F4 H, P
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)9 E1 ^+ r0 i% c, B/ A
24-07. Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.
5 q4 h& l$ E1 z24-08. 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. w( f8 L$ J V1 R# Y. Q/ M) {( C
24-09. Glick, W. H. (1980). Problems in cross-level inference. In K.H.Roberts & L. Burstein (eds.) Issues in Aggregation. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. 17-30.
- P) }8 H) A3 M+ R# j0 h2 J% G* C24-10. 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).
! X3 A8 ~& j' [) m+ Y! |24-11. Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201.
6 c2 p: c4 t- e2 ]
, D' R# c/ [7 m/ U# ~0 ?1 sIssue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective
, p8 s. x, P u8 O. l0 [25-01. **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922.
: G$ e" S! X) \, Y2 P- J25-02. **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.
$ I R# P9 r8 {! V6 \+ h25-03. Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. 1982. Toward a macro-orientedmodel of leadership: An odyssey, In J.G. Hunt, U. Sekaran, & C. Schrieshiem(Eds.), Leadership: Beyond Establishment Views, Carbondale, IL: SouthernIllinois University Press.
" T6 g" P3 N) z0 z( V9 C25-04. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338.
6 \2 H) D9 t6 n9 S4 Q25-05. Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610.: Y; T: |# i0 \& E, r3 n
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.$ Z" Q t. o5 h
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.' s. l5 Z$ Y! I# S& U# E' Y3 }
7 K- D8 \& ], }3 C p3 H" d
Issue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory
% t# I7 q' j& u, ^2 ~8 M26-01. **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.$ Z) x6 g. P3 f; N
26-02. Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307.
+ @$ |: l; J2 M8 q+ r( G26-03. Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346.
7 I) j- F7 H. _' M1 H" ^9 D; T- d& L- ?+ @5 S( A5 j
Issue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research3 ?/ a+ B$ ?% C) e
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.% N) o. m! |. E' l! t- t; Q
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.- ^7 R3 V7 S( W3 m+ S* R
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.
+ _# t: r$ k" n; Q) P' k9 N+ S6 i# X) t: V8 @
Issue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process
7 t+ _$ p+ N: K28-01. Morgeson, F. P., & Hofmann, D. A. 1999. The structure and function ofcollective constructs: Implications for multilevel research and theorydevelopment. Academy of Management Review, 24: 249-265.4 W/ O0 x# }3 [
28-02. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253.
3 T h2 f/ P9 `* S) F# A) K) s28-03. Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453.
1 p1 H& [' l6 Q: q/ Q% O28-04. Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773.
3 t8 _6 T- O" D2 a! O1 k28-05. 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, 239-261.3 u# l, {8 X" s# F6 w; ^
( S) U) e6 V9 C2 j9 V
Issue 29: Measurement and Aggregation
' h x/ d. P& G- G) t: b29-01. Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765.6 g6 d/ j. j' b) E1 m$ @4 l
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.& v9 D, B' e8 E2 D2 M- Q
29-03. James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229.% Y* u P: v+ x3 F" c5 k
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.! x2 N9 a' T, I/ g& A
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.& P) K- {# e7 R
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.
" N# }6 F% T S. S- E29-07. Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582.
7 r3 G: X" x! t( c9 O29-08. Freeman, J. 1980. The unit problem in organizational research.In W.M. Evan (Ed.), Frontiers in organization and management (pp.59-68). NY: Praeger.- x8 U& w' a/ W8 U, ~ ?" I) v
29-09. Campbell, D. T. 1958. Common fate, similarity, and otherindices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities.Behavioral Science, 3: 14-25.6 h1 S. K/ F' V
29-10. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563.
: c5 L& h% H z2 B0 q7 K29-11. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. 1989. Interrater reliability coefficientscannot be computed when only one stimulus is rated. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 74: 368-370." \6 a' {- ~: X$ K- a, i1 W, J7 L7 P
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.
; ^ ?2 l W- W/ S29-13. Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373.' v( M7 R+ d! j4 A
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.
- ~ F2 A+ Q% g: s/ V" v5 \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.
$ ] X% R7 u& E, b* v' [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- {& v0 a( o: g7 l- \! ]; e$ s% K, F29-17. 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.
4 y; c; f h6 ^& G' |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." A5 i N* h: U: q4 [
29-19. McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46.
( L% ?& q' Z9 I! D2 K29-20. 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.; Y$ Y' k/ K. D0 E K+ V7 r
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.
2 P1 D) u1 H# T. i7 {: y* o. k5 w/ B$ F, r! K) Y4 A! Q
Issue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis
; B, Y+ X9 A* g30-01. Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395.% _4 A# v" ]. n, \+ w9 t
30-02. James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424.9 u' l) K1 K1 L" L: R
30-03. George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.
: o, L2 m! ~) C; X7 q30-04. 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.' D0 H/ K3 s2 {
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.; r1 ^+ R6 p# O
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.) D' v- A! I+ a- } `8 T
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.* ^/ p$ q' D) ? {5 M1 _
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: 506-521.7 R" O- R+ r# R. H, |! _
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.) [: T* j5 j/ R% ]
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.
) z5 I5 l; k i2 H
0 u& Y+ ?' i5 g. |0 I9 P3 Y0 |- mIssue 31: Introduction to HLM
- w. }/ ^, v0 ~# k31-01. **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744.
