Getting Through the Gate: Statistical and Methodological Issues Raised in the Reviewing Process

被引:72
作者
Green, Jennifer P. [1 ]
Tonidandel, Scott [2 ]
Cortina, Jose M. [1 ]
机构
[1] George Mason Univ, Dept Psychol, 4400 Univ Dr, Fairfax, VA 22030 USA
[2] Davidson Coll, Dept Psychol, Davidson, NC 28036 USA
关键词
qualitative research; method variance; factor analysis; interactions; construct validation procedures; MODERATED MULTIPLE-REGRESSION; EXPLORATORY FACTOR-ANALYSIS; ORGANIZATIONAL-RESEARCH; METHOD VARIANCE; PREDICTOR VARIABLES; METHOD BIAS; MEDIATION; MANAGEMENT; RECOMMENDATIONS; VALIDITY;
D O I
10.1177/1094428116631417
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
This study empirically examined the statistical and methodological issues raised in the reviewing process to determine what the gatekeepers of the literature, the reviewers and editors, really say about methodology when making decisions to accept or reject manuscripts. Three hundred and four editors' and reviewers' letters for 69 manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Business and Psychology were qualitatively coded using an iterative approach. Systematic coding generated 267 codes from 1,751 statements that identified common methodological and statistical errors by authors and offered themes across these issues. We examined the relationship between the issues identified and manuscript outcomes. The most prevalent methodological and statistical topics were measurement, control variables, common method variance, factor analysis, and structural equation modeling. Common errors included the choice and comprehensiveness of analyses. This qualitative analysis of methods in reviews provides insight into how current methodological debates reveal themselves in the review process. This study offers guidance and advice for authors to improve the quality of their research and for editors and reviewers to improve the quality of their reviews.
引用
收藏
页码:402 / 432
页数:31
相关论文
共 120 条
[1]   Conducting field experiments using eLancing's natural environment [J].
Aguinis, Herman ;
Lawal, Sola O. .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS VENTURING, 2012, 27 (04) :493-505
[2]   First Decade of Organizational Research Methods Trends in Design, Measurement, and Data-Analysis Topics [J].
Aguinis, Herman ;
Pierce, Charles A. ;
Bosco, Frank A. ;
Muslin, Ivan S. .
ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2009, 12 (01) :69-112
[3]  
Aiken L.S., 1991, Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interaction
[4]   STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE - A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED 2-STEP APPROACH [J].
ANDERSON, JC ;
GERBING, DW .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1988, 103 (03) :411-423
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1995, Computer programs for qualitative data analysis: A software sourcebook
[6]   On making causal claims: A review and recommendations [J].
Antonakis, John ;
Bendahan, Samuel ;
Jacquart, Philippe ;
Lalive, Rafael .
LEADERSHIP QUARTERLY, 2010, 21 (06) :1086-1120
[7]   More on testing for validity instead of looking for it [J].
Antonakis, John ;
Dietz, Joerg .
PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2011, 50 (03) :418-421
[8]  
ATLAS.ti, ATLAS TI VERS 6 2 CO
[9]  
Austin J.T., 2002, Handbook of research methods in industrial and organizational psychology, P3
[10]   The dominance analysis approach for comparing predictors in multiple regression [J].
Azen, R ;
Budescu, DV .
PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 2003, 8 (02) :129-148