5-Year Project: 2009 Review

If I did not know I was a researcher focused on organizations, this year certainly would have cleared it up. Since the management department at my school is divided between organizational behavior and strategy, it is good to see evidence (in the form of a word cloud) of my preferences.

I originally chose strategy because I wanted to do something different than what I focused on at my last job (human resources). But going agains everything I knew was not easy. Ever since I started, I had some doubts about my chosen side of the house. With this year of review under my belt (not to mention two years of coursework), I am absolutely sure I chose right.

Words such as firm, organizational, and institutional all speak to the macro side of the house. So YAY me! I am right on track!

I looked at 264 different entries in the top five strategic management journals. Of those, I immediately liked 31 articles:

1. Bartel, C., & Garud, R. (2009). The role of narratives in sustaining organizational innovation. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1080.0372
2. Beck, T., & Plowman, D. (2009). Experiencing rare and unusual events richly: The role of middle managers in animating and guiding organizational interpretation. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1090.0451
3. Berrone, P., & Gomez-Mejia, L. (2009). Environmental performance and executive compensation: An integrated agency-institutional perspective. Academy of Management Journal. Retrieved from http://amj.aom.org/content/52/1/103.short
4. Christianson, M., & Farkas, M. (2009). Learning through rare events: Significant interruptions at the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Museum. Organization  …. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1080.0389
5. Dokko, G., Wilk, S., & Rothbard, N. (2009). Unpacking prior experience: How career history affects job performance. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1080.0357
6. Fanelli, A., Misangyi, V., & Tosi, H. (2009). In charisma we trust: The effects of CEO charismatic visions on securities analysts. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1080.0407
7. He, J., & Wang, H. (2009). Innovative knowledge assets and economic performance: The asymmetric roles of incentives and monitoring. Academy of Management Journal. Retrieved from http://amj.aom.org/content/52/5/919.short
8. Heugens, P., & Lander, M. (2009). Structure! Agency!(and other quarrels): A meta-analysis of institutional theories of organization. Academy of Management Journal. Retrieved from http://amj.aom.org/content/52/1/61.short
9. Holcomb, T. (2009). Making the most of what you have: managerial ability as a source of resource value creation. Strategic Management  …. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.747/abstract
10. Huang, K., & Murray, F. (2009). Does patent strategy shape the long-run supply of public knowledge? Evidence from human genetics. Academy of Management Journal. Retrieved from http://amj.aom.org/content/52/6/1193.short
11. Kang, M., Mahoney, J., & Tan, D. (2009). Why firms make unilateral investments specific to other firms: The case of OEM suppliers. Strategic Management Journal. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.730/abstract
12. Kennedy, M., & Fiss, P. (2009). Institutionalization, framing, and diffusion: The logic of TQM adoption and implementation decisions among US hospitals. Academy of Management Journal. Retrieved from http://amj.aom.org/content/52/5/897.short
13. Lampel, J., Shamsie, J., & Shapira, Z. (2009). Experiencing the improbable: Rare events and organizational learning. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1090.0479
14. Lee, S., & Makhija, M. (2009). Flexibility in internationalization: is it valuable during an economic crisis? Strategic Management Journal. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.742/abstract
15. Lin, Z., Yang, H., & Arya, B. (2009). Alliance partners and firm performance: resource complementarity and status association. Strategic Management Journal. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.773/full
16. Madsen, P. (2009). These lives will not be lost in vain: Organizational learning from disaster in US coal mining. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1080.0396
17. Maguire, S., & Hardy, C. (2009). Discourse and deinstitutionalization: The decline of DDT. Academy of Management Journal. Retrieved from http://amj.aom.org/content/52/1/148.short
18. Marcel, J. (2009). Why top management team characteristics matter when employing a chief operating officer: A strategic contingency perspective. Strategic Management Journal. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.763/abstract
19. Miller, K., Fabian, F., & Lin, S. (2009). Strategies for online communities. Strategic Management Journal. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.735/abstract
20. Moldoveanu, M. (2009). Thinking strategically about thinking strategically: the computational structure and dynamics of managerial problem selection and formulation. Strategic Management Journal. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.757/full
21. Nonaka, I., & Krogh, G. Von. (2009). Perspective-tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: Controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation theory. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1080.0412
22. Plambeck, N., & Weber, K. (2009). CEO ambivalence and responses to strategic issues. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1090.0471
23. Purdy, J. M., & Gray, B. (2009). Conflicting logics, mechanisms of diffusion, and multilevel dynamics in emerging institutional fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52(2), 355–380.
24. Reid, E., & Toffel, M. (2009). Responding to public and private politics: Corporate disclosure of climate change strategies. Strategic Management Journal. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.796/abstract
25. Rerup, C. (2009). Attentional triangulation: Learning from unexpected rare crises. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1090.0467
26. Reus, T., & Ranft, A. (2009). An interpretive systems view of knowledge investments. Academy of Management  …. Retrieved from http://amr.aom.org/content/34/3/382.short
27. Siggelkow, N., & Rivkin, J. (2009). Hiding the evidence of valid theories: how coupled search processes obscure performance differences among organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly. Retrieved from http://asq.sagepub.com/content/54/4/602.short
28. Starbuck, W. (2009). Perspective-cognitive reactions to rare events: perceptions, uncertainty, and learning. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1090.0440
29. Tsoukas, H. (2009). A dialogical approach to the creation of new knowledge in organizations. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1090.0435
30. Wiersema, M., & Bowen, H. (2009). The use of limited dependent variable techniques in strategy research: issues and methods. Strategic Management Journal. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.758/abstract
31. Zollo, M. (2009). Superstitious learning with rare strategic decisions: Theory and evidence from corporate acquisitions. Organization Science. Retrieved from http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1090.0459

