- 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:
5 }" ~$ R# B: Z0 H& i4 X" T* u* Bhttp://spaces.isu.edu.tw/~RMonline/website/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=52&Itemid=66
0 \1 R! O$ G+ m+ u9 V
% a" m2 s# z5 h; e k因为是公开网站,资料应该是公开的。同时我怕国内的同学不容易上到台湾的网站,所以剪贴了出来给大家参考。不过,不仅这不是我的东西,所以请大家作为“参考”好了。 C. Z3 V0 W# ~! h) x" i. A9 {3 `
2 r8 ?8 T0 m( u" Y
Kenny
6 s# K* J. d, K% [
k/ c8 y6 r: ~! t研究方法线上
; o: s8 R% ]1 A' L( F+ s2 b: O3 U
- }+ z# j; g/ t. e, I: tResearchMethodology I
+ [, W; |- D/ j2 U% GOverviewTextbooks2 D. m7 ^8 j" U! L$ Y5 Z% C( t/ [
Issue1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory 4 d6 i t- [" s% m7 @
Issue2: Theory and Hypothesis Development & W; O. \ x5 p9 V* p6 j R
Issue3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct ! l# k! f: h+ m
Issue4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity
8 {# r* [0 i: Z4 w* \6 \( CIssue5: Measurement: Scale Development
% D, V/ V' [- X" ?1 n8 e* Q7 tIssue6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research , P# x; U' U9 P0 W. j
Issue7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
8 w$ S" E7 S. V8 s- P2 J# [/ }( sIssue8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys
* L4 u7 y& p' T3 NIssue9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments + U$ _* j+ n' _% {, o: w9 F% ~
Issue10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research
% J- W! y4 o+ j! zIssue11: Statistical Analysis and Inference
1 C* H0 I' W- V# J2 wIssue12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation 8 \0 X& Y Y r7 p s
Issue13: Testing mediating effects) }* o3 T# {7 D2 \
Issue14: Testing moderating effects
3 J1 d1 z* \: Q" M, B* k3 L; eIssue15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
9 f; d! l$ \6 j' @! i) oIssue16: Reliability and Construct Validation - O8 l7 ^' ~5 a y4 A: m
Issue17: Common Method Variance
) B! x6 @$ P8 n* D4 W+ `; KIssue18: Data Non-independence
4 Y/ W3 ^* ]8 l" E9 m' YIssue19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and Indigenous Research)
! P! J$ P9 X/ ]+ P$ kIssue20: Structural Equation Modeling4 `- x8 A5 Q. |5 S# }
. s2 E, B3 n: {3 W! y
Major Textbooks: g- V( h5 [- H/ u2 z; t% `
Kerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt." g9 ]6 E( l5 F q0 t+ c' v
Schwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book]
/ i- H- a, M8 w1 IKlein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon]
4 [8 E6 P6 ?$ T, ~! r. DSupplementary Books: \) M2 S/ `' [4 Y
Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon]6 n" q0 _5 K6 z+ F# S4 _+ T9 O
Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]
3 b# \' |5 O6 O) u7 Q2 o. b I% D8 E, UHair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. MultivariateData Analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ rentice-Hall. [Amazon]
# E% z7 v3 C, ~$ E) XPedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.5 m+ Y- M" W/ J# X. Q/ R; \
Rogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. I9 j6 P/ u6 V* ^$ E
Journal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6).
2 D9 w" C- \7 m. j7 I7 A: ]6 ]$ Y0 X; tAcademy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2).0 |) e1 @* K! d( N3 W+ p
Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2).
/ K* \/ w. {# RLeadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1).; F6 w7 K" s' I/ o
Academy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6.
1 X/ e) x5 {* W/ z( _Kreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
! K, p6 s5 E0 Z% }* a fRaudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.: ~- j$ d# b3 q- Y) D7 K4 V, h
Roberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
( n7 O8 k" P9 CRoberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- B4 ~' h0 [! Q! S* l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。" C8 s. p$ h7 y) o: z6 I3 X4 ~
! Q( g" l7 \1 \% s# oIssue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory8 R. |9 l* E4 m
K & L: Chapter 1% ?+ J. H# x) g; U
01-01. Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks.
6 D* y& v! ^; p. J01-02. Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91.7 t% P3 M* P9 X: h2 q3 g6 W* p
01-03. Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 584-602.
/ q1 @+ k( f7 d( l; j. v$ g01-04. Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128.
( G- x) x. T" R" E* @01-05. Wright, T. A., & Wright, V. P. 1999. Ethicalresponsibility and the organizational researcher: A committed-to-participantresearch perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior,20(7): 1107-1112.
J# ]8 `4 j/ Z( k01-06. Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly,41: 262-269.0 j( j' z& A5 ?+ l& w+ B [
01-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。
1 X4 K; ]- ~+ s$ H) `01-08. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch2: 研究的起點:提問。" t- I, u2 W7 ?# z
0 u& Q# D! i0 N
Issue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development; e) O) |3 V" o6 y
02-01. Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2
* q! c J- c5 [& \3 W( I02-02. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review,14: 496-515.
