Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:29:39.351Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What about Figure 1? Presenting descriptive figures to facilitate the interpretation of longitudinal research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 December 2021

Jenna A. Van Fossen Open the ORCID record for Jenna A. Van Fossen [Opens in a new window]
Jenna A. Van Fossen*
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
*
*Corresponding author. Email: vanfos10@msu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , December 2021 , pp. 524 - 526
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Can, Ö. (2020, June 18–19). Studying dynamic processes by experience sampling methodology: Challenges and opportunities for organization research [Paper presentation]. 19th European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies: ECRM 2019, Aveiro, Portugal.Google Scholar
Chance, B., Ben-Zvi, D., Garfield, J., & Medina, E. (2007). The role of technology in improving student learning of statistics. Technology Innovations in Statistics Education, 1(1).10.5070/T511000026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, K., Jacobsen, M., & Friesen, S. (2014). The use of graphics to communicate findings of longitudinal data in design-based research. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13, 233–255.10.28945/2081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabriel, A. S., Podsakoff, N. P., Beal, D. J., Scott, B. A., Sonnentag, S., Trougakos, J. P., & Butts, M. M. (2019). Experience sampling methods: A discussion of critical trends and considerations for scholarly advancement. Organizational Research Methods, 22(4), 969–1006.10.1177/1094428118802626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, K. R., (2021). In praise of Table 1: The importance of making better use of descriptive statistics. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 14(4), 461–477.Google Scholar
Rynes, S. L. (2012). The research–practice gap in industrial–organizational psychology and related fields: Challenges and potential solutions. In S. W. J. Kozlowski (Ed.), Oxford handbook of organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 409–452). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, L. D., Best, L. A., Stubbs, D. A., Archibald, A. B., & Roberson-Nay, R. (2002). Constructing knowledge: The role of graphs and tables in hard and soft psychology. American Psychologist, 57(10), 749–761.10.1037/0003-066X.57.10.749CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weissgerber, T. L., Winham, S. J., Heinzen, E. P., Milin-Lazovic, J. S., Garcia-Valencia, O., Bukumiric, Z., Savic, M. D., Garovic, V. D., & Milic, N. M. (2019). Reveal, don’t conceal: Transforming data visualization to improve transparency. Circulation, 140(18), 1506–1518.10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.037777CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed