The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
From Micro to Meso: Critical Steps in Conceptualizing and Conducting Multilevel Research
Abstract
Although interest in multilevel organizational theory, research, and methods has been on the rise in recent years, vigorous debates in the literature regarding appropriate ways to conceptualize and measure multilevel constructs, justify aggregation, and analyze multilevel models have contributed to confusion. New investigators interested in testing multilevel theory are intrigued, but wary. The goal of this article is to cut through the confusion, identifying the critical choices and issues a researcher may confront as he or she shifts from a single level to a multilevel perspective. The authors address four primary choices—construct and measurement issues, model specification, research design and sampling, and data analyses— describing critical steps in conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research.
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
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy · doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 · Cited by 46,835
Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.69.1.85 · Cited by 4,774
Levels issues in theory development, data collection and analysis
Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. (1994) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258703 · Cited by 1,607
Self-citationA disagreement about within-group agreement: disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus
Kozlowski, S. W., & Hattrup, K. (1992) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.77.2.161 · Cited by 514
Self-citation
Cited by
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
Minimum sample size estimation in PLS‐SEM: The inverse square root and gamma‐exponential methods
Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2018) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.12131 · Cited by 2,621
A theory of organizational readiness for change
Weiner, B. J. (2009) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-67 · Cited by 2,268
Abusive Supervision in Work Organizations: Review, Synthesis, and Research Agenda
Tepper, B. J. (2007) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206307300812 · Cited by 1,698
Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective
Misangyi, V. F., Greckhamer, T., Furnari, S., Fiss, P. C., Crilly, D., & Aguilera, R. (2017) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206316679252 · Cited by 1,099
Metadata
- Authors
- Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W. J.
- Venue
- Organizational Research Methods
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2000-07
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 211-236
- ISSN
- 1094-4281 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7425
- OpenAlex
- W2142881033
- Cited by
- 1,471
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 12.88
- 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: From Micro to Meso: Critical Steps in Conceptualizing and Conducting Multilevel Research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/109442810033001
- The paper
- Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2000). From Micro to Meso: Critical Steps in Conceptualizing and Conducting Multilevel Research. Organizational Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810033001
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.