9 w, G( S& q" d, A$ a& ?) x02-03. 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.
8 G3 D1 K! b2 P3 Y02-04. Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? Academy of ManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095.
. Z. J; x/ c& b# ]" v- e( J02-05. Davis, M. S. 1971. That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenologyof sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of Social Science,1(2): 309-344.
6 ?) X' t! W( L1 M02-06. Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. 1998. Trust and distrust: new relationships andrealities. Academy of Management Review, 23: 438-458.
6 ]$ G3 j1 I3 ]0 b, E# ?02-07. Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010.
, |( _7 O! p0 @02-08. Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441.
: C* l4 I, ]4 e8 j$ k; M02-09. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. A. (1993). The motivational effects ofcharismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4,577–594. I+ Z0 ?! t8 x
02-10. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.
& N- J( P2 o8 b8 P' O1 t( t02-11. Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.; t) e: w$ h- _( Q$ x0 p
02-12. Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.
7 f3 w. Y; r: y6 t6 B02-13. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。
: u+ V, ?, G% [* g02-14. 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), 537-563.6 u5 \6 Q7 z- H0 v
$ t, P& h: H) D8 W6 J3 h) w x
Issue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion]. r! T1 N: C8 z9 B C
03-01. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192.* ]- F4 U5 \* ]2 x+ q
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.
& k1 }. k* \3 B* x& A+ Z7 x03-03. Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Toward a taxonomy of multidimensionalconstructs. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 741-755.- Q" B& Z1 h: n d2 F
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, I( ?' V& j: ^; ?
03-05. Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K.E. (2000). Adaptability in the workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptiveperformance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4): 612-624.* l9 g7 p* B- \' k$ K* C
03-06. Wong, C. S., Law, K. S., & Huang, G. H. (2008). On the importance of conductingconstruct-level analysis for multidimensional constructs in theory developmentand testing. Journal of Management, 34 (5): 744-764.
2 v2 w- T4 @# I4 N03-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch12
7 C9 p- g* z& C1 [: @% S% F9 G% [, `# z: \, y9 z6 O4 h: C
Issue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion]
$ G' `7 `- s$ {! Z3 j5 q5 D# W. P**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 8
5 f1 _2 `* C" {K & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28.0 M" a4 ^: ?, M' ~, {. O
04-01. Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.
9 {; s' X% ^/ i! U3 N7 h04-02. **Schmitt, N. W., & Klimoski, R. J. 1991. Determining the quality of ourmeasures. In Research Methods in Human Resources Management, (pp.88-114). Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Co.
( p8 m1 I$ ^+ O) y* s* s04-03. Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical conclusion validity for organizational science researchers: Areview. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 164-208.. J3 T* S) S! m* d2 \
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.- `* F( V) ]8 r8 ?
04-05. Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375.
, E9 j0 E! {; W6 k- U% n* k04-06. 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.
/ ?- Y1 d* l0 o; I8 G04-07. Cole, M. S., Bedeian, A. G., & Feild, H. S. 2006. The measurementequivalence of web-based and paper-and-pencil measures of transformationalleadership: A multinational test. Organizational Research Methods, 9(3):339-368.
5 n; x) x, y }6 `) e" r04-08. Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96.4 }/ K% ~( K a5 w
8 ?" M& w/ I6 o5 p# J
Issue 5: Measurement: Scale Development. s0 ?! q# ?$ ]2 S( O" k2 A
**Schwab: Chapter 4
3 ?* [: x! N; U b9 k' n; ?0 y05-01. **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121.5 a$ x1 j" L9 Z- X, T5 i o
05-02. DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
8 o) ~) @/ c; W) V& Z05-03. 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: 4-70.5 n0 a7 E2 @& G4 J5 o0 x: a
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.
; l7 T" d7 K( P6 }/ E9 W3 l. A05-05. 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.
- O' T5 }- J4 J# i; o05-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch11
6 U7 G# ]/ y) H, R' @9 v$ X6 _* w, c
2 j9 p2 G8 G$ p: m5 \, N' ZIssue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research; J8 [# Y, x# p
MOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3).6 K+ t; [' v; `8 C
6 [ e) Z& c: A4 g; S
Issue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing# e( M; N% v$ u' y& k/ H( T
K & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 52 v. C5 b$ o; ?5 p" H* { o
**Schwab: Chapter 133 Y: h, o1 \7 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.
+ _7 S0 U! k/ V+ A& i8 Z% D' @07-02. Law, K. S. & Wong, C. 1999. Multidimensional constructs in structuralequation analysis: An illustration using the job perception and jobsatisfaction constructs. Journal of Management. 25(2):143-160.