Most came from Organization Science. They had two issues in late 2009 which had most of the articles that caught my attention. The wordcloud reflects the most-used words for the 31 articles cited above.

Next week, my goal is to do 2010.

Productivity Tactic #2: Rescue Time

My computer is the source of all the things. It is both my place of work and entertainment. I connect with my family and friends and conduct meetings. I have all the papers that I am writing for my degree as well as a science fiction I have been working on. I learn by participating in Coursera classes and I play video games (Civ V, anyone?).

Given that all productive and downtime activities take place on the same screen, I have to be careful about how I spend my time. I discussed before the importance of staying away from my browser (thank you, Mailbox). Today I want to talk about RescueTime.

RescueTime tracks all the things you do on your computer. From the specific websites you access on your browser, to the programs you use such as Word or Mendeley. You can access your dashboard to see how you use your computer time. You can also classify certain activities from very productive to very distracting.

My goal is to have my productivity pulse above 80. This is not always possible, since there are meetings to schedule, emails to respond to, and world news to keep up with. In general, as long I spend most of my time in the Composition and Learning categories, I call it a good day.

Exploring the Top Management Literature

I spent today trying to create a brief overview of the Top Management literature - well beyond my review for comps. This is but a small step in my quest to identify an area to make a theoretical contribution.

BRIEF LITERATURE REVIEW
In their 1984 paper, Hambrick and Mason (Hambrick & Mason, 1984) lay the foundations of top management research, or what they call Upper Echelons Theory. This theory explores how the strategies and effectiveness of firms are related to the characteristics of their top managers.

The basic argument states that complex decisions cannot be economically optimized, and behavior dominates. So, the more complex the decision the more the idiosyncrasies of decision makers matter. In their argument, they note that the composition of the entire top management team (TMT) matters, not just the CEO.  It makes sense to examine the team as a whole and to not just focus on the chief executive; in particular, heterogeneity in the TMT, and power differentials, can have a substantial effect on outcomes (Hambrick, 2007).

