The many faces of multi-level issues

92 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.

Understanding Organizations through Embodied Metaphors (2008, background): “A key concern of multi-level research has been to avoid serious errors in theory, conceptualization, and analysis of data (Dansereau and Yammarino 2002).”
Within-group agreement: On the use (and misuse) of rWG and rWG(J) in leadership research and some best practice guidelines. (2012, background): “If the ICC(1) is statistically different from zero, there is evidence to justify making the group the focal unit of analysis (Chen et al., 2004).”
Group Ethical Voice (2017, result): “All of these values exceeded the suggested cutoff value of .70 (Chen et al., 2004), indicating that respondents in our sample had sufficient agreement on their reported measures.”
The Etiology of the Multilevel Paradigm in Management Research (2011, background): “…refers to situations where descriptive statistics, such as means or sums of scores in a collective, adequately represent the processes Chan (1998), Chen et al. (2004) Differentiated the theoretical, psychometric, and construct validity issues involved in different forms of aggregate constructs:…”