5 J5 u$ }' T) o# a6 m/ ~07-03. **Cortina, J. M., & Folger, R. G. 1998. When is it acceptable to accept a nullhypothesis: No way, Jose? Organizational Research Methods, 1: 334-350.
. r4 H. u, W- p- O- c5 a8 M7 }! n& s07-04. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch5
# Q/ T. k: m1 O# p: Q3 O9 p07-05. 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.
9 Y3 t h: D( X$ \; S$ V+ S7 u" i/ z+ d5 O2 M. f# r5 w- b$ k8 T4 C8 y2 h
Issue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys# z4 r3 g, Q3 O
**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 7; u) D7 Q; Y" t6 {7 F6 x
K & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 295 U% W7 B0 h U9 w3 e
08-01. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, N. 1986. The “science of the sophomore” revisited:From conjecture to empiricism. Academy of Management Review, 11(1):191-207.) [( G' V7 K7 N4 X- Y
08-02. Gordon, M. E., Slade, L. A., & Schmitt, N. 1987. Student guinea pigs: Porcine predictorsand particularistic phenomena. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):160-163.( k7 ^# m" g8 D0 Z+ x! M
08-03. Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159.0 J* }' P7 I$ l* N) _
08-04. Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.
+ w$ t7 k# R: I+ t+ s1 C- s+ |/ [08-05. **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008.* J t7 C! P& ?( L& l( p
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.
* d u' V. _, V _& ?08-07. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.* T+ N$ P, Q( y" M6 r4 Q
08-08. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch8& P1 b( w) t) o$ Y; v [$ i$ ~, D% _
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.7 @# O* R; `1 x+ X- d
08-10. Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179.; d, s7 o2 O& b: I" z$ D$ {% V
08-11. Stone-Romero, E. F., Weaver, A. E., & Glenar, J. L. (1995).Trends in research design and data analytic strategies in organizationalresearch. Journal of Management, 21, 141-157.0 t; j( Y8 }0 `8 ^: h
08-12. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.
2 b1 b5 K2 Y D: t1 [7 K# w4 X+ [) m
Issue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments
; ^+ P1 B: f) R+ r5 m) l! g**Schwab: Chapter 6" B$ [* W- x) t$ b
K & L: Chapters 24 and 22
6 n' p% h2 S3 m- z6 x$ R2 R. ^9 w6 S09-01. Cook, T. D. & Shadish, W. R. 1994. Social experiments:Some developments over the past fifteen years. Annual Review of Psychology,45: 545-580.+ L4 R) D7 ^9 U" c- _0 X d
09-02. **Dvir, T., Eden, D., & Banjo, M.L. 1995. Self-fulfillingprophecy and gender: Can women be Pygmalion and Galatea? Journal of AppliedPsychology, 80(2): 153-170.
. j5 _5 h0 S8 y, ?09-03. Audia, P. G., Locke, E. A., & Smith, K. G. 2000. Theparadox of success: An archival and a laboratory study of strategic persistencefollowing radical environment change. Academy of Management Journal,43(5): 837-853.. Z! h8 _5 D- w) ?: ~. b' Y. c; ~
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): 735-744.4 N" p7 \: b3 h* A1 T2 `$ M
09-05. Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.
4 _5 p: f. L- y3 M5 u09-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch6, ch7.
) K0 {7 P7 G$ K; t, m* I& k$ _, k# Q5 L! @$ O; f, @0 K. Y; q1 y
Issue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research) s) o1 m" L6 o/ T, o5 a' {
10-01. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.
' L& h8 T/ v7 m5 x) D0 Q$ \10-02. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576.
" v5 L' R$ q) s n* p) S10-03. Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.% ]6 O/ w* C5 o( o: V
10-04. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441.; k6 S4 N: F" A! e" z) M4 E
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.
9 @/ Q- @7 t4 v3 A( ]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.) w# |* f3 T$ a. r8 c/ H, E* ^
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.% m% C. }/ R% R, U! I8 x
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.
5 p0 b) }4 ~+ |; b10-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch10
1 U- m3 u! x2 P9 `10-10. Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455.4 c1 e9 Z ?. B' q) |- I0 y7 U/ I2 L
- h7 |( J$ v. a0 n
Issue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion]
) r& l, O4 m+ b2 B& M0 T' r& }6 w**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13% n. A0 N1 k" o- U( n' E7 \2 r) {- E
K & L: Chapters 9
) p" J3 W0 s! K$ r! e0 w% n5 z1 T4 Y11-01. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759.
* l7 w' Z7 o! j: L o11-02. Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218.2 [: g- L( d+ e0 B" G
11-03. McFarland, L.A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2003).Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods. Journalof Management, 29(5), 641-661.1 m! u& [* x* |9 X" R
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.
# a- Z: r! G- B11-05. LaHuis, D.M., & Avis, J. M. (2007). Using multilevel randomcoefficient modeling to investigate rater effects in performance ratings. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 10, 97-107.
