- 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:
% I9 n6 U4 @: ?( I8 Rhttp://spaces.isu.edu.tw/~RMonline/website/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=52&Itemid=66# o6 h5 c; j# b8 v3 s
4 ?- p5 E' [) u9 ]: t2 X
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。) |! Q* K# ?; c% }3 P$ o2 K
1 ]8 T0 }" T7 I Y9 Z
Kenny
" E6 `& m% L) h0 Q$ A0 v& j* J, R3 Y- W$ l5 z, t
研究方法线上1 W& K- t. @4 c( c
3 L$ B0 i( t9 @! W; r) AResearchMethodology I & }* E: }2 P; I, Y& Q8 B
OverviewTextbooks3 y5 c7 o3 X7 E$ m' w# i6 m8 N
Issue1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory ) n$ X% I* _+ H" @% B8 H6 ^
Issue2: Theory and Hypothesis Development " ^8 l% q+ P4 g- Z
Issue3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct , Y9 o& p1 l) V/ G
Issue4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity % W0 i7 c2 T' \* q. x& D
Issue5: Measurement: Scale Development & n4 H% k: P- t% C- l% f8 _# z
Issue6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research 2 W7 P5 o7 @" G( o# B; D8 l1 a
Issue7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing 0 m& }8 f2 S/ V4 x$ D0 U7 U D4 n1 |
Issue8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys + _9 k+ Z; R' [. B# o0 A; x
Issue9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments & l8 W' ~0 _. ^) A9 X
Issue10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research ! j, T/ [6 B2 _* a, n( c- U& K
Issue11: Statistical Analysis and Inference0 o! t* v( ]0 }0 p2 x1 |
Issue12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation : u1 G& \( U! w% C
Issue13: Testing mediating effects
, k" G4 i8 f; i0 A; y& F' M# ], \5 ?Issue14: Testing moderating effects
, W9 n! I& Q# {3 T, @Issue15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation
7 `/ G9 M5 B6 u- x: ~) D- |" o2 F7 xIssue16: Reliability and Construct Validation
. s, K" K5 E5 _7 H9 gIssue17: Common Method Variance
H Q; X4 T- }+ O9 f$ `2 TIssue18: Data Non-independence & j* f7 a: Z- x( y
Issue19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and Indigenous Research) 3 ?# }' ~' Q, A3 H) A5 q
Issue20: Structural Equation Modeling4 Z/ q5 x% f- p
5 g" v% j* G4 I* }
Major Textbooks:" N" y- J: e O
Kerlinger, F.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of BehavioralResearch. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
& ~. T& K7 x+ U: gSchwab, D.P. (2005). Research Methods for Organizational Studies. (2ndEd.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. [Amazon] [Google Book]
& `! C3 d8 z+ |! p7 I& HKlein, K.J.& Kozlowski, S.W. (eds.). (2000). Multilevel Theory,Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and NewDirections. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Amazon]
4 y( Q( }2 ]3 T! ySupplementary Books:
: C, G& y* k7 \3 wCohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1998). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Science. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceEarlbaum.[Amazon]
( r6 p* W* U* X* t5 I8 XCook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design andAnalysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Amazon]
+ A+ {6 ], t2 s, D0 Q: W0 jHair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. MultivariateData Analysis. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ rentice-Hall. [Amazon]
& x9 t: [. |' M5 qPedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. 1991. Measurement, Design, andAnalysis: An Integrated Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.& ^ g6 [) K, Y3 T" K2 f
Rogelberg, S.G. (ed.) 2002. Handbook of Research Methodsin Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
& a! B5 i" k+ ?* lJournal of Management. 1997. Special Issue on Hierarchical LinearModels. 23(6).9 U3 M: h, N% H, t2 s5 O. _
Academy of Management Review. 1999. Special topic forum on multileveltheory building. 24(2). y3 | o3 l' w
Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2001. Special issue on multilevelmodels. 36(2).
; f. h: v$ `3 `4 ~Leadership Quarterly. 2002. Special issue: Bench marking multilevelmethods in leadership. 13(1).8 U# a% M1 q/ J
Academy of Management Journal. 2007. Special forum on multilevelresearch. 50,6.
. p! M' n x! k" W, Q# gKreft, I. & de Leeuw, J. 1998. Introducing Multilevel Modeling.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.+ V6 i0 i4 u- J8 ?
Raudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A. S. 2002. Hierarchical LinearModels in Social and Behavioral Research: Application and Data AnalysisMethods. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
: R! l0 j4 Y; q9 x: y) MRoberts, K. H., Hulin, C. L., & Rousseau, D. M. 1978.Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
; d5 P9 w7 z7 x6 o" X" q3 qRoberts, K. H., & Burstein, K. (eds.) 1980. Issuesin aggregation: New directions for methodology of social and behavior science (vol.6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.' z/ [& }2 C8 t2 N7 g3 ?# Q2 {
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。
# O5 @! M, a# n" Q3 i8 x+ @
: V! r: Z% b* I( yIssue 1: Introduction: Science, Knowledge, and Theory/ [* E8 r6 z: E$ f( c2 u+ {& _. c
K & L: Chapter 1
0 Q& w7 i( f2 c! z0 K01-01. Burrell, G.& Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann EducationalBooks.% u3 d8 A. r6 k* U" |" N
01-02. Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroyinggood management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1): 75-91.9 x% _8 q& `& l Q8 x: z
01-03. Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 584-602./ T. j% L# h" |/ Y6 q' p7 n, r4 ]
01-04. Orlitzky, M. 2002. Book review: Research Methods forOrganizational Studies by D. P. Schwab. Organizational Research Methods,5(1): 126-128.
Q' _" H4 b% n1 W01-05. 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.: }! e9 C6 T$ W, d+ z
01-06. Porter, L. 1996. Forty years of organization studies:Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly,41: 262-269.
% G4 b% T2 H/ a01-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch1: 科學過程與研究設計。
9 P; v& E5 t" O. U+ {01-08. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch2: 研究的起點:提問。! b; k! D# i$ U) R4 r2 p
1 [* ~* j, v) X( h5 |/ e7 oIssue 2: Theory and Hypothesis Development
6 \+ N0 b8 ^7 g1 l0 e3 D02-01. Schwab: Chapters 1 and 2; B- T7 ~1 o* h+ O: P9 @
02-02. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review,14: 496-515.
