Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T12:20:13.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Maximizing Your Data or Data Slicing? Recommendations for Managing Multiple Submissions from the Same Dataset

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Bradley L. Kirkman  and
Gilad Chen
Bradley L. Kirkman
Affiliation:
Texas A & M, USA
Gilad Chen
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Researchers who are fortunate enough to collect large datasets sometimes wish to publish multiple papers using the same dataset. Unfortunately, there are few guidelines that authors can follow in managing these multiple papers. In this article, we address three main questions including: (i) how do authors know if they have a dataset truly worthy of multiple papers; (ii) what procedures do authors follow when they are ready to submit multiple papers from a single dataset to top tier journals; and (iii) what are the main issues when attempting to publish multiple papers from a single dataset? We provide a set of concrete recommendations for authors who wish to maximize their data collection efforts with multiple papers.

Keywords

data maximizingdata slicingethicspublishingsingle dataset数据效用最大化数据切割伦理发表单ー数据

Information

Type
Forum Articles
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , November 2011 , pp. 433 - 446
Copyright
Copyright © International Association for Chinese Management Research 2011

References

Academy of Management. 2010. Information for contributors. [Last accessed on 17 March 2011.] Available from URL: http://jounials.aomonline.org/amj/information-for-contributors Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. 2010. Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. [Last accessed on 17 March 2011.] Available from URL: http://www.apa.org/ethics/codc/index.aspx Google Scholar
Chen, G. 2005. Newcomer adaptation in teams: Multilevel antecedents and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1): 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, G., & Klimoski, R.J. 2003. The impact of expectations on newcomer performance in teams as mediated by work characteristics, social exchanges, and empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5): 591–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, X. P. 2011. Author ethical dilemmas in the research publication process. Management and Organization Review, 7(3): 423–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. 1997. A model of work team empowerment. In Woodman, R. & Pasmore, W. (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (Vol. 10): 131–167. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. 1999. Beyond self-management: The antecedents and consequences of team empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1): 58–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. 2000. Powering up teams. Organizational Dynamics, 28(3): 48–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkman, B. L., Tesluk, P. E., & Rosen, B. 2001. Assessing the incremental validity of team consensus ratings over aggregation of individual-level data in predicting team effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 54(3): 645–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkman, B. L., Tesluk, P. E., & Rosen, B. 2004. The impact of demographic heterogeneity and team leader-team member demographic fit on team empowerment and effectiveness. Group & Organization Management, 29(3): 334–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, T. W., & Mitchell, T. R. 2011. Working in research team: Lessons from Personal Experiences. Management and Organization Review, 7(3): 461–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leung, K. Presenting post hoc hypotheses as a priori: Ethical and theoretical issues. Management and Organization Review, 7(3): 471–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spreitzer, G. M. 1995. Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5): 1442–1465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3): 371–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, K. W., & Vclthouse, B. A. 1990. Cognitive elements of empowerment: An ‘interpretive’ model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 666–681.Google Scholar
Whetten, D. 1989. What contributes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 490–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar