The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Research Methodology in Organizational Studies
Abstract
Despite the mounting number of criticisms of the use of a relatively restricted set of methodologies in the organizational sciences, few studies have attempted to empirically determine the extent of this restriction or the potential reasons why some methods are used so exclusively. For this review, the authors content-analyzed all of the articles from the 1985 volumes of the Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes to determine the range of strategies used in organizational research. Our analysis of the literature does, indeed, suggest that there is a relatively limited set of research strategies and analytical procedures that represent the "methods of choice" in the organizational sciences. Potential reasonsfor thesefindings, as well as some of their implications are provided.
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
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs
Churchill, G. A. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377901600110 · Cited by 16,549
Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4 · Cited by 2,573
Barley, S. R. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392767 · Cited by 2,315
Sears, D. O. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.51.3.515 · Cited by 2,119
Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research
Kirk, J., & Miller, M. (1986) · doi:10.4135/9781412985659 · Cited by 1,462
Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982) · ECTJ · doi:10.1007/bf02765185 · Cited by 1,186
Cited by
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/1048-9843(90)90009-7 · Cited by 5,628
Self-citationA Review of Scale Development Practices in the Study of Organizations
Hinkin, T. R. (1995) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639502100509 · Cited by 3,193
Duriau, V. J., Reger, R. K., & Pfarrer, M. D. (2007) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428106289252 · Cited by 1,544
Schriesheim, C. A., Castro, S. L., & Cogliser, C. C. (1999) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/s1048-9843(99)80009-5 · Cited by 819
Designing experiments that generalize
Highhouse, S. (2009) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428107300396 · Cited by 353
Metadata
- Authors
- Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Management
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1987-06
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 419-441
- ISSN
- 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-1211
- OpenAlex
- W2134499635
- Cited by
- 161
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 4.15
- 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: Research Methodology in Organizational Studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/014920638701300213
- The paper
- Podsakoff, P. M., & Dalton, D. R. (1987). Research Methodology in Organizational Studies. Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638701300213
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.