In addition, the importance of the CEO – and their character – depends on managerial discretion.  When an executive has more discretion, upper echelon characteristics will have a larger effect on outcomes. Higher demands on an executive will force them to rely more on their experience and instincts, which makes character matter more.

SOME AREAS TO EXPLORE
While this literature review is brief, there are some potential areas to explore further in order to determine where the gaps are. For instance:

• The literature discusses the CEO’s personal characteristics and demographics of Top Management Teams. Some of the literature has addressed the team as a whole.  
• Papers explored revolving characteristics: (Briscoe, Chin, & Hambrick, 2014; Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007; Chin, Hambrick, & Treviño, 2013; Hayward & Hambrick, 1997; Wiersema & Bantel, 1992)
• Papers explored revolving the team: (Hambrick, Cho, & Chen, 1996; Knight, Pearce, & Smith, 1999; Smith, Smith, & Olian, 1994; Tihanyi & Ellstrand, 2000; Wiersema & Bantel, 1992)
• Managerial discretion is discussed as an important concept that explains the influence managers have. I am wondering what other concepts have been identified (beyond environment). 
• Papers explored discussing managerial discretion and the environment: (Carpenter, 2002; Collins & Clark, 2003; Crossland & Hambrick, 2011; Finkelstein & Hambrick, 1990; Haleblian & Finkelstein, 1993; Priem, 1990; Wiersema & Bantel, 1993)
• Strategic Change is very relevant and is discussed in some papers I read. I am curious to read what other types of change is discussed in the literature. In particular, I am curious to read if response to uncertain environments has been addressed.
• Papers explored: (Carpenter, 2002; Cho & Hambrick, 2006; Wiersema & Bantel, 1992)

NEXT STEPS – IDENTIFYING GAPS
This literature review builds on the content discussed in class, with a very high-level review a few other highly cited TMT papers in the top strategic management journals.
In order to move my understanding of the gaps in this literature forward, and thus my ability to make a theoretical contribution, I will continue to do a more targeted literature search with the following topics in mind:

• Personal characteristics and team composition.
• Next, I will further narrow my literature review search for knowledge of top management teams.
• The kind of knowledge and training the TMT can make a difference in how they interpret the environment, how they perceive problems, and create solutions.
• I hope to see if I can identify some gaps revolving the kind of knowledge of TMT.
• I also hope to learn about the kinds of roles in TMT.
• Managerial discretion.
• Next, I will continue to narrow my search to understand managerial discretion and the environment better.
• Change.
• Strategic change is purposeful. I wonder how the literature addresses change that is in response to a change that not planned or foreseen.

SOME RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Some very preliminary research questions revolving top management teams include:

• How and when do organizations create new TMT roles? Is this in response to a difficult environment? If so, does it make a difference in the outcomes of the firm? Or are these positions mostly ceremonial? Do they negatively impact the firm?
• Do TMT with less traditional roles perform better? For instance, some organizations have created positions such as Chief Integrations Officer, Chief Business Officer. 
• Some organizations have very specialized products. I wonder if having credentials in those specific areas makes a difference in the performance of the CEO or TMT.

These questions are contingent on a closer and more detailed examination of the literature.

CITES
Briscoe, F., Chin, M., & Hambrick, D. (2014). CEO Ideology as an Element of the Corporate Opportunity Structure for Social Activists. Academy of Management Journal.

Carpenter, M. (2002). The implications of strategy and social context for the relationship between top management team heterogeneity and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal. R

Chatterjee, A., & Hambrick, D. (2007). It’s all about me: Narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly.

Chin, M., Hambrick, D., & Treviño, L. (2013). Political Ideologies of CEOs The Influence of Executives’ Values on Corporate Social Responsibility. Administrative Science

Cho, T., & Hambrick, D. (2006). Attention as the mediator between top management team characteristics and strategic change: The case of airline deregulation. Organization Science.