2 A* U+ t# M5 g) d/ A3 p02-03. 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.
- d7 R* T, z: @) c$ F; q7 J. S02-04. Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizationcitizenship behavior: good citizens at what cost? Academy of ManagementReview, 32 (4):1078–1095." c5 a0 \! |" y6 P5 B7 A
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.
4 Z; J' Q( i' }: z( }& ^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.
! R# h6 j! Q F/ A& T* ]02-07. Morris, J. A. & Feldman, D. C. 1996. The dimensions, antecedents, andconsequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4):986-1010.
2 `3 T( s( c* T02-08. Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research methodology inorganizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, 419-441./ `# z+ X6 n) y9 S
02-09. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. A. (1993). The motivational effects ofcharismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4,577–594.
7 _/ g( E/ z7 n: h9 h02-10. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 371-384.6 ^, v$ }) Q8 S
02-11. Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is not, theorizing is. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 40: 385-390.: u% B4 u1 Y5 _$ |1 [
02-12. Whetten, D. A. 1989. What constitutes a theoreticalcontribution. Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.+ _3 ~* x2 v) I7 t1 A7 s! v
02-13. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch3: 管理研究中的理論建構。
" m9 C1 d% R" Y( w02-14. 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.' L5 Z" \; @0 o6 j; Z
# P( f8 a5 k" f: ~3 `7 D/ U' vIssue 3: Construct and Dimensionality: Multidimensional construct [Discussion]
% g5 o4 a$ l! H! x8 _03-01. Edwards, J. R. (2001). Multidimensional constructs inorganizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework.Organizational Research Methods, 4(2): 144-192.# Y" s$ K" ?" r, n5 D' j
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.
7 G* ?1 z( O& W) e- L0 ?9 W03-03. Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Mobley, W. H. (1998). Toward a taxonomy of multidimensionalconstructs. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 741-755.
5 ]* s/ g1 {5 {. [; x03-04. 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): 52-65.2 v/ b2 y6 }! O/ I4 _
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.
; F) M2 P$ Q0 q4 B m03-06. 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.
6 h# T6 I5 n$ p/ d* I/ |; C: ?0 h! f03-07. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch129 r% Y \* h8 _
$ c* J6 h1 L* d, r5 V. B& AIssue 4: Measurement: Reliability and Validity [Discussion]
5 E- L/ W! |# G2 x5 R" x**Schwab: Chapters 3, 4, 8# Y) p. j( Y1 Z7 C7 P2 s$ @( v! a
K & L: Chapters 26, 27, 28.% |' w. F# c, |7 p- U0 w; d) d
04-01. Negy, S. M. 2002. Using a single-item approach to measure facetjob satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75:77-86.
& f* y6 p6 l& @7 h) d9 K0 z04-02. **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.
; z, n3 O& W- ?' X04-03. Austin, J. T., Boyle, K. A., & Lualhati, J. C. 1998.Statistical conclusion validity for organizational science researchers: Areview. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 164-208.
; U8 L) u3 y' U- C: c+ H04-04. 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: 140-156.8 X8 a) ~: c! j4 A6 V6 h2 g
04-05. Wanous, J. P., & Huddy M. J. 2001. Single-item reliability:A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4):361-375.0 N+ h0 S. l9 J% i6 Z
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.
, ~3 ?$ ?: [. |9 B04-07. 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 _8 v" s4 A1 T( f0 |; N8 k% P
04-08. Meade, A.W., & Eby, L. T. 2007. Using indices of groupagreement in multilevel construct validation. Organizational ResearchMethods, 10: 75-96.
% Y) j, m+ O- `" V: B- e( L/ h$ b, Z z) O# ~
Issue 5: Measurement: Scale Development
8 }: z) s1 X8 x8 W% w; l0 o**Schwab: Chapter 4
* ~8 c( Y# R' m3 b05-01. **Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development ofmeasures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods,1: 104-121.9 i! j5 Y% E' b- @ A7 q0 P% F' C" u
05-02. DeVellis, R. F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory andApplication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
t4 j5 l$ p3 D7 K) {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.% D- p/ S3 }- N/ \
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.
6 P: p5 V; M0 i! b9 \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." h. }- C. U, k6 M
05-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch11
+ g' [( m) _' A% U
" o* y3 x0 W/ ~; D* D0 R* EIssue 6: Scale Development for Chinese Management Research
" T6 I9 J: C" q- xMOR, special issue: 2006, 2(3).5 e0 N, }" }( x3 f6 W E
: }; r! Y) ~7 JIssue 7: Constructs and Hypothesis Testing
. m3 B8 J# O7 D& Q0 m D0 d* p" q7 |K & L: Chapters 2, 3, and 5% P1 g2 Y0 h9 P
**Schwab: Chapter 137 `7 |$ Y' {% ] @
07-01. **Higgins, M. C. & Kram, K. E. 2001. Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: Adevelopmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 6(2):264-288.% T9 X" d; p% k- Q& N
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.! W$ |/ R* R4 \+ {# c
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." y; }/ M" u! p
07-04. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch5
3 ?- w! ]7 Q i0 J4 N |07-05. 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. Q4 U, l$ ?. t. r t0 p
2 b# a$ o0 I0 b) T8 v3 P3 K
Issue 8: Sampling, Field studies and Surveys7 J! D! d' S9 p" @: t0 s+ d* T
**Schwab: Chapters 5 and 79 {! I0 L7 o) y- X' A( k
K & L: Chapters 8, 18, 19, 20, 25 and 29* s6 q9 p) X- V9 B- 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.+ G. F2 N7 f: ]
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./ e# m6 A+ s% u( h' C' W- i* `/ [
08-03. Greenberg, J. 1987. The college sophomore as guinea pig:Setting the record straight. Academy of Management Review, 12(1):157-159.
7 S0 w4 X; `1 D$ H08-04. Mollica, K. A. & Dewitt, R. L. 2000. When others retireearly: What about me? Academy of Management Journal, 43(6): 1068-1075.
