Teaching quantitative research design continues to challenge management educators. Challenges arise because this research requires expertise in multiple design elements including theory development, measurement, and statistical analysis. Moreover, capable design necessitates the seamless integration of these separate elements with each other. To aid educators, this article proposes an integrative model for teaching quantitative research. The model specifically focuses on matching design elements and is delineated by exercises that teach integrative skills. The author also discusses the applicability of the model to executive learning wherein managers test their beliefs or theories-in-use.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Argyris, C.
(1991, May/June). Teaching smart people how to learn. Harvard Business Review, pp. 99-109.
2.
Bagozzi, R.
, & Edwards, J. (1999).A general approach for representing constructs in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 45-87.
3.
Bagozzi, R.
, & Phillips, L. (1982).Representing and testing organizational theories: A holistic construal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 459-489.
4.
Baron, R.
, & Kenny, D. (1986).The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
5.
Bentler, P.
(1995). EQS: Structrual Equation Program Manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.
6.
Cook, T.
, & Campbell, D. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
7.
Cooper, H.
(1984). The integrative research review: A systematic approach. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
8.
Dubin, R.
(1978). Theory building. New York: Free Press.
9.
Forthofer, R.
, & Lehnen, R. (1981). Public program analysis: A new categorical data approach. Belmont, CA: Lifetime Learning Publications (Wadsworth).
10.
Ghauri, P.
, Gronhaug, K., & Kristianslund, I. (1995). Research methods in business studies. New York: Prentice Hall.
11.
Hussey, J.
, & Hussey, R. (1997). Business research: A practical guide for undergraduate and postgraduate students. London: Macmillan Business.
12.
James, L.
, Mulaik, B., Brett, J. (1982). Casual Analysis: Assumptions, Models, and Data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
13.
Mason, R.
, & Mitroff, I. (1981). Challenging strategic planning assumptions. New York: John Wiley.
14.
Nunnally, J.
(1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
15.
Pedhazur, E.
, & Schmelkin, L. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
Perry-Smith, J.
, & Blum, T. (2000).Work-family human resource bundles and perceived organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1107-1117.
17.
Rosnow, R.
, & Rosenthal, R. (1996). Beginning behavioral research: A conceptual primer. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
18.
Sarantakos, S.
(1998). Social research (2nd ed.). South Yarra, Australia: Macmillan Education Australia.
19.
Schmitt, N.
, & Klimoski, R. (1991). Research methods in human resource management. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western.
20.
Schwab, D.
(1980). Construct validity in organizational behavior. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 2, 3-43.
21.
Sekaran, U.
(1992). Research methods for business. New York: John Wiley.
22.
Williams, L.
, & Hazer, J. (1986).Antecedents and consequences of satisfaction and commitment in turnover models: A reanalysis using latent variable structural equation methods. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 219-231.
