The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
RETROSPECTIVE REPORTS IN ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH: A REEXAMINATION OF RECENT EVIDENCE.
Abstract
Background: Professionals who pursue a doctorate after significant post-baccalaureate work experience, a group we refer to as returners, represent an important but understudied group of engineering doctoral students.Returners are well situated to leverage their applied work experience in their advanced engineering training.Purpose/Hypothesis: We drew on results from the Graduate Student Experiences and Motivations Survey to explore the dimensionality of our scales measuring value and cost constructs.We used these scales, as well as measures of student expectancy of success, to compare returners with direct-pathway students.Design/ Method: We surveyed 179 returners and 297 direct-pathway domestic engineering doctoral students.We first conducted Exploratory Factor Analysis on our cost and value measures.We then used both Ordinary Least Squares and Ordinal Regression Model analyses to assess the relationships of various student characteristics and experiences (including returner status) with student expectancy of success and the emergent cost and values factors associated with doctoral study in engineering.Results: Factor analysis revealed three categories of values (interest, attainment, and career utility) that were largely consistent with those in Eccles' expectancy-value framework.A similar analysis identified three categories of costs (balance, financial, and academic) associated with pursuing a PhD.Returners felt significantly less confident in their ability to complete their degrees prior to enrolling and perceived higher levels of all cost types than direct-pathway students.Conclusions: Given the differences between returning and direct-pathway students, it is important to consider how universities might best recruit and retain returners.Tracking returner status could be critical in better supporting these students.
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: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 · Cited by 43,925
Making sense of cronbach’s alpha.
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011) · International Journal of Medical Education · doi:10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd · Cited by 15,126
Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000) · Theory Into Practice · doi:10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 · Cited by 9,184
A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation
Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1911963 · Cited by 5,647
Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research
Rosenthal, R. (1991) · doi:10.4135/9781412984997 · Cited by 4,635
Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, H. J. (1978) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1978.4305755 · Cited by 4,527
Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior.
Atkinson, J. W. (1957) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0043445 · Cited by 3,706
CONDUCTING INTERORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH USING KEY INFORMANTS.
KUMAR, N., STERN, L. W., & ANDERSON, J. C. (1993) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256824 · Cited by 2,467
Representing and Testing Organizational Theories: A Holistic Construal
Bagozzi, R. P., & Phillips, L. W. (1982) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392322 · Cited by 2,064
Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: reality or artifact?
Williams, L. J., Cote, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (1989) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.3.462 · Cited by 1,616
Cited by
Qualitative research: deductive and inductive approaches to data analysis
Azungah, T. (2018) · Qualitative Research Journal · doi:10.1108/qrj-d-18-00035 · Cited by 1,262
Building Inclusive Markets in Rural Bangladesh: How Intermediaries Work Institutional Voids
Mair, J., Martí, I., & Ventresca, M. J. (2012) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0627 · Cited by 1,207
What really is alliance management capability and how does it impact alliance outcomes and success?
Schreiner, M., Kale, P., & Corsten, D. (2009) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.790 · Cited by 507
The Interplay between Intuition and Rationality in Strategic Decision Making: A Paradox Perspective
Calabretta, G., Gemser, G., & Wijnberg, N. M. (2017) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840616655483 · Cited by 324
Opportunism, knowledge, and the performance of franchise chains
Barthélemy, J. (2008) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.719 · Cited by 198
Metadata
- Authors
- MILLER, C. C., CARDINAL, L. B., & GLICK, W. H.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 1997-02-01
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 189-204
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- 1948-0989
- OpenAlex
- W2060628494
- Cited by
- 898
- References
- 16
- FWCI
- 21.22
- 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: RETROSPECTIVE REPORTS IN ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH: A REEXAMINATION OF RECENT EVIDENCE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/257026
- The paper
- MILLER, C. C., CARDINAL, L. B., & GLICK, W. H. (1997). RETROSPECTIVE REPORTS IN ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH: A REEXAMINATION OF RECENT EVIDENCE. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.2307/257026
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.