2 ]0 _; I/ p) B# @, L/ Q31-02. Hofmann, D. A. & Griffin, M. A., Gavin, M. B. 2000. Theapplication of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K.& K. 467-511.
/ ~% O( }, N/ T+ l. Q1 p7 y8 T31-03. **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641.
2 z3 I0 z; w2 J% U% D31-04. 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.
; B8 G5 B- C* ]# g' |
7 _6 H+ v- b7 h S0 N3 X: u% l# cIssue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM. c1 M# \( d0 [5 p: Y9 f8 c
32-01. Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297.& ]0 l* E5 R$ |1 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.! w$ V* X, m+ B7 Q
32-03. Eyring, J. D., Johnson, D. S., & Francis, D. J. 1993. Across-level units-of-analysis approach to individual differences in skillacquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 805-815.
3 G0 J) @/ v, {2 D& n32-04. Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33.
/ D0 \+ D* L0 }6 P" n3 f32-05. **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94.% y( B8 @% x& s/ h: B" y: e3 j# B
32-06. Glission, C., & James, L. R. 2002. The cross-level effects of culture andclimate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:767-794.7 _" d* m6 b5 ^2 `7 \0 j+ i
32-07. Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522.
0 E2 S5 r; E9 b6 F32-08. Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255.7 ^$ ^- q9 p+ {' t% I" i/ N6 Y
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: 775-793.4 \. n. g( i4 h2 t
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), g' M$ U- J+ d6 h$ W
32-11. Sacco, J. M., & Schmitt, N. 2005. A dynamic multilevel model of demographicdiversity and misfit effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2):203-231.: E U$ ?" L% W7 V# Q
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.
5 B i4 g0 v* b! U5 C32-13. 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.) r' Z9 R W) w* H
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.
+ _8 I. J/ L7 n; @; K) Q32-15. 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.
1 D, Y1 ]4 X. @9 R! ]% `6 v2 I1 N% F1 h; @) S
Issue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research" v! ]+ u: z6 f! S, V3 G" k5 L
33-01. Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571.) t& X7 I& \. r4 [7 h6 c( `
33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582.. D5 _: f# t5 m4 `" N
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.
; n1 U: K) `9 ` R+ H/ h9 u33-04. 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.
U# J1 l7 d+ z/ V33-05. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. E. 2007. A framework fortesting meso-mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior. Journalof Organizational Behavior, 28: 141-172.5 u8 c2 l9 j% ~0 F' t8 b
33-06. Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277.
4 V1 |; K4 T. L! R+ _. s$ E6 f; s. g. n1 B; U/ v3 U
Issue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review) _. G7 v6 t0 c1 u
Schwab: Chapters 15 and 212 ]. K% j: ~- X p) B& n3 {" ~9 Z E P( G
34-01. 應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信
& ~" T# D1 f6 l/ E& x; U6 B* a, Q9 l34-02. 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 |0 m0 W3 `/ p2 @- {0 r34-03. Bartunek, J. M., Rynes, S. L., & Ireland, R. D. 2006. What makes a management researchinteresting and why does it matter? Academy of Management Journal,49(1): 9-15.
! @7 M( f; n. I# k# y6 h, E34-04. **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout).
8 _9 `# g1 a2 F3 w! X34-05. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515.& K3 j% b- A F. L, J0 E* [
34-06. **Daft, R. L. 1995. Why I recommended that your manuscript berejected and what you can do about it. In L.L. Cummings & P.J. Frost(eds.), Publishing in the Organizational Science, 2nd ed.,164-182. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9 u( c5 x0 L# @; I1 E34-07. **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6.) K" }8 J9 l, C O
34-08. Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164.
' J/ |6 D2 c1 @# K+ b) g2 C34-09. Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307.
0 G9 K/ }, D) e2 @2 g34-10. Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92.. H; \! f! t W( S Y; ~$ f
9 s- D4 I6 k4 U8 R) M" ^: y
Issue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism
; L6 z) }& C: F+ M1 H. q35-01. **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。
/ |) P8 z$ P0 c4 M# U水流花靜---科學與詩的對話。, ?2 f. N' Q. I; f p! C9 p; e
P.121~139.台北:天下文化。+ x* K9 ^3 l5 i6 `6 \% n; i! T
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.! B0 d m l* L! Z; p) T3 M! s
35-03. Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242.0 M8 N$ e7 H3 ]" A- v0 m" J
35-04. Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.* L- u6 Q$ x# Y. |
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): 331-341.5 x# F# U; ?: r" n$ q% u: C
35-06. Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312.6 P7 R' l+ j: d, I
35-07. Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2)." U) r+ s% ^$ K4 C% W
35-08. Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620.
$ q) N) D$ z+ x9 W5 h7 S& @8 X35-09. **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)
( G! ?- d* C2 ^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.& a& E- e& L/ D; x$ _
35-11. Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158.3 A$ Q8 }( _: s- ^. R4 V. `
35-12. Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44.* H }5 b: V8 {9 `3 Y
35-13. Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.4 w; e3 j7 d9 [! Q e, n
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.
1 r+ M7 ]* z% p* H& o1 Q4 ~6 g& u2 C" ~8 t- T6 q' Q
<<End>> 本帖最后由 Kenneth 于 2011-5-3 15:37 编辑 6 v6 c. S, k. a
& K6 N% k5 d& {( L/ _1 i2 F |
|