Search

We review the development of path model fit measures for latent variable models and highlight how they are different from global fit measures. Next, we consider findings from two published simulation articles that reach different conclusions about the effectiveness of one path model fit measure (RMSEA-P). We then report the results of a new simulation study aimed at resolving the questions of whether and how the RMSEA-P should be used by organizational researchers. These results show that the RMSEA-P and its confidence interval is very effective with multiple indicator models at identifying misspecifications across large and small sample sizes and is effective at identifying true models at moderate to large sample sizes. We conclude with recommendations for how the RMSEA-P can be incorporated along with other information into model evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

No research question is compelling enough nor a meta-analytic procedure advanced enough to overcome an ineffectual search or inaccurate coding process. The bulk of attention towards meta-analyses conducted within the organizational sciences has been directed at establishing the types of research questions meta-analyses are best equipped to address and how best to go about analyzing secondary data. However, the meta-analytic process requires rigor and transparency at every step. It is too often the case that the search and coding are non-systematic, resulting in a deficient and/or contaminated dataset and, ultimately, not an accurate reflection of the extant literature. Using the analogy of a fishing trip where fish are available studies and the oceans, lakes, and rivers are the sources of data, we highlight best practices and offer actionable takeaways in conducting and reporting a thorough and representative search and accurate and inclusive coding process for meta-analyses in the organizational sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review builds on self-control theory (Carver & Scheier, 1998) to develop a theoretical framework for investigating associations of implicit theories with self-regulation. This framework conceptualizes self-regulation in terms of 3 crucial processes: goal setting, goal operating, and goal monitoring. In this meta-analysis, we included articles that reported a quantifiable assessment of implicit theories and at least 1 self-regulatory process or outcome. With a random effects approach used, meta-analytic results (total unique N = 28,217; k = 113) across diverse achievement domains (68% academic) and populations (age range = 5-42; 10 different nationalities; 58% from United States; 44% female) demonstrated that implicit theories predict distinct self-regulatory processes, which, in turn, predict goal achievement. Incremental theories, which, in contrast to "entity theories", are characterized by the belief that human attributes are malleable rather than fixed, significantly predicted goal setting (performance goals, r = -0.151; learning goals, r = 0.187), goal operating (helpless-oriented strategies, r = -0.238; mastery-oriented strategies, r = 0.227), and goal monitoring (negative emotions, r = -0.233; expectations, r = 0.157). The effects for goal setting and goal operating were stronger in the presence (vs. absence) of ego threats such as failure feedback. Discussion emphasizes how the present theoretical analysis merges an implicit theory perspective with self-control theory to advance scholarship and unlock major new directions for basic and applied research. (Contains 5 figures, 4 tables and 6 footnotes.)

This article encourages transparency in the reporting of meta-analytic procedures. Specifically, we highlight aspects of meta-analytic search, coding, data presentation, and data analysis where published meta-analyses often fall short in presenting sufficient information to allow replication. We identify opportunities where reviewers can request additional information or analyses that will enhance transparent reporting practices and facilitate the evaluation of quality in meta-analytic reporting. We focus on concerns specific to (or prevalent in) meta-analyses conducted in organizational research. In doing so, we reference a number of existing and emerging techniques, highlighting their contribution to meta-analysis while emphasizing key information reviewers may request. Our focus is primarily on meta-analyses, but secondary uses of meta-analytic data are also considered. We conclude by providing a checklist for reviewers in an effort to facilitate the review process as it pertains to the goals of transparency and replicability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research Summary: Using meta‐analysis, we investigate the extent to which General Mental Ability (GMA) and Emotional Intelligence (EI) predict entrepreneurial success. Based on 65,826 observations, we find that both GMA and EI matter for success, but that the size of the relationship is more than twice as large for EI. Our study contradicts and adds important contextual nuance to previous meta‐analyses on performance in traditional workplace settings, where GMA is considered to be more critical than EI. We also contribute to the literature on cognitive and emotional intelligence in entrepreneurship. Managerial Summary While previous studies have shown General Mental Ability (GMA, cognitive intelligence) to be more important for success compared to Emotional Intelligence (EI) in traditional workplace settings, we theorize that EI will be more important in entrepreneurial contexts. Entrepreneurship is an extreme setting with distinct emotional and social demands relative to many other organizational settings. Moreover, managing an entrepreneurial business has been described as an "emotional rollercoaster." Thus, on a relative basis we expected EI to matter more in entrepreneurial contexts and explore this assumption using a meta‐analysis of 65,826 observations. We find that both GMA and EI matter for entrepreneurial success, but that the size of the relationship is more than twice as large for EI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We revised the Ethics Position Questionnaire (EPQ), which measures variations in sensitivity to harm (idealism) and to moral standards (relativism). Study 1 identified the core components of the measured constructs theoretically and verified those features through confirmatory factor analysis (n = 2,778). Study 2 replicated these findings (n = 10,707), contrasted the theoretically defined two-factor model to alternative models, and tested for invariance of factor covariances and mean structures for men and women. Study 3 examined the relationship between the EPQ and related indicators of ethical thought (values and moral foundations) and the theory's four-fold classification typology of exceptionists, subjectivists, absolutists, and situationists. The three studies substantially reduced the original EPQ's length, clarified the conceptual interpretation of the idealism and relativism scales, affirmed the EPQ's predictive and convergent validity, and supported the four-fold classification of individuals into ethics positions. Implications for previous findings and suggestions for future research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]