CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 319Computational and Text Analysis MethodsTopic ModelingSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Topic Modeling as a Strategy of Inquiry in Organizational Research: A Tutorial With an Application Example on Organizational Culture

Open access
Schmiedel, Theresa, Müller, Oliver, vom Brocke, Jan·2019·Organizational Research Methods
DOI 10.1177/1094428118773858
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Research has emphasized the limitations of qualitative and quantitative approaches to studying organizational phenomena. For example, in-depth interviews are resource-intensive, while questionnaires with closed-ended questions can only measure predefined constructs. With the recent availability of large textual data sets and increased computational power, text mining has become an attractive method that has the potential to mitigate some of these limitations. Thus, we suggest applying topic modeling, a specific text mining technique, as a new and complementary strategy of inquiry to study organizational phenomena. In particular, we outline the potentials of structural topic modeling for organizational research and provide a step-by-step tutorial on how to apply it. Our application example builds on 428,492 reviews of Fortune 500 companies from the online platform Glassdoor, on which employees can evaluate organizations. We demonstrate how structural topic models allow to inductively identify topics that matter to employees and quantify their relationship with employees’ perception of organizational culture. We discuss the advantages and limitations of topic modeling as a research method and outline how future research can apply the technique to study organizational phenomena.

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 · 10.1177/1094428118773858

Cites

52 of 52 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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 51 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Berente N., 2014, Paper presented at the 20th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS)
  2. Blei D., 2003, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993
  3. Frawley W., 1992, Al Magazine, 13, 57
  4. Jagarlamudi J., 2012, Paper presented at the 13th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics
  5. Mimno D., 2011, Paper presented at the Conference on empirical methods in natural language processing
  6. Nguyen L., 2015, Paper presented at the Pacific-Asia Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 318

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Schmiedel, T., Müller, O., & vom Brocke, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Liechtenstein (LI)
  • IT University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • University of Liechtenstein, Liechtenstein
Corresponding author
Schmiedel, Theresa
ORCID
Schmiedel, Theresa
Venue
Organizational Research Methods
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2018-05-06
Volume
22
Issue
4
Pages
941-968
ISSN
  • 1094-4281 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7425
DOI
10.1177/1094428118773858
OpenAlex
W2801182247
Cited by
319
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 54 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2
FWCI
67.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Organizational Research Methods (publishedVersion)
  • IT University Of Copenhagen (IT University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften digital collection (Zurich University of Applied Sciences) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Keywords
topic modeling, structural topic modeling, text mining, organizational culture, employee perceptions, Glassdoor reviews, Fortune 500 companies

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