Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 544

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 111 of the 111 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Tale of Two Sample Sources: Do Results from Online Panel Data and Conventional Data Converge?

Walter, Sheryl L., Seibert, Scott E., Goering, Daniel, O’Boyle, Ernest H.·2019·Journal of Business and Psychology
DOI 10.1007/s10869-018-9552-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10869-018-9552-y

Cites

111 of 111 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 111 references

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. *Alarcon, G. M. (2009). The development of the wright work engagement scale (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database. (UMI No. 3393395).
  2. *Badger, J. M. (2014). The formative nature of perceived person-environment fit (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database. (UMI No. 3615149).
  3. *Carlsen, J. J. (2015). An investigation of work engagement as a moderator of the relationship between personality and work outcomes (Doctoral dissertation, San Diego State University).
  4. Cochran, M. N. (2014). Counterproductive work behaviors, justice, and affect: A meta-analysis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL.
  5. *Cochrum-Nguyen, F. L. (2013). Predicting job performance and job satisfaction: An examination of the five-factor model of personality, polychronicity and role overload (Doctoral dissertation, San Diego State University).
  6. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1976). Four kinds of validity. Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 224–246).
  7. *Costa, J. B. (2015). Coping through counterproductive work behaviors: An examination of how employees deal with emotional labor (Master’s thesis, Roosevelt University).
  8. Duhachek, A., Coughlan, A. T., & Iacobucci, D. (2005). Results on the standard error of the coefficient alpha index of reliability. Marketing Science, 24, 294–301. · doi:10.1287/mksc.1040.0097
  9. Fisher, G. G., & Sandell, K. (2015). Sampling in industrial–organizational psychology research: Now what? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(02), 232–237. · doi:10.1017/iop.2015.31
  10. *Gangadharan, A. (2014). Can I smile with spirit? Towards a process model associating workplace spirituality and emotional labor (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3642187).
  11. Gillespie, M. A., Gillespie, J. Z., Brodke, M. H., & Balzer, W. K. (2016). The importance of sample composition depends on the research question. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(01), 207–211. · doi:10.1017/iop.2015.137
  12. *Goo, W. (2015). Employee needs and job-related opportuniites: From the person-environment fit framework (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database. (UMI No. 3681240).
  13. Highhouse, S., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2009). Do samples really matter that much. Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 247–265).
  14. *Jeon, G. (2011). Equity sensitivity versus equity preference: Validating a new viewpoint on equity sensitivity (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illionois at Urbana-Champaign.
  15. *Johnson, V. A., Beehr, T. A., & O’Brien, K. E. (2015). Determining the relationship between employee psychopathy and strain: Does the type of psychopathy matter? International Journal of Stress Management, 22(2), 111–136. · doi:10.1037/a0038817
  16. *Joseph, D. L. (2011). Emotional intelligence, leader-member exchange, and behavioral engagement: Considering mediation and reciprocity effects (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign).
  17. *Lee, J. (2012). The effects of leadership behavior on workplace harassment, employee outcomes, and organizational effectiveness in small businesses (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ABI/INFORM Global; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3489453).
  18. *Lusin, J. M. (2014). Employee perceptions of authentic leadership and outcomes of planned organizational change (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3615782).
  19. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  20. *O’Brien, K. E. (2008). A stressor-strain model of organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3347361).
  21. *O’Boyle, E. H. (2010). A test of the general CWB-OCB emotion model (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ABI/INFORM Global; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3411997).
  22. Postoaca, A. (2006). Launching the bottle: The rhetoric of the online researcher. The anonymous elect: market research through online access panels (pp. 67–107).
  23. *Salvaggio, T. (2014). Towards a more complete understanding of the effects of the virtual environment on the relationship between leadership style and outcomes of LMX relationships (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3690538).
  24. *Schultz, L. A. (2009). Exploring the relationship between the positive and negative sides of the work-family interface: The role of enrichment in buffering the effects of time-, strain-, and behavior-based conflict (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3378859).
  25. *Shao, P. (2010). Ethics-based leadership and employee ethical behavior: Examining the mediating role of ethical regulatory focus (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3430591).
  26. Smith, R. & Hofma Brown, H. (2006). Panel and data quality: Comparing metrics and assessing claims. In Proceedings of the ESOMAR Panel Research Conference. Barcelona: ESOMAR.
  27. Sparrow, N. (2007). Quality issues in online research. Journal of Advertising Research-New York, 47(2), 179. · doi:10.2501/s0021849907070201
  28. *Thompson, C. N. (2008). Personal characteristics and the impact of transformational leadership behaviors on follower outcomes (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ABI/INFORM Global; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3375475).
  29. *Wall, A. (2014). Common method variance: An experimental manipulation (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3662469).
  30. *Wilson, L. M. (2015). An examination of the moderating effects of work centrality on the relationships between person-group fit and work-related outcomes (Doctoral dissertation, San Diego State University).
  31. *Wynne, K. T. (2012). Profiling leaders: Using a profiling approach to examine the effects of multifactor leadership on follower deviance (Master’s thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 1518818).

Cited by

See all 544

Metadata

Authors
Walter, S. L., Seibert, S. E., Goering, D., & O’Boyle, E. H.
Venue
Journal of Business and Psychology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2018-07-21
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
425-452
ISSN
  • 0889-3268 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-353X
DOI
10.1007/s10869-018-9552-y
OpenAlex
W2883834609
Cited by
544
References
111
FWCI
100.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Tale of Two Sample Sources: Do Results from Online Panel Data and Conventional Data Converge? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10869-018-9552-y
The paper
Walter, S. L., Seibert, S. E., Goering, D., & O’Boyle, E. H. (2019). A Tale of Two Sample Sources: Do Results from Online Panel Data and Conventional Data Converge? Journal of Business and Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9552-y

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.