Collins, C., & Clark, K. (2003). Strategic human resource practices, top management team social networks, and firm performance: The role of human resource practices in creating organizational. Academy of Management Journal.

Crossland, C., & Hambrick, D. (2011). Differences in managerial discretion across countries: how nation‐level institutions affect the degree to which ceos matter. Strategic Management Journal.

Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. (1990). Top-management-team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative Science Quarterly.

Haleblian, J., & Finkelstein, S. (1993). Top management team size, CEO dominance, and firm performance: The moderating roles of environmental turbulence and discretion. Academy of Management Journal.

Hambrick, D. (2007). Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review.

Hambrick, D., Cho, T., & Chen, M. (1996). The influence of top management team heterogeneity on firms’ competitive moves. Administrative Science Quarterly.

Hambrick, D., & Mason, P. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review.

Hayward, M., & Hambrick, D. (1997). Explaining the premiums paid for large acquisitions: Evidence of CEO hubris. Administrative Science Quarterly.

Knight, D., Pearce, C., & Smith, K. (1999). Top management team diversity, group process, and strategic consensus. Strategic Management

Priem, R. (1990). Top management team group factors, consensus, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal.

Smith, K., Smith, K., & Olian, J. (1994). Top management team demography and process: The role of social integration and communication. Administrative Science

Tihanyi, L., & Ellstrand, A. (2000). Composition of the top management team and firm international diversification.

Wiersema, M., & Bantel, K. (1992). Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal.

Wiersema, M., & Bantel, K. (1993). Top management team turnover as an adaptation mechanism: The role of the environment. Strategic Management Journal.

Productivity Tactic #1: Mailbox

A lot of my work takes place in a web browser. Unfortunately, that is where all my distractions happen too.

In order to minimize distractions, I have been finding ways to move my work away from the web browser. Enter Mailbox for Mac.

It was quite a quest to get a betacoin in order to have the Maibox app for my mac, but I am very happy.

The best part of this app is that it allows you to defer mail to later in the day, the next day, the next week, or at any point in time that you choose.

This has allowed me to move email tasks from my inbox to a later day when they have to be completed. Clearing my inbox is akin to clearing my mind. If I am not looking at an interminable list of email to-dos, I can focus on the task at hand.

Step One

The third year in most management doctoral programs has the potential to be wasted. This is the year that marks the beginning of the transition from knowledge consumer to knowledge producer. Making that transition is the key to successfully completing a doctoral program.

The first two years of my doctoral education consisted on exposure to the biggest ideas in the field. Now, I need to understand the many conversations that scholars are engaged in. In order to do so, my advisor has given me a rather fun task: read all the abstracts for all the articles in our top journals for the last five years. Then, carefully read the articles that are the most interesting to me.

Since my field is strategic management and I am interested in healthcare, I have selected the following journals to review:

1. Strategic Management Journal
2. Academy of Management Journal
3. Academy of Management Review
4. Organization Science
5. Health Services Research

Just as a rough indication of the scope of this project, here are the number of articles per journal:

1. SMJ: 390
2. AMJ: 270
3. AMR: 180
4. OrgSci: 300
5. HSR: 590

My plan is to tackle one year at a time, so I have a sense of who is talking about what and where - and how those conversations change over time.

It seems that I have my work cut out for me! 

Transition

It has been a few weeks since I took the much-dreaded comprehensive exams. While the final results have not yet been released, I am working to transition into the Proposal Stage.

This led me to evaluate the usefulness of this blog. The vast majority of posts have been written with the purpose of studying for comps. Each entry has detailed what I learned in class about specific theories used in management research.

Now that the exams are over, I think this blog will be a useful way to explore my research ideas as I move on to the proposal stage. I envision entries detailing ideas and potential ways to use theories to frame them. Eventually, I will hopefully pursue some of these ideas as a dissertation topic.

With a new school year about to begin and a new deadline ahead there is only one thing to say:

¡Arriba y Adelante!

