Theory Testing and Organizational Behavior: The Varient Approach.

Robert J. House; Fred Dansereau; Joseph A. Alutto; Francis J. Yammarino

doi:10.2307/2392921

Theory Testing and Organizational Behavior: The Varient Approach.

Administrative Science Quarterly ◽

10.2307/2392921 ◽

1987 ◽

Vol 32 (3) ◽

pp. 459 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Robert J. House ◽

Fred Dansereau ◽

Joseph A. Alutto ◽

Francis J. Yammarino

Keyword(s):

Organizational Behavior ◽

Theory Testing

Download Full-text

Review of Theory Testing in Organizational Behavior: The Varient Approach.

Contemporary Psychology ◽

10.1037/023588 ◽

1985 ◽

Vol 30 (2) ◽

pp. 160-161

Author(s):

William L. Hays

Keyword(s):

Organizational Behavior ◽

Theory Testing

Download Full-text

Eerherstel van het interview als onderzoeksinstrument in de organisatiepsychologie

Gedrag & Organisatie ◽

10.5117/2012.025.003.254 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 25 (3) ◽

Author(s):

Ben Emans

Keyword(s):

Organizational Behavior ◽

Data Quality ◽

Quantitative Methods ◽

Theory Building ◽

Theory Testing ◽

Questionnaire Data ◽

Validity And Reliability ◽

Quality Requirements ◽

Fact Finding ◽

State Of Affairs

The comeback of the interview in organizational behavior research The comeback of the interview in organizational behavior research Organizational behavior, as a theory-developing field of research, is highly questionnaire-based and highly dependent on quantitative methods. In its dominant methodology tradition, variables are measured in a sample of respondents or other units of observation and the calculated relationships between the variables subsequently serve as the input for theory building or theory testing. This state of affairs generates restrictions regarding the domain of phenomena that can be studied. A plea is made for using of the interview as a tool for collecting data that permit theory building like questionnaire data, yet without the restrictions of these data. Quality requirements that apply to interviews used for theory building are very different from the ones that apply to questionnaires. Rather than relating to the validity and reliability of the measures, they relate to the valid elicitation of relevant facts. In short: it is a matter of fact-finding.

Download Full-text

Beyond Meta-Analysis: Secondary Uses of Meta-Analytic Data

Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior ◽

10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012119-045006 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

pp. 125-153 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

In-Sue Oh

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Organizational Behavior ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Theory Testing ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Future Directions ◽

First Order ◽

Rigorous Research ◽

Secondary Analyses

Secondary uses of meta-analytic data (SUMAD) represent advanced analyses and applications of first-order meta-analytic results for theoretical (e.g., theory testing) and practical (e.g., evidence-based practice) purposes to produce novel knowledge that cannot be directly obtained from the input meta-analytic results. First-order meta-analytic results in the form of bivariate effect sizes have been used as input to such secondary analyses and applications. Given the increasing popularity of SUMAD in human resource management (HRM) and organizational behavior (OB), there is a need for a systematic review on this topic. This article has two primary goals. First, it reviews essential works regarding SUMAD in the fields of HRM/OB and provides taxonomies of SUMAD in theoretical and practical domains. Second, it introduces recent SUMAD and discusses future directions that encourage more innovative and rigorous research endeavors along this line.

Download Full-text