The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Best-Practice Recommendations for Estimating Cross-Level Interaction Effects Using Multilevel Modeling
Abstract
Multilevel modeling allows researchers to understand whether relationships between lower-level variables (e.g., individual job satisfaction and individual performance, firm capabilities and performance) change as a function of higher-order moderator variables (e.g., leadership climate, market-based conditions). We describe how to estimate such cross-level interaction effects and distill the technical literature for a general readership of management researchers, including a description of the multilevel model building process and an illustration of analyses and results with a data set grounded in substantive theory. In addition, we provide 10 specific best-practice recommendations regarding persistent and important challenges that researchers face before and after data collection to improve the accuracy of substantive conclusions involving cross-level interaction effects. Our recommendations provide guidance on how to define the cross-level interaction effect, compute statistical power and make research design decisions, test hypotheses with various types of moderator variables (e.g., continuous, categorical), rescale (i.e., center) predictors, graph the cross-level interaction effect, interpret interactions given the symmetrical nature of such effects, test multiple cross-level interaction hypotheses, test cross-level interactions involving more than two levels of nesting, compute effect-size estimates and interpret the practical importance of a cross-level interaction effect, and report results regarding the multilevel model building process.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue.
Enders, C. K., & Tofighi, D. (2007) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.12.2.121 · Cited by 4,462
A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation
Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0020141 · Cited by 3,796
Hox, J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2010) · doi:10.4324/9780203852279 · Cited by 3,469
Aguinis, H., Beaty, J. C., Boik, R. J., & Pierce, C. A. (2005) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.94 · Cited by 1,216 · cited 1×
“Given that most same-level research relying on degrees of freedom based on total sample size is notoriously underpowered (Aguinis et al., 2005; Maxwell, 2004) and that multilevel modeling is usually conducted with L2 sample sizes that are much smaller, we anticipate that many tests regarding t11 may also be underpower…”
BackgroundSelf-citationUsing SAS PROC MIXED to Fit Multilevel Models, Hierarchical Models, and Individual Growth Models
Singer, J. D. (1998) · Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics · doi:10.2307/1165280 · Cited by 1,092
Reporting standards for research in psychology: why do we need them? What might they be?
APA Publications and Communications Board Working Group on Journal Article Reporting Standards (2008) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.63.9.839 · Cited by 571
Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2004) · Computational Statistics & Data Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.csda.2003.08.006 · Cited by 399
The Power of the Test for Treatment Effects in Three-Level Cluster Randomized Designs
Konstantopoulos, S. (2008) · Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness · doi:10.1080/19345740701692522 · Cited by 124
Cited by
Gabriel, A. S., Podsakoff, N. P., Beal, D. J., Scott, B. A., Sonnentag, S., Trougakos, J. P., & Butts, M. M. (2019) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428118802626 · Cited by 755
Age and gender differences in self-esteem—A cross-cultural window.
(2015) · doi:10.1037/pspp0000078 · Cited by 684
An Ounce of Prevention Is Worth a Pound of Cure: Improving Research Quality Before Data Collection
Aguinis, H., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2014) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091231 · Cited by 304
Self-citationHigh economic inequality leads higher-income individuals to be less generous
Côté, S., House, J., & Willer, R. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1511536112 · Cited by 295
Hechavarría, D. M., Terjesen, S. A., Ingram, A. E., Renko, M., Justo, R., & Elam, A. (2017) · Small Business Economics · doi:10.1007/s11187-016-9747-4 · Cited by 268
Metadata
- Authors
- Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Culpepper, S. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Management
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-04-02
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1490-1528
- ISSN
- 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-1211
- OpenAlex
- W2141772436
- Cited by
- 1,090
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 44.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Best-Practice Recommendations for Estimating Cross-Level Interaction Effects Using Multilevel Modeling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0149206313478188
- The paper
- Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Culpepper, S. A. (2013). Best-Practice Recommendations for Estimating Cross-Level Interaction Effects Using Multilevel Modeling. Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313478188
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.