Stages of Studying for Comps

Comprehensive exams are a thing of legend. Every PhD hopeful must endure the process of preparing and must survive the exams themselves. If you have not taken these exams, here is what is in store for you:

Vague Awareness
At the start of your PhD program, you know you will have to face comps one day... but that day is not here yet... it is not even happening this year!

Reality Shock
Somehow, you managed to complete all your coursework and now the faculty have scheduled your comps - in a few weeks!

Panic Mode, Engaged
This happened much too soon... there is so much material to review... did you even learn what you were supposed to?

Despair
Nope. You most certainly did not learn anything. You know nothing. At all. Not a single thing. Time is ticking.

Confusion
You get over the despair and begin to study. And as you review, you realize that you don't even remember half of these things. What is the difference between moderated mediation and mediated moderation? Is that even a thing?

Anger
You have spent so much time studying and it dawns on you: most of the material has nothing to do with your research interests. Why are the faculty even testing you on this? Don't they know you need to focus and publish?

Studying
Once you let go of all the emotions, you get to work. You have to take comps soon!

Panic Mode, 2.0
It is too much. There is so little time. There is no way in the world a single human could possibly learn all of this. You panic. Again.

Determination
You finally realize that every single PhD you know has gone through this. You are not alone. You are capable. You can do this!

More Studying
Yes! You got a second wind and this time YOU KNOW you can handle it!

Exhaustion
After your second wind and new-found determination, you study like never before. Now, you have ben studying for so long... you can't possibly do any more.

Sleeplessness
The exams start tomorrow. And sleep is elusive. You ponder all of the life choices that led you to this moment. You wonder if you are smart enough, and if you have what it takes.

The Exam
The exams begin. Somehow, you manage to type ALL THE WORDS. You write pages and pages and pages. Everything you know - everything you are - is poured into this exam.

Post-Exam
You are done with this exam. You can't even make it home. You are so done.

The Wait
All you have left to do now is wait for your faculty to decide if you pass...

The Results
You somehow manage to pass this hurdle. You should celebrate!! Be happy!

The Next Step
You are now ready for the next stage: the dissertation! Keep pushing!

The day before comps

Tomorrow, I finally take my comps. FINALLY.

Sadly, I did not get to take today off... I had so much to do before tomorrow.

In an ideal world, I would have one more week to practice more questions and really memorize all the cites. Though I am not sure this will make a big difference.

I began this blog as a way to keep myself motivated and focused during the time I had to study for comps. There have been many ups and downs in this process. If anyone were to look at the number of posts per day, it would be very easy to see which days were the better ones.

Despite any challenges (and there were many), I managed to review and write about every topic for the exam. I also was able to make electronic flashcards and table of articles. Unexpectedly, I even made regular flashcards and practiced writing out all the cites multiple times (an inherently difficult task because of my dyslexia).

The only thing I did not do was to practice more questions. But after one question it was clear my biggest weakness was the memorization of all the citations. And this is how I have tried to spend my days.

All there is left to do is to be confident that my preparation will be evident as I take the test.

As expected, I will be away for the next few days.

¡Si se puede!

... and it continues

Since 90% of the test relies on memorization, this is all I have done today.

Yesterday I focused on making flashcards for economic foundations topics. Today I practiced over and over and over until I could write out all those cites and their key ideas.

My goal is to complete the sociological foundations flashcards today. Tomorrow, I plan to practice until I know them. I will be making the last set of theory flashcards tomorrow as well.

On Tuesday, I will practice until all I can write out all the theory cites (just under 120) and all the theories (just over 20).

Just a few more days to comps...

Just studying

All I plan to do from now until the test is to keep reviewing. I am still making flashcards by hand. And I am still memorizing all the information in the tables of articles.

Practice Questions

The most important part about comps is answering the question. To that end, I will be practicing some questions over the next few days. It is not my intention to write out the answers, but rather identify what is needed in order to answer the question.

