Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
Within-and-Between Analysis/Evidence
Method evidence record

Within-and-Between Analysis

Within-and-Between Analysis (WABA) is a methodology for determining the level of analysis at which a relationship between variables actually operates, developed by Fred Dansereau, Joseph Alutto, and Francis Yammarino in their 1984 book on the varient approach to theory testing. The central question it answers is whether an observed correlation reflects a group-level phenomenon (differences between work units), an individual-level phenomenon (differences among individuals within units), both, or neither. WABA decomposes the variance of each variable, and the covariance between variables, into between-entity and within-entity components, then applies statistical and practical tests to draw a levels inference. Yammarino and Markham's 1992 application showed how WABA can overturn casual assumptions, demonstrating that phenomena presumed to be group-based may in fact be individual-based. Klein, Dansereau, and Hall's 1994 review situated WABA within a broader argument that levels of analysis must be specified in theory, measurement, and analysis alike. WABA forces researchers to test, rather than assume, the level at which their constructs live.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Source record

Citations copied verbatim from the method’s source record. No claim-level verification is inferred from them.

Within-and-Between Analysis (WABA) for Levels-of-Analysis Inference
Taxonomic method record · regression-model / organizational-behavior
  • Dansereau, F., Alutto, J. A., & Yammarino, F. J. (1984). Theory Testing in Organizational Behavior: The Varient Approach. Prentice-Hall. · ISBN 9780133595079
  • Yammarino, F. J., & Markham, S. E. (1992). On the application of within and between analysis: Are absence and affect really group-based phenomena? Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(2), 168-176. · DOI 10.1037/0021-9010.77.2.168
  • Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. (1994). Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 195-229. · DOI 10.5465/amr.1994.9410210745
Open full method

Curated claims

Claims persisted in the evidence ledger, each with its own assessment.

No curated claims yet

This view does not invent a claim assessment when the ledger has none.

Related methods

Generated from the method graph and shown as machine-suggested relations — no evidence claim is inferred.

Used in the same domainLeader-Member Exchange Scalemachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Used in the same domainOrganizational Justice Scalemachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Used in the same domainPsychological Safety Scalemachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Evidence status

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Sources

3 recorded citations, copied from the method source record.

Actions

Open method page
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account