( y' J; p5 O: J. J11-06. 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.# O# w4 b% x0 K) K, b k
- }4 z8 x$ X7 v3 s4 `4 ?0 HIssue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation7 Z9 k% b D4 m* ~. a9 v
**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19! u k P2 Q* ]
K & L: Chapters 33 and 34: c0 z% h' P) Q4 ]: }7 {
12-01. **Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1986. The moderator-mediator variabledistinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, andstatistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,51(6): 1173-1182.
" b, r, \- m5 X# C+ [12-02. James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321.
' e: G; L7 H2 t& w6 ~' a; G12-03. 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.+ O/ C, b8 d6 F3 }/ z- [
12-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.
; x4 p- T! D% A; D5 u; ]- ?- ?12-05. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch14
; O) ?7 o' o- S. [9 y0 Z- \- H' S B: n1 V/ h: ~1 [: u
Issue 13: Testing mediating effects3 p$ z4 @4 i% E- K- Z
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.
; \/ o- }- }# |% E13-02. Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358.. t, ^0 |, |1 R9 D7 J q1 _
13-03. James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363.
* V% g. k4 M; ?9 R2 ?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.
9 F* v. J- K% U) J8 _1 n13-05. 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.
3 I0 i" P1 M$ E6 L$ t6 u13-06. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47.
7 N1 x$ O; F( M6 [1 ?- ~13-07. Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398.
3 B8 _( C) z" g+ ` ]0 `" _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.
; U! ^) J4 W: p) a1 w, q13-09. Freedman, L. S., & Schatzkin, A. 1992. Sample size forstudying intermediate endpoints within intervention trials of observationalstudies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 136: 1148-1159.
v& p, a) Q$ u& h d g8 T13-10. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619.
8 A2 B2 [# m2 E! J; J7 O% ?13-11. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158.5 a; b: Z5 P" E& f; B
13-12. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181.
: ?) X0 d1 v0 e7 c+ ]! Y$ m0 A. F; P, a13-13. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62.
% [6 p: D& a$ U( v& q- @3 k$ h13-14. 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& [( D9 V) i \% G13-15. Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515.
/ L# f; `) c$ b13-16. 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.
+ V4 l5 z6 ~1 \0 P6 c13-17. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107.+ a8 q* _) N" g7 c" I
13-18. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.
+ m/ ?; D( a. r2 t. L2 A13-19. 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.
( |1 F1 G3 ]6 \# ]/ O13-20. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62.
) W7 q4 A% @7 i8 V0 L. J R5 d13-21. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445.
: D5 t6 P" V- N) b' k13-22. Smith, E. 1982. Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations:Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 43: 248-259.. H5 j! f: r/ B5 F, s3 U
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.
) y- f6 J8 E4 ]7 B5 B( k/ |) p
$ t1 }! A9 q1 D$ ?$ V( D: G. \ Issue 14: Testing moderating effects! n8 f( }. U, Y/ }/ C) A
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.
/ g( X. X! N: P6 J1 E% F$ J; k14-02. Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417./ g& B! g/ f1 s
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.
$ t4 L* \# y! `7 R Z14-04. 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.; V4 ~: ^' ]% M- q+ H% K% H M3 v- d
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.
' \6 u) z' o5 A2 H) ?# J/ ~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): 3-23.3 D! q0 h8 v6 w1 O- \# H
! e3 w# n& u: ?% b. y1 hIssue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
# Y3 A2 @# i0 M v* aSchwab: Chapters 11 and 19
# O5 n/ @3 u" h* c7 i+ eK & L: Chapters 33 and 34
) B8 _& g1 V3 r7 g7 x15-01. 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.
3 Y# }1 _; l; Y1 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: 142-163.9 {8 x$ N' q5 \# f& n/ r, T/ k* D
15-03. Edwards, J. R., & Lambert L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12: 1-22.3 j# e9 ?4 v9 C
15-04. Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128.: b! W0 R" t1 a: E. `
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: 877-883.2 V, i4 ?# x) L$ g
15-06. Muller, D., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2005). Whenmoderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 89: 852-863., o* H9 h7 [' Y# s Z
15-07. Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444.. _9 E; t% K. U! f' B
- F& n9 q9 v$ v: H. Q* L
Issue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation: [' l! D- v, b! \* }
Schwab: Chapters 14 and 17' f7 R% ~/ o0 v& x
K & L: Chapter 28' I9 N; P' @" L$ p' ~0 I
16-01. Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87.) T: N" s* U* V. P0 v7 E
16-02. Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical Conclusion Validity for Organizational Science Research: A Review. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 1: 164-208.1 d5 ^3 x& D. W1 u0 R
16-03. Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105.: r) j5 |+ K6 k# R
16-04. Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400.# o! ]! n4 b u! k* r# {
16-05. Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302.
# m2 c1 i1 F, R7 A( r16-06. 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.
' K+ Q7 m1 ]! m) L- O16-07. 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.