Practice question 1
Imagine two US firms in the same industry.  In the last five years, both companies have been trying to expand their presence in China.  While one has been very successful in their efforts, the other has not. Agency Theory, Transaction Cost Theory, and theories of Dynamic Capabilities would likely offer some common and several unique explanations for the differences in these firms’ performance in this market.  Develop the unique explanations and design a study that would effectively confirm or eliminate one or more of these explanations.

In order to answer this question, I need to:

• Define how each theory offers different explanations for performance
• Agency Theory
• Management structure
• Transaction Costs
• Vertical Integration, make-or-buy
• Dynamic Capabilities
• Routines of the organization
• Having defined how each theory offers different explanations, I must design a study:
• Structure the previous explanations into testable hypothesis or propositions
• The management controls in one company create the right incentives
• The successful company has integrated key operations in China
• The successful organization is more efficient
• Define the variables
• DVs (outcome - success) 
• IVs (based on the hypotheses)
• Controls (age, funding)
• Discuss sampling and data collection issues
• Selection of the sample
• Archival and survey methods
• Length of the study
• Discuss what data is necessary to confirm or eliminate each hypothesis

• Cites
• Agency: 
• Jensen and Mekling 1976
• Fama 1980
• Demsetz 1983
• Fama and Jensen
• Jensen 1986
• TCE:
• Coase 1937
• Williamson
• Hill 1990
• Jones and Hill  1988
• Teece 1982
• Alchain and Demsetz
• RVB:
• Alchain
• Schumpeter
• Nelson and Winter 1950
• Teece

Creating this outline took me about 25 minutes. I did not recall many of the years of the citations. My goal is to create the outline and the cites in 20 minutes. Furthermore, I should be able to detail one or two words about each paper. I also did not include the critics of TCE.

During the exam, I will have two hours to complete this question. In this case, the key ideas have been detailed and it is a matter of making this into paragraph form.

Grad School Wisdom

"True wisdom begins when we accept things as they are"

I came across this quote while watching cartoons. It was quite unexpected. And yet it was perfect.

With so little time to my comps, I am naturally stressed. Every PhD student I have spoken with describes the comps as one of the lowest and most stressful moments of the journey.

I admit that I am fortunate in that I had 4 weeks to exclusively focus on the exam. I had no other classes, no teaching duties, and very few RA responsibilities.

However, I am not fortunate in that my exam is closed notes and closed book. I do not understand why this has to be the case. Other majors in the school are allowed notes. And I know of several schools that allow notes as well. Furthermore, when writing papers, I will never have to cite something without the opportunity to look it up.

Memorizing the material does not upset me. But I do feel it has detracted from my focus of synthesizing what I have learned. The learning process for each activity is significantly different. We are going to be tested on our ability to synthesize, sure. But we also have to memorize.

I have devoted more than a few hours lamenting this fact. And I have been struggling to balance one set of activities over the other. Naturally, I have prioritized synthesizing. This activity is a lot closer to the ideal of being an academic: reading and writing and thinking and learning and imagining the possibilities of new things.

But with so little time to go, it has become apparent I must simply accept this is what my test will be: it will require memorization. As hard as it is to believe, I have never had to memorize before. I have always taken the time to learn. And I am including all the econometric proofs I had to learn for my methods classes.

I will now stop using my time pondering why my comps are structured this way, and instead focus on creative ways to ensure that all the pieces of information I need in order to talk about these topics intelligently (or as close to that as possible) are stored in my brain by next week.

The End: Putting It All Together

Now that I have finished making a blog post for each of the major ideas for my exam, it is time to put it all together.

I have previously mentioned how I was working on a mindmap in order to accomplish this. My remaining task is not just synthesizing, it is also memorizing. This represents a challenge since I have never memorized anything as a way to prepare for an exam.