6 _. u" Y6 K2 ~3 V8 y3 y- s08-05. **Tsai, W. C. & Huang, I. M. 2002. Mechanisms linkingemployee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 87: 1001-1008., g$ L# E8 P5 C' R# _( d6 R
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.
6 m' ?* _ D$ i+ F; a, W08-07. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H.G. 2007. The reportingof nonresponse analysis in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.
# ?6 Z' u- A# T3 q* y08-08. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch8
4 B+ t, o0 k' o8 \# p' [% S08-09. 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.
; M7 b0 l# g3 k1 Z+ j/ _/ `; h08-10. Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodologicalfit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155-1179.
9 }5 ~% ]9 ~5 q0 X3 X08-11. 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.
' ?+ z4 x0 S3 L8 j9 W2 {, N08-12. Werner, S., Praxedes, M., & Kim, H. (2007). The reportingof nonresponse analyses in survey research. Organizational Research Methods,10: 287-295.( @6 `" \5 l: A1 b& _# Z0 _
$ x" U- b: w- I a" f) r2 s6 M: SIssue 9: Experiments and Quasi-Experiments
( F; x9 t& C0 s- b5 \! ], I% ~**Schwab: Chapter 66 e% _3 n: V5 q
K & L: Chapters 24 and 22
* I1 Z; X0 Q, `( }5 _( m/ m( O09-01. Cook, T. D. & Shadish, W. R. 1994. Social experiments:Some developments over the past fifteen years. Annual Review of Psychology,45: 545-580.
3 t8 [4 c, y% [8 v09-02. **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.* n( Y) S1 k# l C! M
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): 837-853.8 v" {- m& k. F# Y
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.% {, ^+ d" R1 q! ]% l
09-05. Greenberg, J. & Tomlinson, E. C. 2004. Situated experimentsin organizations: Transplanting the lab to the field. Journal of Management,30(5): 703-724.
, `1 P9 U2 e- d8 U9 w2 M& \0 f09-06. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch6, ch7." O/ N! g8 t# p) f( c# T- L- H
5 C5 `! D. M% p+ [3 o
Issue 10: Case Studies and Qualitative Research5 R+ d# E) g3 t- d
10-01. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case studyresearch. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.
* @( O: U) c: m& {. h' X* z( j/ o10-02. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast strategic decisions inhigh-velocity environment. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3):543-576.
8 o; f& d% c% \10-03. Morgan, G. & Smircich, L. 1980. The case forQualitative research. Academy of Management Review, 5(4): 491-500.- l. A+ Z6 o* h% m8 v. J2 x; |
10-04. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographicevidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative ScienceQuarterley, 41(3): 404-441.6 m" v0 y- w$ L
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.+ B7 m; E' T( P: s% z; x8 d6 i$ p
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.
9 J! K1 |) s9 l2 G" b0 ~2 g10-07. Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. 1991. The dynamics ofintense work groups: A study of British String Quartets, AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 36: 165-186. Y. _2 Q$ {4 P2 }- W. q
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.
( ~4 I5 i2 \/ {8 S! w10-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch10$ X; c3 L2 l7 [& K2 z( X
10-10. Fendt, J., & Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method inmanagement research: Users' perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11,430-455.
# h' `( X: c+ V1 a& Y7 g( A2 b( G3 r. o7 O) o- h3 O
Issue 11: Statistical Analysis and Inference [Discussion]
( P, N+ ]0 X! @& I**Schwab: Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13- t' P- S$ T, Q' b
K & L: Chapters 9
! V/ O* \" o1 f1 F! ]11-01. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whosetime has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5),746-759.& e/ O! p+ e$ k) O' j! j6 F" i; w
11-02. Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Somesuggestions. Educational and Psychological measurement, 61(2),213-218.
: Z5 n6 p$ L# s11-03. McFarland, L.A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2003).Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods. Journalof Management, 29(5), 641-661.2 _$ @9 H& k8 h% K! L
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, 2469-2472.3 B" ]; x7 p3 ]5 G% P9 Z- }6 U
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.
8 N" r" ]$ }2 S( j: Y8 f" a" \0 h11-06. 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.
( t4 P' x+ V, d( F) X' B
# j) `* v3 \; a6 yIssue 12: Basic concept of mediation and moderation
$ R; h1 ?/ A( n$ {" [**Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19
3 H$ x" s5 U- u4 }% ^# YK & L: Chapters 33 and 34- R* [$ W- \7 z5 |
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.
5 T8 g! d ^2 X5 y: J12-02. James, L. R. & Brett, J. M. 1984. Meidators,moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology,69(2): 307-321.2 A+ L3 }: A* w
12-03. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. R. 2006. Clarifying conditionsand decision points for mediational type inferences in Organizational Behavior.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 1031-1056.5 S& i, x- k2 Q7 p+ \) @' ^
12-04. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.0 C& ^$ ~/ b" x& |7 K
12-05. **陳曉萍等(2008):ch14
& B- \1 i/ Y+ f5 [! K8 r) I/ |- N1 I8 O! Y
Issue 13: Testing mediating effects
V! H8 G q. D+ }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.
2 O0 F! f% Z8 N: l13-02. Kenny, D. A. 2008. Reflections on mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 353-358.
) e z! y" A6 G3 F; D9 U13-03. James, L. 2008. On the path to mediation. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 11(2): 359-363.
; {: c! n4 P8 }7 b% i* X8 T13-04. 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.* k4 ~2 |( j2 U$ C) d
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.; i; \ e1 ] c5 i3 u$ L6 Q V
13-06. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. 1975. The decomposition ofeffects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1): 37-47.! a& l6 R0 E/ z" Z: a; y2 l. a
13-07. Bobko, P., & Rieck, A. 1980. Large sample estimators forstandard errors of functions of correlation coefficients. AppliedPsychological Measurement, 4: 385-398.7 e4 Q# \& V' b% Z& |" D2 C
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.' ]! o/ e5 Y$ p: g3 n2 N- j9 s
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.
: {$ K: k& W" Z: Q* e8 ]13-10. Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1981. Process Analysis: Estimating mediationin treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5: 602-619.
