Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 412

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Being Both Too Liberal and Too Conservative: The Perils of Treating Grouped Data as though They Were Independent

Bliese, Paul D., Hanges, Paul J.·2004·Organizational Research Methods

Abstract

Organizational data are inherently nested; consequently, lower level data are typically influenced by higher level grouping factors. Stated another way, almost all lower level organizational data have some degree of nonindependence due to work group, geographic membership, and so on. Unaccounted-for nonindependence can be problematic because it affects standard error estimates used to determine statistical significance. Currently, researchers interested in modeling higher level variables routinely use multilevel modeling techniques to avoid well-known problems with Type I error rates. In this article, however, the authors examine how nonindependence affects statistical inferences in cases in which researchers are interested only in relationships among lower level variables. They show that ignoring nonindependence when modeling only lower level variables reduces power (increases Type II errors), and through simulations, the authors show where this loss of power is most pronounced.

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 · 10.1177/1094428104268542

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Cited by

See all 412

Metadata

Authors
Bliese, P. D., & Hanges, P. J.
Venue
Organizational Research Methods
Published
2004-10
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
400-417
ISSN
  • 1094-4281 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7425
OpenAlex
W2057932134
Cited by
412
References
6
FWCI
8.86
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: Being Both Too Liberal and Too Conservative: The Perils of Treating Grouped Data as though They Were Independent. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1094428104268542
The paper
Bliese, P. D., & Hanges, P. J. (2004). Being Both Too Liberal and Too Conservative: The Perils of Treating Grouped Data as though They Were Independent. Organizational Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428104268542

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.