Showing papers by "Philip M. Podsakoff published in 2005"
Book•
15 Jun 2005
TL;DR: The Good Sam: Its Roots, Structure, and Frameworks OCB in the Context of Organization Theory Attitudinal and Dispositional Antecendents of OCB The Impact of Leadership and Work Environments on OCB as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: The Good Sam The Study of OCB: Its Roots, Structure, and Frameworks OCB in the Context of Organization Theory Attitudinal and Dispositional Antecendents of OCB The Impact of Leadership and Work Environments on OCB The Effects of OCB on Performance Evaluations and Judgments The Effects of OCB on Organizational Performance and Success Implications for HR Practitioners and OCB Researchers Appendix References Index About the Authors
1,893 citations
TL;DR: Results of the Monte Carlo simulation indicated that measurement model misspecification can inflate unstandardized structural parameter estimates by as much as 400% or deflate them by asMuch as 80% and lead to Type I or Type II errors of inference, depending on whether the exogenous or the endogenous latent construct is misspecified.
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to review the distinction between formative- and reflective-indicator measurement models, articulate a set of criteria for deciding whether measures are formative or reflective, illustrate some commonly researched constructs that have formative indicators, empirically test the effects of measurement model misspecification using a Monte Carlo simulation, and recommend new scale development procedures for latent constructs with formative indicators. Results of the Monte Carlo simulation indicated that measurement model misspecification can inflate unstandardized structural parameter estimates by as much as 400% or deflate them by as much as 80% and lead to Type I or Type II errors of inference, depending on whether the exogenous or the endogenous latent construct is misspecified. Implications of this research are discussed.
1,528 citations
TL;DR: The findings show that the top seven journals accounted for 61 percent of all of the citations in the journals included, and that the three journals that showed the greatest increase in influence over the past 20 years were AMJ, AMR, and SMJ.
Abstract: It is difficult to get a clear picture of the relative influence of management journals because previous studies have focused on a single sub-area in the field over a relatively restricted number of years, and/or have used inconsistent criteria to judge journal influence. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine journal influence using citations from 28 journals over the past two decades. The findings show that the top seven journals accounted for 61 percent of all of the citations in the journals included, and that the three journals that showed the greatest increase in influence over the past 20 years were AMJ, AMR, and SMJ. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
683 citations