Диссертация (1136621), страница 26
Текст из файла (страница 26)
Blader,A. Wrzesniewski. – Taylor & Francis, 2012. – 304 p.13158. Bell B.S. Three Conceptual Themes for Future Research on Teams / B.S.Bell, S.W. Kozlowski // Industrial and Organizational Psychology. – 2012. – Vol. 5.– № 1. – P. 45-48.59. Bergami M. Selfcategorization, affective commitment and group selfesteemas distinct aspects of social identity in the organization / M. Bergami, R.P. Bagozzi// British Journal of Social Psychology. – 2000. – Vol. 39. – № 4.
– P. 555-577.60. Bergeron D.M. Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Career Outcomes:The Cost of Being a Good Citizen / D.M. Bergeron et al. // Journal of Management.– 2013. – Vol. 39. – № 4. – P. 958-984.61. Blader S.L. Testing and extending the group engagement model: Linkagesbetween social identity, procedural justice, economic outcomes, and extrarolebehavior. / S.L. Blader, T.R. Tyler // Journal of Applied Psychology. – 2009. –Vol.
94. – № 2. – P. 445-464.62. Blau P.M. Exchange and Power in Social Life / P.M. Blau. – Wiley, 1964.63. Bliese P.D. Within-Group Agreement, Non-Independence, and Reliability.Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations / P.D.
Bliese // Multileveltheory, research, and methods in organizations / eds. K.J. Klein, S.W. Kozlowski. –Jossey-Bass, 2000. – P. 349-381.64. Boldry J.G. Measuring the Measures: A Meta-Analytic Investigation of theMeasures of Outgroup Homogeneity / J.G. Boldry, L. Gaertner, J. Quinn // GroupProcesses & Intergroup Relations. – 2007. – Vol.
10. – № 2. – P. 157-178.65. Bolino M.C. Exploring the dark side of organizational citizenship behavior/ M.C. Bolino et al. // Journal of Organizational Behavior. – 2012. – Vol. 34. – № 4.– P. 542-559.66. Bowler W.M. Relational Correlates of Interpersonal Citizenship Behavior:A Social Network Perspective. / W.M. Bowler, D.J.
Brass // Journal of AppliedPsychology. – 2006. – Vol. 91. – № 1. – P. 70-82.67. Brewer M.B. Dynamic Entitativity: Perceiving Groups as Actors / M.B.Brewer, Y. Hong, Q. Li // The psychology of group perception: Perceivedvariability, entitativity, and essentialism / eds. V. Yzerbyt, C.M. Judd, O. Corneille.– Psychology Press, 2004. – P. 25-38.68. Brief A.P. Prosocial organizational behaviors / A.P. Brief, S.J. Motowidlo //Academy of Management Review. – 1986. – Vol.
11. – № 4. – P. 710-725.13269. Brown A.D. Identities and Identity Work in Organizations / A.D. Brown //International Journal of Management Reviews. – 2014. – Vol. 17. – № 1. – P. 20-40.70. Brown M.E. Identification and some conditions of organizationalinvolvement / M.E.
Brown // Administrative Science Quarterly. – 1969. – Vol. 15.– № 3. – P. 346-355.71. Brown T.A. Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research / T.A.Brown. – Guilford Publications, 2015. – 462 p.72. Campbell D.T. Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status ofaggregates of persons as social entities / D.T. Campbell // Behavioral science.
–1958. – Vol. 3. – № 1. – P. 14-25.73. Capozza D. Social Identity Processes: Trends in Theory and Research / D.Capozza, R. Brown. – SAGE Publications, 2000. – 240 p.74. Carpenter S. The Relation between Allocentrism and Perceptions of Ingroups/ S. Carpenter, P. Radhakrishnan // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. –2002. – Vol. 28. – № 11. – P. 1528-1537.75. Carron A.V. Cohesion: Conceptual and Measurement Issues / A.V.
Carron,L.R. Brawley // Small Group Research. – 2000. – Vol. 31. – № 1. – P. 89-106.76. Carron A.V. Using Consensus as a Criterion for Groupness: Implicationsfor the Cohesion–Group Success Relationship / A.V. Carron et al. // TransculturalPsychiatry. – 2004. – Vol. 35. – № 4. – P.
466-491.77. Castano E. I Belong, therefore, I Exist: Ingroup Identification, IngroupEntitativity, and Ingroup Bias / E. Castano et al. // Personality and Social PsychologyBulletin. – 2002a. – Vol. 28. – № 2. – P. 135-143.78. Castano E. Protecting the ingroup stereotype: Ingroup identification and themanagement of deviant ingroup members / E. Castano et al. // British Journal ofSocial Psychology.
– 2002b. – Vol. 41. – № 3. – P. 365-385.79. Castano E. The Perception of the Other in International Relations: Evidencefor the Polarizing Effect of Entitativity / E. Castano, S. Sacchi, P.H. Gries // PoliticalPsychology. – 2002. – Vol. 24. – № 3. – P. 449-468.80. Castano E. We are one and I like it: The impact of ingroup entitativity oningroup identification / E.