: B+ ?4 E! @# R8 D. }) P2 s3 o7 V) c& S+ z$ p& v O3 n
Issue 17: Common Method Variance' g: e( p& G) [/ I7 W
**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 206 t0 D0 Z9 r5 z# g, G' r9 A! x/ L
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): 77-98.9 C2 F3 r: j. I/ r
17-02. Doty, D. H. &Glick, W. H. 1998. Common methods bias: Does common methods variance reallybias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 374-406.% Y; j5 r1 e# W% C8 r
17-03. Goffin, R. D. & Gellatly, I. R. 2001. A multi-raterassessment of organizational commitment: Are self-report measures biased? Journalof Organizational Behavior, 22: 437-451.3 ]8 a$ L. _. m+ k2 t2 v: w* l- a
17-04. Kemery, E. R. & Dunlap, W. P. 1986. Partialling factorscores does not control method variance: A reply to Podsakoff and Todor.Journal of Management, 12(4): 525-530.1 F" F! {1 l+ c6 ]6 D$ M- z. V1 N
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.
7 \" P# k5 l" @4 {1 h17-06. Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research roblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544.
; \% @( L9 Y' y8 ]17-07. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223.
# @2 Q2 e j( V6 g; ~) ~1 U( ~17-08. Spector, P. E. & Brannick, M. T. 1995). The nature andeffects of method variance in organizational research. International Reviewof international and organizational Psychology, 10: 249-274.
( y' W! N9 @0 @2 s17-09. Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232.
" v3 Y( \/ b5 g+ u6 y4 Z! Q W4 R- x! B! b( f
Issue 18: Data Non-independence5 _* z7 m! w0 a9 n |- ^
18-01. Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735.
5 I# m& R' _; z v18-02. Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75.6 m' }9 V, J! ^% q; H# P- l
18-03. Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.1 S' s( R* Q+ `! t" \
18-04. Bliese, P. & Hanges, P. J. 2004. Being too liberal and tooconservative: The perils of treating grouped data as though they wereindependent. Organizational Research Methods, 7: 400-417.! @8 g9 a g$ Y$ N' r: y
18-05. 彭台光 & 林鉦棽 2008. 組織現象和層次議題: 非獨立性資料的概念和實徵. 組織與管理, 1(1): 95-121.
# O n6 K+ q- S& q. Y; H, r( c0 f18-06. Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. 1995. On thelevel: Homogeneity, independence, heterogeneity, and interactions inorganizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 20: 7-9.6 A2 `. W* X. A& ?) S+ 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.
: Q: T2 J) P. m! v* M- w/ ?9 |9 g& i& L$ w4 C8 H5 b: z
Issue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch)& K M$ U6 {4 ] k: W. 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.
5 q7 M9 Q4 H( Z5 }# k% w2 V19-02. Boisot, M. & Child. J. 1996. From fiefs to clans andnetwork capitalism: Explaining China’s emerging economic order. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 41(4): 600-628.
; h4 b" F* i& P" v! t19-03. Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209.: H1 L4 [8 j. K) h( t
19-04. Farh, J. L., Tsui, A. S., Xin, K., & Cheng, B. S. 1998. Theinfluence of relational demography and guanxi: The Chinese case. OrganizationScience, 9: 471-488.2 X$ w7 F0 x( G+ `8 ~
19-05. Farh, J. L. & Cheng, B. S. 2000. A cultural analysis ofpaternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In J. T. Li, A. S. Tsui,& E. Weldon (Eds.), Management and Organizations in the Chinese Context.London: MacMillan, 2000: 84-127.4 s( z: Z4 D: ?0 J, G7 Y5 a) [8 Z- Z2 u
19-06. Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974.( ?0 Z/ x# R- V C$ G. O. ~% r. k/ P
19-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151.* w. C& s) }* G9 Q6 Q3 Z
19-08. Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215., d) c7 N3 L: X' Y
19-09. 楊國樞(主編) 1993。「本土心理學的開展」 (本土心理學研究第一期),台北:台灣大學心理系本土心理學研究室。: j& f+ p% B1 @
2 i! M$ N' Z- k+ I19-10. 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。" _" ]! c$ `: n5 H- @9 T
# v% p) D# k' D% g0 Y
19-11. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰
, G4 I) j7 O- _" d+ d! h" J+ K9 f. }3 R- q/ [3 I
19-12. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch17
) x% Q0 T F* X# y19-13. 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.; I6 \6 k0 Z- _) V- @- |. y
19-14. Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia PacificJournal of Management, 21, 491-513.
/ t1 w1 \% j4 O& z4 M1 l# h4 T/ _$ ?! g: S9 ~+ {2 T6 F
Issue 20: Structural Equation Modeling
6 Y) A1 ~6 K$ M1 l( QK & L: Chapter 35.
4 C/ n5 x3 J6 ]) B20-01. 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。) |: ?9 A; e3 t$ x
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.