$ z6 k/ l$ k8 `6 `' B, O13-11. MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediatedeffects in prevention studies. Evaluation Review, 17: 144-158./ D; n4 r- X8 W# L. T o& U# q
13-12. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. 2000.Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. PreventionScience, 1: 173-181.- ` Q& h# G, \
13-13. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J. H. 1995. Asimulation study of mediated effect measures. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 30: 41-62.+ I2 }7 e' U- ^) z4 H
13-14. Sobel, M. E. 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervals forindirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.) SociologicalMethodology 1982, (pp. 290-312). Washington, DC: American SociologicalAssociation.
' v! `2 Q/ E# u13-15. Sobel, M. E. 1990. Effect analysis and causation in linearstructural equation models. Psychometrika, 55: 495-515.
8 m% B& {8 g$ j1 j1 i) G7 Y c13-16. 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.
6 a0 l# R. T5 r. P13-17. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. 1948. On a distinctionbetween hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. PsychologicalReview, 55: 95-107.7 z S1 Q# \' @& l: ^. J/ a
13-18. MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. 2007.Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 593-614.
) l$ Y$ h. _0 b; V8 N9 Y7 G13-19. 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.
7 ^8 d! M( W* }! Y13-20. MacKinnon, D. P., Warsi, G., & Dwyer, J.H. 1995. A simulation study of mediated effect measures. MultivariateBehavioral Research, 30: 41-62.
- `: E5 D2 T9 h0 k+ I. ]6 g' Q& L. f13-21. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. 2002. Mediation inexperimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. PsychologicalMethods, 7: 422-445.- \$ @/ i' \+ j( H
13-22. Smith, E. 1982. Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations:Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 43: 248-259.* I4 Q1 ^1 d- u o1 D# ?! }( }2 E; d4 H
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.
* D6 G; t5 C5 \, r! H% R& m$ B8 d# W {% @) m2 C
Issue 14: Testing moderating effects2 Q2 F/ V! C/ k, z
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): 1029-1045.9 Z# e9 G: q+ q# b, d
14-02. Cronbach, L. J. 1987. Statistical tests for moderatorvariables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin,102(3): 414-417.
( V f# d5 J7 [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): 454-464.1 g! ]0 I! v! V$ i4 E
14-04. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. R. 2006. Clarifying conditionsand decision points for mediational type inferences in Organizational Behavior.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 1031-1056.9 _/ z7 o1 b1 J* v8 `! p
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./ v2 e& P5 i6 J( z# F
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.
- C! {" g- f/ }/ E5 u; W" [7 ^- |4 ? ]8 z0 r* ~, f
Issue 15: Testing mediated moderation and moderated mediation( u! B) F& J8 S0 @5 @5 ?
Schwab: Chapters 11 and 19; _- V: k: e4 C! ` _7 w
K & L: Chapters 33 and 349 j. @* T9 F, s# B _, Z
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.
" z3 k* A/ c+ x5 t# S15-02. 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: 142-163.6 Y7 _+ W4 C' i# I
15-03. Edwards, J. R., & Lambert L. S. 2007. Methods forintegrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework usingmoderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12: 1-22.7 {6 @ S; \2 F, V( u `( x4 b! N
15-04. Kenny, D. A., Korchmaros, J. D., & Bolger,N. 2003. Lower level mediation in multilevel models. PsychologicalMethods, 8: 115-128.
7 w4 ~! {( d* e( r, X15-05. 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: 877-883.0 g- \/ e( e' F6 ~' p+ p3 M+ `
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.
4 u! w7 g9 u% `15-07. Krull, J. L. & MacKinnon, D. P. 1999. Multilevelmediation modeling in group-based intervention studies. EvaluationReview, 23: 418-444.
U) P& A; ~+ B+ l/ T* x- B8 o" U0 a# y3 _/ e
Issue 16: Reliability and Construct Validation
0 _2 v9 t+ K) V1 U$ USchwab: Chapters 14 and 17- j) ^" x, q; G6 l# W+ R
K & L: Chapter 28
& ]' U# o; y2 O+ V; R7 y( n16-01. Bagozzi, R. P., Edwards, J. R. 1998. A General Approach for RepresentingConstructs in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods,1: 45-87.
7 P' l$ A. y) M. y16-02. 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 { _0 P$ A, r
16-03. Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent anddivergent validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. PsychologicalBulletin, 56:81-105.! r# J6 f; y4 d$ \
16-04. Colquitt, J. A. 2001. On the dimensionality oforganizational justice: a construct validation of a measure, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 86:386-400.2 n. U n+ X* @ K+ }$ M- B0 E, z
16-05. Cronbach, L.J. & Meehl, P. E. 1955. Construct validityin psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 32(4): 281-302.
$ E% n7 L9 ?( ?+ J8 _* U16-06. Schriesheim, C. A., & Powers, K. J. 1993. Improvingconstruct measurement in management research: Comments and a quantitativeapproach for assessing the theoretical content adequacy of paper-and-pencilsurvey-type instruments. Journal of Management, 19(2): 385-417.
$ F: i& G/ Y' E: a; g v" U16-07. 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. 3-43.9 Y* _ m- u0 o1 p
" b, V5 Q1 @1 y: d/ g" K# T/ p' O
Issue 17: Common Method Variance, S( E8 C3 z0 }3 `/ j, T; s
**Schwab: Chapters 16, 17, 18 and 20- _# Q( @- r& a9 R
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.
$ \" M7 k! f' A: x$ z; Y6 ~. I17-02. Doty, D. H. &Glick, W. H. 1998. Common methods bias: Does common methods variance reallybias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 374-406.# Y. ^5 z: M+ C& L- y
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.
/ F( S0 |( B8 ^( r" p" H, z' p. q# 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.
; Q. V9 g" H. T17-05. 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.
! ]4 j2 K' l0 I17-06. Podsakoff, P. M. & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research roblems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4): 531-544., L, G B K4 ?/ y. z" ^
17-07. Schmidt, F. L. & Hunter, J. E. 1996. Measurement error in psychologicalresearch: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1:199-223.. e9 d8 g# M# k8 X
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.
+ }2 ?0 [9 r# e8 l* m! e# `17-09. Spector, P. E. 2006. Method variance in organizationalresearch: Truth or urban legend. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2):221-232.