I recently linked this article from Mental Floss on my twitter. In it, the author describes 11 different ways to improve my memory. They are:

1. Concentrate For Eight Seconds
2. Don’t Walk Through A Doorway
3. Make A Fist
4. Exercise
5. Sleep
6. Use Crazy Fonts
7. Chew Gum
8. Write Things Out 
9. Know When To Turn The Music On—And Off
10. Visualize
11. Doodle

In an attempt to memorize for the first time ever, I am making flashcards by hand. Making flashcards helps with concentrating for more than eight seconds and writing things out. In addition, it helps me to review. Once I finish a particular theory, I will go to the mindmap to see if I can put things together from memory. This also helps visualize.

This is how I will be spending the rest of the day today. And possibly tomorrow.

The exams are next week...

¡Arriba y adelante!

Endogeniety

Endogeniety simply means that a parameter or variable is correlated with the error term. There are many reasons why this would happen:

1. Measurement error
• This happens when we do not have an accurate measure of the independent variables.
2. Omitted variables
• This happens when the model does not include all the variables it should, and thus we have an uncontrolled variable.
3. Simultaneity
• This happens when two variables are each affecting the other.

To address endogeniety, there are a few options:

• Use instrumental variables address omitted variables
• Heckman correction models address the sampling bias and unobservable variables
• If the data is not a panel, then propensity score matching could help a small sample
• Run a 2SLS or 3SLS

(Adapted from course notes)

(Flashcards and other resources here)

Fixed vs. Random Effects

The best way to think about the difference between random and fixed effects is with this picture.

Fixed effects can be thought of as the relationship between predictor and outcome within an entity. In addition:

• Assumes something about entity may bias predictor/outcome so need to control for it
• Removes effects of observed or unobserved time-invariant characteristics from predictor variables
• It helps with omitted variables bias
• Creates separate regressions for each entity and averages effects across entities

Random effects, on the other hand, vary across entities

• Assumes random and uncorrelated with IVs
• Can include time-invariant variables
• Assumes entity’s error term is not correlated with predictors which allows time-invariant variables can be explanatory variables

Some examples include:

• Time-varying observables – age, years of experience
• Time-invariant observables – degree, gender
• Time-invariant unobservables – ability, IQ
• Omitted variables are time invariant

(Adapted from course notes)

(Flashcards and other resources here)

Structural Equation Modeling

When you think that there are unobserved or latent variables, a potential technique is Structural Equation Modeling (SEM).

Among other advantages, SEM:

• Can control for random errors
• Can model measurement error so the model is more precise
• Can test elaborate models

In general, the SEM starts by looking at all of the relationships in your study. This is known as the perfectly saturated model. All other models are compared to this one. The chi square here should be zero.

From there, it is possible to fix some relationships based on theory. This model is aligning variables to constructs and it is similar to a factor analysis. This model is referred to as the measurement model. If this model is very good, then the chi square will be insignificant. Furthermore, we do not want to have a significant difference between the estimated covariance matrix of the measurement and saturated models. The measurement model is used to asses convergent/discriminant validity. However, this model does not say anything about causality.

It is then possible to specify a causal model using theory. In this case, we also want a low chi square statistic. That would suggest that there is no difference in the estimated covariance matrix from the theoretical model and of the observed.

Last is a further constrained model. This aims to get the most parsimonious model. In this case, some relationships are set to zero.  This model should have a larger chi square (bad news), but it is more parsimonious (good news). The goal is to determine if the change in the chi square between the theoretical model and this parsimonious model is significant. If the change is not significant, we should choose the parsimonious model.

(Adapted from course notes)

(Flashcards and other resources here)

Survival Analysis

Survival analysis is used when we need to choose a point in time to measure survival, success, failure, death, etc..

Two important concepts relate to the time that we observe the data. This is refered to as censoring and it comes in two varieties: left and right.

Left censoring happens when we do not know how many organizations, people, etc have failed before we began sampling. That means that we only see the people that have survived up to that point, and how long have they survived.