% ?3 Q- N2 m$ | \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.& x4 u# D, B/ }8 V8 x! r+ Y
20-04. Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172.3 f0 v: w+ C5 ~2 h) H$ A: U
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.
$ R @' G. y; t" Y* x& r1 E# o20-06. Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. 1994. An alternativeapproach to method effects using latent-variable models: Applications inorganizational behavior research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3):323-331.
( e* s- c0 u, n# z20-07. 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: 185-209.2 m8 y- p& h9 s3 l/ b
20-08. Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. 2006. Problems with itemparceling for comfirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 9: 369-403.2 k/ d+ \# V6 D" V
20-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch13
$ t) s1 ]3 p/ K2 N/ F2 i( X
$ F/ ]% Y4 X& K5 ~Issue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism: Z" d+ Q2 \3 @/ y. `
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.9 p* ~; q. t" n( U3 z) _, ~
21-02. Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.% ?: ^2 d0 T+ ^4 J: G& ]- o
21-03. Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14.
: M0 b- @; Q e# J/ _* }, K$ e21-04. Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652.' s+ G/ e0 q+ q$ |2 Y: K
21-05. Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607.
" Y |7 _- X3 m, v$ W+ K5 m21-06. Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613.
- j; v2 x3 S5 d, r. r2 h21-07. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68).2 V( I P" ^# I1 I. {) z
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.
4 X. N! w9 C0 p& w9 c* v7 m21-09. von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53).
6 m2 x3 ^5 f- `1 A' D; n7 ^5 h" [21-10. Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50).
$ J! }3 g2 }' j; T+ b# N# D8 u6 V* z; M# |
Issue 22: Level Fallacies
3 L2 Z5 c' N1 t! k22-01. Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73.
! R" {6 b5 I+ P0 K/ x- }22-02. Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191.
- Z0 ~; Z( f+ M* A1 J; H& [( h" [( s22-03. **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, 122-124.6 Z" `$ S/ R4 X
22-04. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357.1 T1 I5 D: K) {- Y4 I
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.
4 R- _3 P3 U9 v22-06. Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777.( I9 j4 Q0 h/ G% h2 @# W
. G [- V: \: d8 B6 X+ |' d
Issue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena
! k; k; r* m% x. [9 x+ a23-01. James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112.
5 q" T! W3 x+ {, O23-02. Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller.) B$ Y3 N) K5 t% ]6 M
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.
# y G( S. F1 H/ w* |: b: S23-04. Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540.' j# r8 m/ |; b$ I+ v+ L% L. ^& \
23-05. **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53.% M, S# S" B! C3 T' ]8 G: 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.
" r+ J/ l- }- W- L8 n7 t- F" ?/ N23-07. 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.' H$ ?. x' i3 f% i& Y& S
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.; [8 b8 U1 r% @
23-09. Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42.
0 u" u. N1 `# m F) W& _23-10. Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348.
7 y- r' e* z; o! H23-11. Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.0 h& B) X; @5 D6 @$ g
23-12. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.
! r+ W$ C7 f, o7 r* t23-13. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. 1981.Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 501-524.
0 m, q) U' Y8 E( ^23-14. **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974.
2 b7 _3 |0 _2 I5 R; {- g
8 M( P# V9 i( L3 ?3 HIssue 24: Levels in Theory Building- @* X) t$ 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.
, X) V- u9 L8 h# m1 a* O24-02. Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248.
. A, _+ @/ C- |# e( z9 e% [2 G$ P24-03. 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./ p# D' c: ^. g L! p
24-04. Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229.) \) m3 t/ l2 `1 d1 l% x6 y
24-05. George, J. M., & James, L. R. 1994. Levels issues in theory development. Academyof Management Review, 19: 639-640. (Critique of Klein et al., 1994)
. A+ z: p* }' I24-06. 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); n$ f4 P3 e* s
24-07. Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37." t& D, m! K( A1 f$ V# d$ _3 ^
24-08. Mossholder, K. W. & Bedeian, A. G.. 1983. Cross-level inference andorganizational research: Perspectives on interpretation and application.Academy of Management Review, 8(4): 547-558.* P' ]+ ^% |; k; d# k' r6 B, Q2 G$ g- [
24-09. Glick, W. H. (1980). Problems in cross-level inference. In K.H.Roberts & L. Burstein (eds.) Issues in Aggregation. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. 17-30.; ^: i2 k ~6 ]3 ?( q% c: o+ a: f
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).
. g6 M% C, N, Q6 z2 ^) O24-11. Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201.: J- Y. c- n/ k5 \! _
# x: A; R1 m) i9 l7 }" G8 G
Issue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective
5 b# E4 a2 ?2 M, R0 F8 A X; K- ^# q25-01. **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922.4 K; P" A, j* Z" |- |
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.+ k5 L/ ^! R; E4 Y/ {% s! A
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.