3 A+ X) Z# l- b% T8 ~' o1 N% }- X
6 y6 n) S2 d4 T7 @+ `5 fIssue 18: Data Non-independence. v: g7 \) ~9 p5 {0 ]: Y
18-01. Glick, W. H., & Roberts, K. H. 1984. Hypothesized interdependence, assumedindependence. Academy of Management Review, 9: 722–735.6 t3 U% V( S( w! g$ @( G
18-02. Kenny, D. A. 1995. The effect of nonindependence onsignificance testing in dyadic research. Personal Relationships, 2:67-75.
/ M7 [( F% I8 S! a; U- @' y18-03. Kenny, D.A. & Judd, C. M. 1986. Consequences ofviolating the interdependence assumption in analysis of variance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99: 422-431.
% }+ L7 V+ M! G K# l I: i18-04. 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.
7 K4 V8 \ P( c) E$ y0 c) k. `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.
0 r, w$ h0 }2 @0 q( Q2 }18-06. Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. 1995. On thelevel: Homogeneity, independence, heterogeneity, and interactions inorganizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 20: 7-9.0 o! ?1 \3 v) [8 t" P* Q- \ n
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.
' I/ c# U" b: ~" b- S$ D! H9 }$ y6 M; F, V4 [. M. s9 b; e s% j
Issue 19: The Culture Factor (Cross-cultural and IndigenousResearch)) T p) j" ?( r3 s
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.
[! U" Q5 V2 M( D; I19-02. Boisot, M. & Child. J. 1996. From fiefs to clans andnetwork capitalism: Explaining China’s emerging economic order. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 41(4): 600-628.
t: Y6 c G% @& o19-03. Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., & Xin, K. 2004. Guanxi practicesand trust in management: A procedural justice perspective. OrganizationScience, 15: 200-209.
. p* {% E2 n( I3 u19-04. Farh, J. L., Tsui, A. S., Xin, K., & Cheng, B. S. 1998. Theinfluence of relational demography and guanxi: The Chinese case. OrganizationScience, 9: 471-488.6 {) S) d; M; D% [
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.
9 L" w$ g6 I) c, p$ q19-06. Hwang, K. K. 1987. Face and favor: The Chinese power game. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 92(4): 944-974.& w9 O, l4 f' X
19-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. 1989. On the empirical identificationof dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20, 2, 133-151.8 _( b7 E" B. v' O
19-08. Schaffer, B.S. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologiesfor organizational research: A best-practices approach. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 6(2): 169-215.6 |4 ` o% e$ ]/ V
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。5 \+ l4 j3 Q1 j: ?3 v% a2 B+ x
2 j! s: r& G- [1 U" `
19-10. 楊國樞(主編) 1996。「本土心理學方法論」(本土心理學研究第八期),台北:台灣大學心理系本土心理學研究室。
/ f0 j- h# w, k2 X: h. f" ?+ e4 u" Q, ^# N H* ?' G8 j
19-11. 陳曉萍等(2008):Ch4: 建構華人管理學理論的機會與挑戰
: z" i0 H' v l& Z7 G2 U, u3 j5 S q! C
19-12. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch17
# \- y( n: }& `5 ?7 e. T! j, q" U19-13. 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.9 h5 F- J0 O; a
19-14. Tsui, A. (2004). Contributing to global managementknowledge: A case for high quality indigenous research. Asia PacificJournal of Management, 21, 491-513.( N$ t1 w$ P3 D4 t- G, f6 A
- |8 P; H# |& ^8 ?+ D& e
Issue 20: Structural Equation Modeling! p2 a9 L0 t: l8 g
K & L: Chapter 35.. {! m$ \: j/ Y+ m0 M# m6 K
20-01. 林清山 1984。「線性結構關係」(LISREL)電腦程式。中國測驗年會測驗學刊,31:149-164。
: n# D) s. r* K1 R! A5 J+ _/ ?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 w3 h1 e, {# f4 o
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.
# J, x7 L) Q6 e) }9 ~) C20-04. Kenny, D. A., & Kashy, D. A. 1992. Analysis ofmultitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 112: 165-172.
/ W0 d' b2 M7 `* o0 Q8 B- D x20-05. 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.: L# }* K) Y* P
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.
% W$ V3 G% C1 Q3 B) A6 y20-07. 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.
0 g! Y5 N/ w$ T20-08. Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. 2006. Problems with itemparceling for comfirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 9: 369-403.2 f5 D- f: W8 J# Q8 C
20-09. 陳曉萍等(2008):ch13
~- K3 ]+ Z0 ?2 c: @# @: ?" U T4 z% q. s4 h/ j
Issue 21: Level as Knowing: Holism& [( Y, o ^- G, y3 o
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.+ x$ g$ u; t! Z
21-02. Butz, M. R. 1997. Chaos and complexity: Implications forpsychological theory and practice (Chapter 1, pp. 3-24). London: Taylor& Francis.1 w: |! O* [$ O9 |! t
21-03. Barton, S. 1994. Chaos, self-organization, and psychology. AmericanPsychologist, 49: 5-14.) F) p# P, A b) P `! \, c% R4 V
21-04. Pinder, C.C., & Bourgeois, V.W. 1982. Controlling tropes inadministrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 641-652.$ S: E3 s5 V5 U; A1 w$ Q6 D4 i
21-05. Morgan, G. (1983). More on metaphor: Why we cannot controltropes in administrative science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:601-607.
: m, G& v' d2 v, x! ^21-06. Bourgeois, V.W., & Pinder, C.C. 1983. Contrastingphilosophical perspectives in administrative science: A reply to Morgan. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28:608-613.# n7 [1 |9 M4 V. |9 q y! u
21-07. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. 1978. The social psychology oforganizations. NY: Wiley (Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-68).' P" A5 \! P D3 X3 R) J M
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.3 O4 C3 j8 X- I) X
21-09. von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General system theory. NY:Braziller (Chapters 1 & 2, pp. 3-53).
5 @$ e9 z7 N6 s5 [# ~21-10. Miller, J. G. 1978. Living systems. NY: McGraw-Hill(Preface, Chapter 2, pp. 9-50).
