Institution
Indiana University
Education•Bloomington, Indiana, United States•
About: Indiana University is a education organization based out in Bloomington, Indiana, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 64480 authors who have published 150058 publications receiving 6392902 citations. The organization is also known as: Indiana University system & indiana.edu.
Topics: Population, Poison control, Health care, Transplantation, Cancer
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: The extent to which method biases influence behavioral research results is examined, potential sources of method biases are identified, the cognitive processes through which method bias influence responses to measures are discussed, the many different procedural and statistical techniques that can be used to control method biases is evaluated, and recommendations for how to select appropriate procedural and Statistical remedies are provided.
Abstract: Interest in the problem of method biases has a long history in the behavioral sciences. Despite this, a comprehensive summary of the potential sources of method biases and how to control for them does not exist. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to examine the extent to which method biases influence behavioral research results, identify potential sources of method biases, discuss the cognitive processes through which method biases influence responses to measures, evaluate the many different procedural and statistical techniques that can be used to control method biases, and provide recommendations for how to select appropriate procedural and statistical remedies for different types of research settings.
52,531 citations
•
01 Jan 1990TL;DR: In this paper, an institutional approach to the study of self-organization and self-governance in CPR situations is presented, along with a framework for analysis of selforganizing and selfgoverning CPRs.
Abstract: Preface 1. Reflections on the commons 2. An institutional approach to the study of self-organization and self-governance in CPR situations 3. Analyzing long-enduring, self-organized and self-governed CPRs 4. Analyzing institutional change 5. Analyzing institutional failures and fragilities 6. A framework for analysis of self-organizing and self-governing CPRs Notes References Index.
16,852 citations
••
Monash University1, University of Amsterdam2, University of Paris3, Bond University4, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio5, University of Ottawa6, American University of Beirut7, Oregon Health & Science University8, University of York9, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute10, University of Southern Denmark11, Johns Hopkins University12, Brigham and Women's Hospital13, Indiana University14, University of Bristol15, University College London16, University of Toronto17
TL;DR: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement as discussed by the authors was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found.
Abstract: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
16,613 citations
01 Jan 1994
TL;DR: This is also one of the factors by obtaining the soft documents of this competing paradigms in qualitative research by online as discussed by the authors. But, it will totally squander the time.
Abstract: This is likewise one of the factors by obtaining the soft documents of this competing paradigms in qualitative research by online. You might not require more become old to spend to go to the books establishment as skillfully as search for them. In some cases, you likewise do not discover the broadcast competing paradigms in qualitative research that you are looking for. It will totally squander the time.
15,524 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify six categories of self-reports and discuss such problems as common method variance, the consistency motif, and social desirability, as well as statistical and post hoc remedies and some procedural methods for dealing with artifactual bias.
14,482 citations
Authors
Showing all 64884 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Vladimir N. Uversky | 131 | 959 | 75342 |
Kiyotomo Kawagoe | 131 | 1406 | 90819 |
Frans Meijers | 130 | 1660 | 91514 |
Joseph P. Broderick | 130 | 504 | 72779 |
Gideon Bella | 129 | 1301 | 87905 |
Chi-Huey Wong | 129 | 1220 | 66349 |
Austin Ball | 129 | 1400 | 87729 |
David B. Allison | 129 | 836 | 69697 |
Darren Price | 129 | 1036 | 88981 |
Tohru Takeshita | 128 | 1036 | 78625 |
Glenn M. Chertow | 128 | 764 | 82401 |
Rolf Loeber | 128 | 470 | 58477 |
Benjamin Brau | 128 | 971 | 72704 |
Gary C. Curhan | 128 | 435 | 55348 |
Gokhan Unel | 128 | 954 | 77318 |