Dyads in Organizational Research: Conceptual Issues and Multilevel Analyses

By Janaki Gooty, Francis J. Yammarino. 2011

101 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/85761c14a719c1a50dc922ac334a7ec8b0f947db

How researchers see this paper

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

In Gender Studies

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Leader-member Exchange (LMX) and Performance: A Meta-Analytic Review (2016, unknown): “1177/1094428109358271 Graen, G. B. (1976). Role-making processes within complex organizations.”
Affect and leader-member exchange in the new millennium: A state-of-art review and guiding framework (2017, background): “…LMX researchers rarely collect reciprocal data on affect-related variables (e.g., emotional intelligence or emotional experience in response to the LMX process within a social context, see Gooty & Yammarino, 2011; Krasikova & LeBreton, 2012; Tse & Ashkanasy, 2015) from both the leader and follower.”
The changing bases of mutual trust formation in inter-organizational relationships: A dyadic study of university-industry research collaborations (2017, background): “…dyad-level effects into separate actor and partner effects, and thus allowing to separately estimate the influence of a focal actor's perception of a behavior or outcome as well as the influence of the partner's perception of a behavior or outcome (Ferrin et al., 2008; Gooty & Yammarino, 2011).”
From bad to worse (2012, background): “As discussed by Gooty and Yammarino (2011), this is common in organizational research, which often neglects the dyad as a level of analysis in favor of focusing on individuals, groups/teams, and organizations.”
The Leader–Member Exchange Relationship (2016, methodology): “Furthermore, it creates an additional potential dependency between dyads due to the presence of a common leader; thus, these can be viewed as “dependent dyads” (for a detailed explanation, see Gooty & Yammarino, 2011).”
Within-group agreement: On the use (and misuse) of rWG and rWG(J) in leadership research and some best practice guidelines. (2012, background): “Researchers interested in learning more about these topics are referred to Pasisz and Hurtz (2009) and Gooty and Yammarino (2011).”
Dispersion-Composition Models in Multilevel Research (2011, methodology): “For example, Gooty and Yammarino (2011) have shown how dyadic theorizing and testing can be used to complement and, thus, expand the ever-so-popular teamsbased perspective.”
The role of leader emotion management in leader–member exchange and follower outcomes (2016, methodology): “We adopted the LMSX scale as our paper takes a social exchange view of LMX (Gooty & Yammarino, 2011, in press for such use).”