7 Q5 m# D5 u+ B H
: K6 y% U8 ^; ~- GIssue 22: Level Fallacies4 C3 x8 T: Z/ k! m
22-01. Allport, F. H. (1924). The group fallacy in relation tosocial science. JournalofAbnormal and SocialPsychology, 19(1), 60-73.
8 `) n8 c7 ^7 ~! B0 R+ _22-02. Allport, F. H. (1924). Dicsussion: The group fallacy inrelation to social science. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 19(2),185-191.3 i7 f* r) N/ i
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.# |, S) L. x$ u0 D) ?4 V' c) k- l, M2 |
22-04. Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and thebehavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15,351-357.
' O7 }, ]) f7 z( f8 _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.
: R5 t: X( a+ s& O0 X7 `5 L22-06. Hammond, J. L. (1973). Two sources of error in ecologicalcorrelations. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 764-777.# M2 [+ h4 E7 }
4 o) Q2 r- y) dIssue 23: Multilevel Nature of Organizational Phenomena
% I' D( Q+ z: G$ \23-01. James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. 1974. Organizationalclimate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112.8 L8 z% ~+ k& L6 {
23-02. Simon, H.A. 1973. The organization of complex systems. In H.H.Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory (pp. 1-27). NY: Braziller.
$ Y6 O2 k% Q* h0 l* |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.( V+ S! K/ \0 O7 ?% b! R
23-04. Rousseau, D. M. l978. Characteristics of departmentspositions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 23: 52l-540.+ R# B/ f& a3 Z/ x0 h" ~
23-05. **Feldman, D. C. 1984. The development and enforcement ofgroup norms. Academy of Management Review, 9: 47-53.& o5 ?. S* v5 ]) T
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.
3 A! L" X3 W# ]! b23-07. 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: 189-239.9 h8 @3 T I9 y8 K
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.' Z3 v, m/ j, ~4 {1 W: v
23-09. Johns, G. 2001. In praise of context. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 22: 31-42.
7 x! B. B; \( _23-10. Brass, D. J. l98l. Structural relationships, jobcharacteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 33l-348.
. S5 P5 {, p2 j M! [9 a3 h23-11. Rousseau, D. M. 1978. Measures of technology as predictorsof employee attitude. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.& c. ]9 ^# l3 ^4 r/ s' b
23-12. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. 1988. An integrativemodel of updating and performance. Human Performance, 1: 5-29.
j$ [" T% F7 H! a! S23-13. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. 1981.Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 26, 501-524.9 O% v6 Z4 W# R4 Y9 c" [+ \
23-14. **Ostroff, C. 1992. The relationship between satisfaction,attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 77(6): 963-974.
/ E& @- o" @1 e! s) z2 h G" k* k/ z' i, j+ Y% e8 m
Issue 24: Levels in Theory Building" ?/ Q6 I! y- y! m$ O$ H
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.
" K8 T2 v1 o u d4 J' o" G& L24-02. Klein, K. J., Cannella, A., & Tosi, H. 1999. Multileveltheory: Challenges and contributions. Academy of Management Review, 24,243-248.6 Q% i C& Z; k: n
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: 346-357.4 `% w& ^ ^% @% X
24-04. Klein, K., Dansereau, F. & Hall, R. 1994. Level issuesin theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of ManagementReview, 19, 195-229.
X. S$ B$ J6 a9 y9 ^( ` v: n24-05. George, J. M., & James, L. R. 1994. Levels issues in theory development. Academyof Management Review, 19: 639-640. (Critique of Klein et al., 1994)+ H; N x# M, A# b$ ?" L4 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)1 n; c( A! o# M8 P6 R/ d) u
24-07. Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizationalresearch: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.* U( k+ K% i5 B6 X- ~) Z! ?" A* n
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.
& P3 A$ N- ^! C# ?; H$ ^7 q24-09. Glick, W. H. (1980). Problems in cross-level inference. In K.H.Roberts & L. Burstein (eds.) Issues in Aggregation. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. 17-30.
" q4 U; j# V' I* K, h; t) x/ o24-10. 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).
1 d4 C# i, w# a0 ^# ~8 _- ?24-11. Behling, O. 1978. Some problems in the philosophy of science oforganizations. Academy of Management Review, 3: 193-201.
; M, q) n5 f% I. ?, D5 e
& s, _, V \1 G- [Issue 25: Meso Paradigm: An Integral Perspective) y& w Z4 n) R& F
25-01. **Hackman, J. R. 2003. Learning more by cross level: Evidencefrom airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 24: 905-922.
% H0 ]. g" f8 `% w9 A0 b25-02. **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." O+ `3 S$ t) b% j
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.
3 X* R' _8 G, R& q& n/ d, L& D. ]25-04. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. 1996. A cross-levelinvestigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. PersonnelPsychology, 49: 307-338.$ j% |! J- n* A. }6 }- L1 F
25-05. Glick, W.H. 1985. Conceptualizing and measuring organizationaland psychological climate: Pitfalls of multilevel research. Academy ofManagement Review, 10: 601-610.; n4 Z3 I" r l: I1 I7 ]1 u
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.
* J( M1 t2 c! G. [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.
" Z) X* ?$ @6 G- r. B% ^
" J' o5 _& j; }9 I. w' IIssue 26: Extending Multilevel Organizational Theory
: a0 Y: I% B6 Q0 W3 M3 f. Z" p26-01. **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.( i4 a4 Q) D2 t" z& X1 _
26-02. Klein, K., Palmer, S. L., Conn, A. B. 2000. InterorganizationalRelationships: A multilevel perspective. In K. and K. 267-307.
7 B5 ? `/ R; ~. x z% Z26-03. Chao, G. T. 2000. Multilevel issues and culture: An integrativeview. In K. & K. 308-346.- V& q7 i* S& E) o" D
1 Z, y1 O1 N- ` A3 BIssue 27: Research Design in Multilevel Research
" h, A0 a0 o8 e/ h7 R. [3 q27-01. **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.+ Z3 W B0 l$ W$ J. x1 b1 f
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.
' x) a5 v! G) M9 ?/ M8 _! w27-03. Kline, K. J. &Kozlowski, S. J. 2000. From micro to meso: Critical stepsin conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research. OrganizationalResearch methods, 3(3): 211-236.
