Journal of Business Ethics 88 (4):763 - 766 (2009)
|Abstract||In this paper, the authors respond to a recent critique of their Journal of Business Ethics article, which provided a meta-analytic review of ethical climate theory research (Martin and Cullen, 2006 ). They review basic principles of meta-analytic research and discuss the methodological context of their work, which was not discussed in the recent reply article. Additional methodological and practical evidence is presented in support of Martin and Cullen ( 2006 ), including a discussion of the paper’s findings and its contribution to ethical climate theory and research.|
|Keywords||ethical climate meta-analysis path analysis rejoinder structural equation modeling|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
P. X. Monaghan (2010). A Novel Interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Metaphysica 11 (1):63-78.
H. M. Malm (1989). Commodification or Compensation: A Reply to Ketchum. Hypatia 4 (3):128 - 135.
H. E. Baber (1987). How Bad Is Rape? Hypatia 2 (2):125 - 138.
Dale Hample, Bing Han & David Payne (2010). The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments. Argumentation 24 (4):405-421.
J. L. Schellenberg (2005). The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (II). Religious Studies 41 (3):287 - 303.
Kelly D. Martin & John B. Cullen (2006). Continuities and Extensions of Ethical Climate Theory: A Meta-Analytic Review. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 69 (2):175 - 194.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #169,891 of 722,703 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,247 of 722,703 )
How can I increase my downloads?