•Journal•ISSN: 2158-2440
SAGE Open
SAGE Publishing
About: SAGE Open is an academic journal published by SAGE Publishing. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Psychology & Business. It has an ISSN identifier of 2158-2440. It is also open access. Over the lifetime, 5141 publications have been published receiving 60081 citations. The journal is also known as: SAGE Open.
Topics: Psychology, Business, Medicine, Higher education, China
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the trustworthiness of content analysis in nursing science studies and found that content analysis is commonly used for analyzing qualitative data, however, few articles have examined the use of QCA in nursing studies.
Abstract: Qualitative content analysis is commonly used for analyzing qualitative data. However, few articles have examined the trustworthiness of its use in nursing science studies. The trustworthiness of q...
5,401 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors focus on the importance and influence of Industry 4.0 and consequently the Internet-connected technologies for the creation of value added for organizations and society, and investigate the changes that will result from Industry4.0 with the development of the Internet of things.
Abstract: This article is focused on the importance and influence of Industry 4.0 and consequently the Internet-connected technologies for the creation of value added for organizations and society. The contribution of the article is mainly conceptual. With the development of the Internet, the Internet of things that is central to the new industrial revolution has led to “Industry 4.0.” The aim of this article is to synthesize the known theory and practices of Industry 4.0, and to investigate the changes that will result from Industry 4.0 and with the development of the Internet of things.
704 citations
••
Umeå University1, University of Queensland2, Tilburg University3, North-West University4, National Research University – Higher School of Economics5, Victoria University of Wellington6, University of Lyon7, Stanford University8, Peking University9, Southwest University10, University of Zagreb11, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic12, Tallinn University13, University of Provence14, Heidelberg University15, Panteion University16, Tel-Hai Academic College17, Kyorin University18, Gunma University19, Hosei University20, Vilnius University21, Klaipėda University22, Universidad de Sonora23, The Catholic University of America24, University of Coimbra25, University of the Algarve26, Moscow State University27, University of Education, Winneba28, Tver State University29, Saratov State University30, Saint Petersburg State University31, Russian Academy32, Complutense University of Madrid33, University of East London34, Google35
TL;DR: In this paper, the structural equivalence of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) across 26 samples from 24 countries (N = 12,200) was assessed.
Abstract: In this article, we assess the structural equivalence of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) across 26 samples from 24 countries (N = 12,200). The ZTPI is proven to be a valid and reliable index of individual differences in time perspective across five temporal categories: Past Negative, Past Positive, Present Fatalistic, Present Hedonistic, and Future. We obtained evidence for invariance of 36 items (out of 56) and also the five-factor structure of ZTPI across 23 countries. The short ZTPI scales are reliable for country-level analysis, whereas we recommend the use of the full scales for individual-level analysis. The short version of ZTPI will further promote integration of research in the time perspective domain in relation to many different psycho-social processes.
525 citations
••
TL;DR: Citations are increasingly used as performance indicators in research policy and within the research system as mentioned in this paper, and it is argued that citations reflect aspects related to scientific impact and relevance, although with important limitations.
Abstract: Citations are increasingly used as performance indicators in research policy and within the research system. Usually, citations are assumed to reflect the impact of the research or its quality. What is the justification for these assumptions and how do citations relate to research quality? These and similar issues have been addressed through several decades of scientometric research. This article provides an overview of some of the main issues at stake, including theories of citation and the interpretation and validity of citations as performance measures. Research quality is a multidimensional concept, where plausibility/soundness, originality, scientific value, and societal value commonly are perceived as key characteristics. The article investigates how citations may relate to these various research quality dimensions. It is argued that citations reflect aspects related to scientific impact and relevance, although with important limitations. On the contrary, there is no evidence that citations reflect other key dimensions of research quality. Hence, an increased use of citation indicators in research evaluation and funding may imply less attention to these other research quality dimensions, such as solidity/plausibility, originality, and societal value.
517 citations
••
TL;DR: This article investigated the extent to which MTurk samples differ from population samples, and the underlying nature of these differences by replicating items from the population-based American National Election Studies (ANES) 2012 Time Series Study in a survey administered to a sample of mTurk respondents.
Abstract: One of the most notable recent developments in survey research is the increased usage of online convenience samples drawn from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk). While scholars have noted various social and political differences (e.g., age, partisanship) between MTurk and population-based samples, the breadth and depth of these variations remain unclear. We investigate the extent to which MTurk samples differ from population samples, and the underlying nature of these differences. We do so by replicating items from the population-based American National Election Studies (ANES) 2012 Time Series Study in a survey administered to a sample of MTurk respondents. With few exceptions, we not only find that MTurk respondents differ significantly from respondents completing the 2012 ANES via the Web but also that most differences are reduced considerably when controlling for easily measurable sample features. Thus, MTurk respondents do not appear to differ fundamentally from population-based respondents in unmeasur...
503 citations