Right censoring happens when we do not know it the people survived and for how long beyond conclusion of the study.

Some techniques to look at survival analysis include:

• Hazard rate. This is the rate of not survivivngt to the midpoint of a specified time interval
• Cox Haphazard regression. This examines which IVs influence if failure occurred at a particular time. It is a proportional model, so time is not considered.
• A generic hazard model does not use proportion. So this model does think about how failure happens as a function of time.

(Adapted from course notes)

(Flashcards and other resources here)

Categorical DVs

When the DVs are categorical variables, different analyses should be used.

The most common (and the only one discussed in class) is the case of a binary outcome variable. If this is the case either Logit or Probit should be used. Logistic regression estimates the probability of the outcome variable having a certain value (as opposed tot he value itself).

When there are more than two outcome variables, we need multiple logistic regressions solved simultaneously.

Moderators and Mediators

A moderator is a qualitative or quantitative variable that affects the direction and/or strength of the relation between an IV (or predictor) and a dependent or criterion variable.

Within a correlational analysis framework, a moderator is a third variable that affects the zero-order correlation between two other variable. In the more familiar ANOVA terms, a basic moderator effect can be represented as an interaction between a focal IV and a factor that specifies the appropriate conditions for its operation. In other words, an observed relationship may be different at different levels of a third variable. Moderation refers to the situation where the direction and intensity of an effect of a predictor on a criterion depends on the levels or settings of a third variable.  In essence, moderators attenuate or exacerbate the effect.

To test:

1. Variables entered into the regression equation in a stepwise and hierarchical fashion.
2. Control variables (if any were collected) are entered first into the equation.
3. In order to derive main effects of X on Y, regress X onto Y for this step
4. Add the interaction terms (X x M) to the analysis.  If there is a change in total variance explained from step 3 to step 4 this suggests total moderational impact, and r2 values for each interaction term shows the impact of the moderator for each relationship.

A variable is said to function as a mediator to the extent that it accounts for the relation between the predictor and the criterion (X and Y). Mediators explain how external physical events take on internal psychological significance. Whereas moderator variables specify when certain effects will hold, mediators speak to how or why such effects occur. 

For a variable to be considered a mediator, it must pass three tests:

1. X correlates with Y
2. X correlates with M
3. M significant impact on Y when X controlled for
• Effect of X on Y when M controlled for is 0 for full mediation

This is mostly been adapted from Baron and Kenny, 1986

(Adapted from course notes)

(Flashcards and other resources here)

Analysis of Variance and Sundry

Here I will write very briefly about some analysis.

T-Test
This test compares the means to two groups. The goal is to determine if they are statistically different from one another.

Analysis of Variance
These include the MANOVA, ANOVA and MANCOVA and ANCOVA.

The MANOVA test compares the multivariate means of multiple groups. If this test is significant, then it is possible to do an ANOVA test for each DV.

In particular, the MANOVA:

• Has more than one DV
• Uses an omnibus F-test
• The IV is categorical
• Identifies significant DVs
• Assumes normality, linearity

ANOVA:

• Can be used for each DV after MANOVA F-test is significant.

The MANCOVA and ANCOVA test includes covariates. The covariates are used when you want to control for this variables in the analysis of variance. 

Regressions

The purpose of a regression is to estimate the relationship between the independent (predictor/explanatory) variables and the dependent (response./outcome) variable. Assumptions of regressions include:

• No specification error (no omitted variables)
• No measurement error
• There is no multicollinearity (variables are independent)
• Errors are independent (no omitted variables)
• Errors are normally distributed
• Normality

Hierarchical Regression

Are a type of regression models. This analysis builds successive linear regression models, each time adding more predictors. Here, the order of input matters. Generally, the oder is:

• Controls
• Main
• Interactions and higher order

(Adapted from course notes)

(Flashcards and other resources here)