Ethical Leadership and Followership Behaviors

Article Review that answers the following questions, on the article I will upload called Ethical Leadership and Followership Behaviors: A Moderated Mediation Model *Outline form to answer questions 2-4 is appropriate if getting through them all and their sub-questions. 1. Purpose/rationale of the study. How do the authors setup the study? How do they position it? What is the contribution to the literature, i.e., what gaps does it address? (10 points) 2. Theory. Does the paper provide a coherent theory or theoretical framework? Is it clear how the hypotheses are derived from theory or do authors just claim their hypothesis is supported? (10 points) 3. Method. What is the design of the study? How are variables operationalized? Are measures reliable? Are measures established with strong evidence for construct validity? Is this a single-source or multi-source design? How were the data collected, i.e., what is the procedure? Are their ethical issues involved in the study? What population was sampled? What are the limitations to generalizability in both population and setting? (10 points) I. Is the discussion of controls relevant? a) Examine the correlation/s of control/s with the dependent variable/s in the study: if correlation/s is/are less than .10 (low effect size) and they are still utilized as control/s then the use of control/s is/are invalid. b) Any conceptual or theoretical reason for including controls? c) Any studies cited? d) Is it clearly mentioned how controls were measured? e) Does the article mentions the method used for controlling such as SEM, regression etc? f) If the controls were used in some analyses and not in others was the rationale given? g) Descriptive statistics need to be reported for continuous control variables and frequencies and percentages for categorical variables. h) Correlations need to be reported for both descriptive and continuous. i) Controls need to be treated as dependent variables and beta weights, effect sizes and significance levels need to be reported. j) Results need to be reported for both with and without controls and differences in the results need to be reported as well. If there is no difference report the results without controls. If there is a difference then examine the role of controls and try to replicate that in further study. II. Any threats to statistical, internal, construct and external validity present?

If yes comment on it III. Any concern for longitudinal analyses? Criteria for longitudinal designs (Ployhart & Vandenberg, 2010) a.) Having measurements at 3 points in time. b.) If there are 3 variables at least two of them need to be measured at all times. c.) Hypotheses need to be written as longitudinal d.) Need to theoretically justify longitudinal study (seen Ployhart & Vandenberg, 2010 pg 97—102). Have a theoretical explanation why your constructs/ variables should change in time. e.) Were steps taken to mitigate internal validity? f.) Was there any missing data? If yes was it missing data at random/non-random? g.) Did they use appropriate longitudinal analyses? h.) If conducted did they report limitations of longitudinal analyses? IV. Is this a field experiment, then…? a) Does this involve random assignment to manipulated conditions of working adult population b) Are the tasks genuine or real to convey realism? c) Is the topic sensitive? d) Is deception involved? e) Any legal concerns? 4. Results. How were the data analyzed? How were hypotheses tested? Did results support or fail to support hypotheses? Did analyses make sense? Were they overly complex? Did the authors give a good rationale for what they did? If complex statistics were used, were the simpler building blocks also shown/discussed such as descriptive statistics and correlations? (10 points). If it is nested data it should utilize HLM. 5. Discussion. What do the authors conclude? Do the conclusions flow logically from the method/results or are they stretched? Do you agree with the conclusions? Are there feasible alternative explanations for results? Were limitations discussed and if so, did you find this discussion to be informative/thoughtful or merely obvious?