手法を比較

	Within-and-Between Analysis	組織公正尺度
分野	組織行動論	組織行動論
系統	Regression model	Process / pipeline
提唱年	1984	2001
提唱者	Fred Dansereau, Joseph Alutto & Francis Yammarino	Jason Colquitt and Robert H. Moorman
種類	Levels-of-analysis decomposition and inference method	Self-report questionnaire
原典	Dansereau, F., Alutto, J. A., & Yammarino, F. J. (1984). Theory Testing in Organizational Behavior: The Varient Approach. Prentice-Hall. ISBN: 9780133595079	Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: a construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386-400.
別名	WABA, Within and Between Entities Analysis, Dansereau WABA, Levels-of-Analysis Analysis	OJS, Justice Climate Scale
関連	3	5
概要	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.	The Organizational Justice Scale (OJS) measures employees' perceptions of fairness in organizational settings across four dimensions: distributive justice (fairness of outcomes), procedural justice (fairness of decision-making processes), interpersonal justice (respectful and dignified treatment), and informational justice (honest and adequate communication). Developed by Colquitt (2001) and building on earlier work by Moorman (1991), the OJS assesses how fairly employees perceive they and their work are treated, predicting organizational commitment, citizenship behavior, and turnover.