O3 d( Y/ e# ]* Z) @: a+ i0 @7 w' r* a9 C+ S* A
Issue 28: Phenomena from Micro to Macro: An Emerging Process * S* B, z2 `. B) G/ H( W" S
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.) |0 D* t) X8 L) F6 R7 J
28-02. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. 1978. A social information processing approachto job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224-253.
7 k. m: O5 ]7 z* }' {2 d28-03. Schneider, B. 1987. The people make the place. PersonnelPsychology, 40, 437-453.) Q. V1 O9 U; e' r ?7 z
28-04. Schneider, B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. PersonnelPsychology, 48, 747-773.* Z; P; H) h: R
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.
- U o+ Y4 x: Q$ E( T+ P$ p
7 r6 f4 g7 u5 y" X; |- ]* _" _Issue 29: Measurement and Aggregation
1 X9 k$ x( a9 H% ]4 H B1 L29-01. Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlationreliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762-765.; P D8 z% X" ~) y% y' Y! }
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.+ ]( F* ~/ m0 t4 g ]5 M0 z
29-03. James, L. R. l982. Aggregation bias in estimates ofperceptual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 2l9-229.% y+ t& C& J# Y! ^/ r
29-04. **James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimatingwith-group reliability with and without response bias. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 69(1): 85-98./ I& c- n1 L. u' X
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.( b* q0 w$ I4 p" ^: M; N- }0 E# b
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.
( k) A3 {' U0 b9 {. t8 N' ^29-07. Ostroff, C, 1993. Comparing correlations based onindividual-level and aggregated data. Journal of Applied Psychology,78(2): 569-582.
& ?2 g9 h& J" e" F: {) 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.- D4 ]1 `2 H' V2 ]
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.
9 f0 i9 S. E' V4 \0 X( Y* B" t% m; `29-10. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. l987. Anexploration of climates for technical updating and performance. PersonnelPsychology, 40: 539-563.
) z8 j9 Q4 }0 P* U0 E' x2 |29-11. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. 1989. Interrater reliability coefficientscannot be computed when only one stimulus is rated. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 74: 368-370.0 j( y h/ S8 ?$ d% x! X
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.
t7 u' O4 E2 H0 T/ o# q2 m29-13. Bliese, P. D. 1998. Group size, ICC values, and group-levelcorrelations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 355-373.7 R' c! h5 J* u+ S u% M+ o8 x' Z
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.
% w- v$ J1 Y) ?, U7 X29-15. 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.- T8 \1 K \3 D! Z* X. [
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.# r1 F5 k3 d( _ s) v# D
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.! c7 b& g4 ?, u, }, w5 w
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: 127-135.7 s$ |3 J9 B" \0 A0 M. w6 _4 d9 ^
29-19. McGraw, K. O. & Wong, S. P. 1996. Forming inferences aboutsome intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1:30–46.
( ?. G' N; r/ p9 P) c, Q6 {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.
: T B* O! D* ~0 g1 A29-21. Burke, M. J., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. S. 1999. Onaverage deviation indices for estimating interrater agreement.Organizational Research Methods, 2(1): 49-68./ X h; I$ s* @, f# A- r! i% j( v
2 a! ^! J1 n, j( f7 I
Issue 30: Approaches to Multilevel Data Analysis& G" |# a3 X5 ^9 }9 g+ I$ M
30-01. Firebaugh, G. 1979. Assessing group effects: A comparison oftwo methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 7: 384-395.
5 c; m, r$ N" P% d6 o30-02. James, L. R., & Williams, L. 2000. The cross-level operator in regression,ANCOVA, and contextual analysis. In K. & K. 382-424.
) f# n$ {: ?, ~8 r' N" m. w/ P2 h30-03. George, J. M. 1990. Personality, affect, and behavior ingroups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 107-116.6 R: J, Q. d' Q9 @' g- i
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 m" Y0 t0 N5 b30-05. 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.
9 r& N" [+ H& E! t30-06. **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.
; G: ~ p0 r' \8 U T8 p30-07. Leung, K. & Bond, M. H. 1989. On the empiricalidentifications of dimensions of cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 20(2): 133-151.
5 |) L" o8 h- `4 n# E( n30-08. Peterson, M. F. & Castro, S. 2006. Measurement metrics ataggregate levels of analysis: Implications for organization culture researchand the GLOBE project. Leadership Quarterly, 17: 506-521.6 {0 ^) S/ ]6 b6 `# c
30-09. Dansereau, F., Yammarino, F. J., & Kohles, J. 1999. Multiple levels ofanalysis from a longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theorybuilding. Academy of Management Review, 24: 346-357.% I0 ^+ c6 u) U* q" S L7 p
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.. M/ L( }, H8 u3 R6 \( s
7 o5 L, F* W. Q$ DIssue 31: Introduction to HLM
9 x# K/ r0 a- j: w D31-01. **Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationaleof HLM. Journal of Management. 23(6): 723-744.( V# {8 Z& }8 P( O; G
31-02. Hofmann, D. A. & Griffin, M. A., Gavin, M. B. 2000. Theapplication of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K.& K. 467-511.7 J( ?( ?. |6 ?' K, d
31-03. **Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centeringdecisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research inorganizations. Journal of Management, 24: 623-641.
- \8 ^: J2 v+ w h1 q. N3 X31-04. 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.# C1 w7 P% U0 p& j+ W# n
- U4 F; T/ j" H0 t* Q5 @Issue 32: Empirical Examples of HLM
% I9 l- A1 b( J" J$ X32-01. Bloom, M., & Milkovich, G. 1998. Relationships among risk,incentive pay, and organizational performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 41: 283-297.
7 G5 A1 q$ K+ f4 p# S32-02. **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.
8 n& k: `& l& r6 u32-03. 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.
* J4 f, M2 H4 b$ N1 l5 E32-04. Gavin, M. B., & Hofmann, D. A. 2002. Using hierarchical linear modeling toinvestigate the moderating influence of leadership climate. LeadershipQuarterly, 13: 15-33.
9 |& Z7 _8 j4 P$ z8 u9 S% B& L0 u32-05. **Erhart, M. G. 2004. Leadership and procedural justice climateas antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. PersonnelPsychology, 57: 61-94.