& P: \1 t( ?4 |. E+ Q& b25-04. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338.. ^8 L& v1 a4 ]* _' }
25-05. Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610./ X( J- S4 p, M4 ]. L2 N2 _
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.3 K: h% A* Q; ~8 u" H o
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.. v+ s" I8 L2 z- D" y5 t: z
% ]8 @" i% X7 M3 {Issue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory 7 P# v/ Z( q$ c! R! V3 b' X3 E5 J
26-01. **Kozlowski, S.W.J. & Kline, K. 2000. A multilevel approach to theory andresearch in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In K.and K, 3-90.
/ [9 N5 \8 |6 I1 F6 B V26-02. Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307., u( e* v, E" j
26-03. Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346.
3 {: A h$ c) H0 D! e4 I* A
) L C6 M' C. K2 ^5 U# hIssue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research. J7 a7 o7 O/ F( T# q
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.# e. z% \% W/ G( W
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.
9 `1 _7 O/ a1 v) a7 g4 ^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.
9 I8 R+ K2 L0 J- [
, d) \6 V! \5 V- x. {$ U8 r( FIssue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process 1 Q" q% {# m/ e; G4 Z+ U
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.
, x1 k4 @, H9 ~ p8 I& Y28-02. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253.
! [ B- \! m2 T' B: b, a28-03. Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453.
0 ^2 z- S8 c" S+ n1 |4 b! j- p28-04. Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773.9 _4 S# }6 T7 f0 J3 B
28-05. Walter, F., & Bruch, H. 2008. The positive group affectspiral: A dynamic model of the emergence of positive affective similarity inwork groups. Journal of Organizational Psychology, 29, 239-261.
0 C& q& p! h1 j8 a8 U, n, I6 x, s* C; v1 d
Issue 29: Measurement and Aggregation
+ P2 }$ h0 J- H& o* W. |29-01. Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765." c- _& }0 B: L% |, l2 ^8 x
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., z1 z; w3 v, Q3 W- E) e
29-03. James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229.) x' j" O7 {$ R! Z, r% w+ y
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.
# E' Z q, C2 _) c29-05. James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1993. Rwg: Anassessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 78(2): 306-309.
/ K6 Q7 l4 s& V( F: j9 f29-06. 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.
; X3 J5 l" C, R j29-07. Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582., `6 S( X" r3 A
29-08. Freeman, J. 1980. The unit problem in organizational research.In W.M. Evan (Ed.), Frontiers in organization and management (pp.59-68). NY: Praeger.: H" M+ k# v' v. f `) T
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.% x& K7 N4 W! ?1 ~& B2 Z# C, j# j6 T
29-10. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563.
0 v, T. h. D$ M8 z5 |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.- N6 z/ G# j$ U S! F$ e& k4 A% ^
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." l( _ ?+ d+ m: r# }; g
29-13. Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373.
! _4 H; N/ X- @/ q: I$ H29-14. 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.
4 B" E. Q# U6 z7 H5 F29-15. 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., C1 M0 n, D+ f+ V; @# }6 E4 Y1 e
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., E& L" ^% Q7 g. C2 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., ]# n: D! C5 ]2 Y8 w q" k
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: 127-135.0 t# O" n% }5 [# ]$ ~ f3 \& R; M
29-19. McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46. r8 E1 ^# q+ M+ S1 d* [+ \, C
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, 306-307.9 \8 z: w$ k2 E. p- t
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.
7 j6 w2 _; [1 K% b5 [8 v* X
4 g8 }, ?; T* F) @5 q; q8 ^Issue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis! g! x2 @. _# i4 D5 n
30-01. Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395.
' T4 U3 \ a# r E6 x30-02. James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424.
& N0 N9 ]- H; O9 ]6 H' j+ M30-03. George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.+ N7 x9 Q+ o1 d9 n2 {
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: 168-176.9 f% v* q+ N+ V; j& |2 k; h* H4 C
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.
2 D9 A, L. b: B! {$ ?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.& C- D0 }& C1 n# j5 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.- L$ I6 w* J2 ?+ o
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. w, L* D2 e8 H- Q$ f ^
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.
2 D6 z* ?, ?6 C5 ]) o30-10. **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.
6 t6 i8 D7 d% h# p; @+ T
7 U$ K; n- J& v2 KIssue 31: Introduction to HLM 9 t7 s$ P7 [, b8 e
31-01. **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744.
/ k; }3 G; p6 w; T31-02. Hofmann, D. A. & Griffin, M. A., Gavin, M. B. 2000. Theapplication of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K.& K. 467-511.4 J" b7 Q; I: y L) [
31-03. **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641./ e8 @3 N% r% A. @3 _5 Z
31-04. Klein, K. J., Conn, A. B., Smith, D. B., & Sorra, J. S. (2001). Is everyonein agreement? An exploration of within-group agreement in employee perceptionsof the work environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 3-16./ y$ S# ?" V u7 J
- a! J9 J; O9 [% LIssue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM, G1 ?0 Y. e) I( ?
