Conceptual Framework and Statistical Procedures for Delineating and Testing Multilevel Theories of Homology

374 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A Within-Person Examination of the Effects of Telework (2014, background): “While meta-analytic evidence does speak to their functionings at the between-person level (Gajendran and Harrision 2007), these mediators do not necessarily act in the same manner or to the same degree at the within-person level (Chen et al. 2005).”
At What Level (and in Whom) We Trust (2012, methodology): “Chen, Bliese, and Mathieu (2005) reviewed different methods to test the homology of constructs across levels of analysis: (1) within and between analysis (WABA; Dansereau & Yammarino, 2000), (2) multilevel structural equation modeling (SEM; Muthén, 1994), and (3) levels of similarity.”
Change Readiness (2013, background): “Chen et al. (2005) argued that one of the first steps to developing a multilevel theory is to explicitly test the assumption of homology, which suggests that similar relationships exist between parallel constructs across levels of analysis.”
The Dynamic Relationships of Work Affect and Job Satisfaction with Perceptions of Fit (2014, methodology): “As stated by Chen et al. (2005), configural similarity involves researchers testing “the significance levels of parameter estimates at each relevant level of analysis [in order to] compare the relative ‘hit rate’” (p. 387).”