% K% D- d1 \& K. S7 w32-06. Glission, C., & James, L. R. 2002. The cross-level effects of culture andclimate in human service teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:767-794.
: R# \0 W2 R* p | M# a32-07. Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. 2005. Leadership,collective personality, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,90: 509-522.; I3 W+ e& p# u- V' t# L
32-08. Kark, R., Shamir, B., Chen, G. 2003. The two faces oftransformational leadership: Empowerment and dependency.Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(2): 246-255.) @7 d3 E p) x' W
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.
: U( c7 K" q5 M" L32-10. 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)
t3 }, n+ h$ w% U' b2 w' V32-11. Sacco, J. M., & Schmitt, N. 2005. A dynamic multilevel model of demographicdiversity and misfit effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2):203-231.
* S) Y X) f, s0 u! P32-12. Steensma, H. K., Marino, L., & Dickson, P. H. 2000. Theinfluence of national cultural on the formation of technology alliances byentrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 951-973.2 k: P7 H7 F0 W( l% n
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./ c1 h5 `6 ]+ j% T0 b! |( f5 w4 [
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.) |' A$ P' {0 r' Q+ ?+ }# w
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: 515-535.2 Z. g. X1 `& o/ _8 N4 V2 L( ^
- x( o! F8 J7 b. l1 Y
Issue 33: Extended Issues in Multilevel Research
- X! Y4 U; M( A+ z$ f33-01. Brass, D. J. 2000. Networks and Frog Ponds: Trends inmultilevel research. In K.& K. 557-571.2 J, p; A# S9 R
33-02. Rousseau, D. M. 2000. Multilevel competencies and missinglinkages. In K. & K. 572-582., k1 M4 L6 X% @) s# _
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.
: [( C- ^8 G+ e+ L33-04. 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.
! c3 d j2 ?/ D d1 c% Q2 j33-05. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. E. 2007. A framework fortesting meso-mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior. Journalof Organizational Behavior, 28: 141-172.4 p* a+ t% R+ M" q6 j) F) g* ^
33-06. Krull, J. L. & Mackinnon, D. P. 2001. Multilevel modelingof individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate BehavioralResearch, 36(2): 249-277.
( [. y$ c9 G# Q6 ^+ y2 k3 \8 ?" k
Issue 34: Report Writing and Paper Review
& L# n J$ D! [( `Schwab: Chapters 15 and 211 w1 `; e2 O. b# _8 P1 O. e
34-01. 應用心理學刊給審稿者的一封信$ k$ Z" u4 v' N" W. n
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.! ?5 l' U h7 G, Z, \, j6 l7 }, o
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.
+ v6 ]8 C9 A. Q: G2 F" f9 c' U34-04. **Tsui, A. 2005. Guidelines on writing a research manuscript.(one page handout)., c# N7 R0 w$ N. f
34-05. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Somecriteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 496-515.
0 X2 `' o) M' ^! g# a( \: n8 O34-06. **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. o- q' _( [) L# g5 D- \% x
34-07. **Feldman, D. C. 2004a. The devil in the details: Convertinggood research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1):1-6.3 P2 C# N& V5 {4 k+ \7 P+ p
34-08. Feldman, D. C. 2004b. Being a developmental reviewer:Easier said than done. Journal of Management, 30(2): 161-164.+ k5 l8 a& a9 N$ j
34-09. Feldman, D. C. 2004c. Negotiating the revision process. Journalof Management, 30(3): 305-307.
$ N& m' X9 G* j. {2 }' |34-10. Lee, A.S. 1995. Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journalof Operations Management, 13(1): 87-92.5 k9 \% O1 A( h
9 y1 S$ Y* A7 @( H$ e. ]7 Q
Issue 35: Wrap-up: Alternatives to Positivism8 K6 j3 U: U" e% m7 ~! l
35-01. **童元方2003. 追蹤天才之源。6 |2 x7 C& H" B6 j2 i$ |; U! A
水流花靜---科學與詩的對話。
4 m9 t) I' |( j+ ZP.121~139.台北:天下文化。% D# L* D) A) u( u- c/ f
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.
) z8 h3 c2 o* }- _0 C$ ^. y35-03. Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M. G. 2002. Qualitativeresearch can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 23: 237-242.
( B9 G" Z9 t% ]0 z6 c' g% B35-04. Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. 1979. Assumptions about the nature of Science. SociologicalParadigms and Organizational Analysis. 1-9. Portsmouth, NH: HeinemannEducational Books.. S1 j! Y$ @8 V* C8 v9 R5 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.
; p) I# Z L3 p% ]+ M35-06. Cohen, J. 1990. Things I have learned (so far). AmericanPsychologist, 45(12): 1304-1312.
" e$ A# v9 e9 c35-07. Journal of Management. 1985. Special issue onorganizational symbolism. 11(2).9 o0 T) I) ]7 x2 Z: t; ?9 I4 z
35-08. Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizationalscience: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of ManagementReview. 18: 599-620.- E; {, i/ ]0 B% f% P& I3 I( P
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) f& h+ ]! a* V$ i# Z0 @0 x
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.
2 J4 E+ ~4 I2 K- b- A" X9 q35-11. Vandenberg, R. J. 2002. Toward a Further Understanding ofand Improvement in Measurement Invariance Methods and Procedures. OrganizationalResearch Methods, 5: 139-158.+ Z6 o! _% I! R. h: `5 f
35-12. Hitt, M. A., Gimono, J., & Hoskinsson, R. E. 1998. Currentand Future Research in Strategic Management. Organizational ResearchMethods, 1: 6-44.8 O+ k; ^' t1 f4 B- q9 e$ K( m: f
35-13. Chan, D. 1998. The conceptualization and analysis of changeover time. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4): 418-489.5 D1 g2 B# v0 s9 e. g
35-14. **Lance, C. E., Butts, M. M., & Michels, L. C. 2006. Thesources of four commonly reported cutoff criteria: What did they really say? OrganizationalResearch Methods, 9: 202-220.
8 Y! {! A1 D' O$ \ x5 G6 i2 ^- \, z8 a" E; f% f8 Y4 [
<<End>> 本帖最后由 Kenneth 于 2011-5-3 15:37 编辑
' G M) r3 c7 c
% p, D; @% X% s7 x" Q |
|