Castano, V. Yzerbyt, D. Bourguignon // European Journalof Social Psychology. – 2003. – Vol. 33. – № 6. – P. 735-754.13381. Castano E. Who May Enter? The Impact of In-Group Identification onIn-Group/Out-Group Categorization / E. Castano et al. // Journal of ExperimentalSocial Psychology. – 2002c. – Vol. 38.
– № 3. – P. 315-322.82. Chan D. Functional relations among constructs in the same content domainat different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. / D. Chan //Journal of Applied Psychology. – 1998. – Vol. 83. – № 2. – P. 234-246.83. Chang A.
A Multidimensional Approach to the Group Cohesion-GroupPerformance Relationship / A. Chang et al. // Small Group Research. – 2001. –P. 379-405.84. Chen Y. Do more hats bring more benefits? Exploring the impact of dualorganizational identification on work-related attitudes and performance / Y. Chen,S. Chi, R. Friedman // Journal of occupational and organizational psychology. –2013. – Vol. 86. – № 3.
– P. 417-434.85. Cheney G. Coming to terms with organizational identification andcommitment / G. Cheney, P.K. Tompkins // Central States Speech Journal. – 1987.– Vol. 38. – № 1. – P. 1-15.86. Christ O. When teachers go the extra mile: Foci of organisationalidentification as determinants of different forms of organisational citizenshipbehaviour among schoolteachers / O.
Christ et al. // British Journal of EducationalPsychology. – 2003. – Vol. 73. – № 3. – P. 329-341.87. Cikara M. The Neuroscience of Intergroup Relations: An Integrative Review/ M. Cikara, J.J. Van Bavel // Perspectives on Psychological Science. – 2014. –Vol. 9. – № 3. – P. 245-274.88. Cohen J. A power primer / J. Cohen // Psychological Bulletin. – 1992. –Vol.
112. – № 1. – P. 155-159.89. Costello A.B. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: fourrecommendations for getting the most from your analysis / A.B. Costello, J.W.Osborne // Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. – 2005. – Vol. 10. – № 7.– P. 1-9.90. Crawford M.T. Entitativity, identity, and the fulfilment of psychologicalneeds / M.T. Crawford, L. Salaman // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. –2012.
– Vol. 48. – № 3. – P. 726-730.91. Crawford M.T. Perceived entitativity, stereotype formation, and theinterchangeability of group members. / M.T. Crawford, S.J. Sherman, D.L. Hamilton134// Journal of personality and social psychology. – 2002. – Vol. 83. – № 5. – P. 10761094.92. Cropanzano R. Three roads to organizational justice. Research in Personneland Human Resources Management. Vol. 20 / R.
Cropanzano et al. – EmeraldGroup Publishing Limited, 2001. – 1-113 p.93. Crump S.A. Group entitativity and similarity: Their differing patterns inperceptions of groups / S.A. Crump et al. // European Journal of Social Psychology.– 2010. – Vol. 40. – № 7. – P. 1212-1230.94. Dansereau F. Avoiding the “Fallacy of the Wrong Level”: A Within andbetween Analysis (WABA) Approach / F. Dansereau // Group & OrganizationManagement.
– 2006. – Vol. 31. – № 5. – P. 536-577.95. Denson T.F. The Roles of Entitativity and Essentiality in Judgments ofCollective Responsibility / T.F. Denson et al. // Group Processes & IntergroupRelations. – 2006. – Vol. 9. – № 1. – P. 43-61.96. Dick R.
van. Category salience and organizational identification / R. vanDick et al. // Journal of occupational and organizational psychology. – 2011. –Vol. 78. – № 2. – P. 273-285.97. Dick R. van. Identity and the Extra Mile: Relationships betweenOrganizational Identification and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour / R. vanDick et al. // British Journal of Management.
– 2006. – Vol. 17. – № 4. – P. 283-301.98. Dick R. van. Interactive effects of work group and organizationalidentification on job satisfaction and extra-role behavior / R. van Dick et al. //Journal of Vocational Behavior. – 2008. – Vol.
72. – № 3. – P. 388-399.99. Dick R. van. The utility of a broader conceptualization of organizationalidentification: which aspects really matter? / R. van Dick et al. // Journal ofoccupational and organizational psychology. – 2004. – Vol. 77. – № 2. – P. 171-191.100. Dickson M.W. Systematic variation in organizationally-shared cognitiveprototypes of effective leadership based on organizational form / M.W.
Dickson,C.J. Resick, P.J. Hanges // The Leadership Quarterly. – 2006. – Vol. 17. – № 5. –P. 487-505.101. Dunlop W.L. Does similarity make a difference? Predicting cohesionand attendance behaviors within exercise group settings. / W.L. Dunlop, M.R.Beauchamp // Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice. – 2011. – Vol. 15.– № 3. – P. 258-266.135102. Edwards M.R.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