32-01. Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297.
j8 |" Y# I) d! Z7 N0 K+ `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.
5 g" B# V, Y2 B; X32-03. 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.; B: x/ X5 R' ]7 `; x! @' j1 t
32-04. Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33.
) m; Y4 [, |9 V% Z/ q, D& V' T32-05. **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94.
# [8 G7 Z6 d, `. l5 b) Q32-06. Glission, C., & James, L. R. 2002. The cross-level effects of culture andclimate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:767-794.$ L& Q, l. |! ^" L+ B7 v
32-07. Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522.
" a; Y9 h( T7 q- z( C32-08. Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255.1 q6 m8 e: i: ?8 _3 K) a
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.
$ ~1 e7 b$ v* Q9 \. N/ }3 m32-10. 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)4 H1 X$ T, {* A1 Y$ [
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.
* [% _2 U7 i' b0 G. u32-12. Steensma, H. K., Marino, L., & Dickson, P. H. 2000. Theinfluence of national cultural on the formation of technology alliances byentrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 951-973.! B \ K. S/ `+ G8 W: C+ I
32-13. Steward, G. L., Fulmer, I. S., & Barrick, M. R. 2005. Anexploration of member roles as a multilevel linking mechanism for individualtraits and team outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 58: 343-365.3 }# J8 E5 e$ w6 Y* [4 T7 j
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.$ b$ J! P4 t; |7 j! i5 p# K6 T9 o
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: 515-535.0 S+ G9 J% B7 ]' u1 J6 e: m
1 ?8 B; F* m' u0 h4 F& a% i/ RIssue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research
% ]/ z7 f6 L: [' t- b33-01. Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571.
/ M) R3 [9 l7 {; c4 Q. w: w33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582.- w p- k2 @* Z8 i3 U9 O5 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.
) H- r3 M X2 e$ s* k33-04. 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.
& L) t7 ?7 k8 [& W33-05. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. E. 2007. A framework fortesting meso-mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior. Journalof Organizational Behavior, 28: 141-172.2 C, W9 O: l4 L# z F5 J2 w9 c
33-06. Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277.
. H: j3 g0 a# N
- H7 f5 Z8 g& I& _1 U, o% UIssue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review8 d; B( R8 d& } l" S
Schwab: Chapters 15 and 21$ v) |( O: x9 ?
34-01. 應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信( |. Q/ D) i9 |( ?
34-02. 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):491-506.9 b) {, O t i, w
34-03. Bartunek, J. M., Rynes, S. L., & Ireland, R. D. 2006. What makes a management researchinteresting and why does it matter? Academy of Management Journal,49(1): 9-15., Y. n# g: F( K- F
34-04. **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout). E' M, q) p, m: \9 X3 I# E2 b$ [! ~
34-05. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515.
, l$ S. g1 {5 E4 L1 c; ?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.
% ~% l9 U, v$ t5 t+ ]" C5 K+ |34-07. **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6.
5 a6 U p b& {$ r34-08. Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164.
1 m- v$ \3 Q9 W1 D0 m, ]34-09. Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307.
+ a/ c5 [8 M/ M6 _1 ~34-10. Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92." H/ Y$ V& Z, l- E: I6 m- s/ a
h3 I4 V9 h* |6 U) a6 |- m) t
Issue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism3 ]& D2 [/ g1 I A5 k& j' @
35-01. **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。# n2 j% @2 L9 I+ E8 K D
水流花靜---科學與詩的對話。5 F5 Z5 ` c" u" \
P.121~139.台北:天下文化。
& ^0 r3 H! _. S4 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.% e' L: _; b6 x$ k; C- T: ]3 \; P0 k
35-03. Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242.+ W4 h8 s' a2 t& [0 y
35-04. Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.+ z* n$ S4 d! c
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.* ?* ]4 f+ q* }" i2 R* I0 Y" o
35-06. Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312.$ t, V, ?( @+ M b+ q2 R' `
35-07. Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2)./ c6 n, b5 E6 v! b ?
35-08. Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620.2 s9 q. \: H* E2 O+ y/ s
35-09. **Prasad, A. & Prasad, P. 2002. The coming of age ofinterpretive organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 5(1):4-11. (A special issue on interpretive genres of organizational researchmethods)
8 A3 n/ Z: B7 Z( y$ X0 P0 |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.
) }5 G3 B* M7 ?- Y% `35-11. Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158.
! O0 o, P5 g( r5 n: I; |35-12. Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44.& b% @% U' h4 _9 U
35-13. Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.. ^: u2 e7 R8 J9 |$ q% u1 e
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.
, K( P, l4 R" c% Y
* ~0 R; b: V' S6 c- n `. e& Z# ]<<End>> 本帖最后由 Kenneth 于 2011-5-3 15:37 编辑 ) K8 d2 G7 }5 G1 C- F5 O+ {6 B4 V: H
# `! Y$ |$ R3 |( h1 x4 A$ E |
|