1

Doctoral Introduction to Statistics Made Simple Through

Annotated Bibliographies
Christine Ann McCalla, NorthCentral University
Abstract
Statics are terrifying at any college level, but surprisingly enough can be gently introduced to
first-year doctoral candidates as annotated bibliographies. The initial intimidation can be
minimized by reviewing annotated bibliographies to conceive the finished product, and then
reviews of peer-reviewed studies for statistical components. The instructions provided by the
professor should be adequate enough that the student can grasp the concepts, and some
appreciation can be realized after the concept is understood.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Chenwei, L., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant Leadership and
Serving Culture: Influence on Individual and Unit Performance. Academy Of
Management Journal, 57(5), 1434-1452. doi:10.5465/amj.2013.0034
This study analyzes the cause-effect relationships between leaders and their dynamics, and the
effects on followers and organizational culture in general. The population of the study
was the restaurant setting. The sample was store managers and hourly employees of 76
restaurants (34% of the chains total restaurants in 6 U.S. states). It included randomly
selected restaurants within the 10 metropolitan areas containing the largest number of
restaurants, with employees who worked at least 20 hours a week and had store tenure
of at least 1 month. The research methodology used was the quantitative methodology,
which requires items / answer options with the respondent choosing responses such as
strongly agree, agree, etc. with a numerical value assigned, e.g. the Likert Scale. The
studys design was cross-sectional and causal precluding causal inferences, but it also
had a causal direction which rendered it predictive in nature, and was also a weakness.
The instruments of the survey were a web-based survey for managers, with employees
completing a paper survey. For the data analysis, a Statistical Package for the Social

Sciences (SPSS) was used by way of one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The
Excel Add-in was used (Data/Add-in analysis/ANOVA: Single Factor) formula. The
conclusion of the study was that the servant leadership and serving culture differed
across the stores in a significant manner. The study had three limitations. (1) The survey
length was limited as the researchers opted for the short form which reduced 28 items
to 7, (2) servant leadership and serving culture overlapped content wise, and (3) the
serving culture measure focused on partial measures such as behavioral norms and not
the full aspect of the culture. Longitudinal research is necessary and recommended for
further study.

Mason, C., Griffin, M., & Parker, S. (2014). Transformational Leadership Development.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(3), 174-194.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-05-2012-0063
This study researches the behavioral difference of psychological reactions between leaders
whose leadership behaviors improved in response to training and those who do not. The
population was middle and senior level leaders of public sector organizations invited to
participate in a year-long leadership development program. These leaders are
employees of agencies that provide scientific services to other government departments.
The sample was 83 percent of the leaders invited to participate in the program, but the
completion rate was 80 percent due to attrition. The study consists of 56 leaders
completing the program. Of which, 40 were male and 16 female with the age range of
30 59 years. Organizational tenure ranged from one to 18 years. The mixed
methodology was used. This was a correlational study as variables were analyzed, an
experimental study as developmental behaviors were the desired outcome as a result of
the professional development, a phenomenological study as the participants used the
360-degree feedback to provide input. This was also an ethnographical study as peers,
team members, and supervisors provided input. The 360-degree feedback questionnaire
is a qualitative method, while the quantitative methodology required responses on a
five point scale including strongly agree, agree, etc. with a numerical value assigned
presented as the Likert Scale, but varied at different phases with various numerical
values as well as attributes to evaluate. The 360-degree questionnaire requires some
degree of confidentiality, so it would not have been face to face. The five point and
other varying scale methodology was not done face to face. For the quantitative data, a
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) was used by way of Excel Add-in,
one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The findings of the study are that during
developmental processes, the psychological reactions of the leaders should be
mentored. The limitations of the study are; (1) there may have been inflation of
variance effects of the relationship between psychological measures and self-ratings of
leadership behavior, and (2) there may be delays in the recognition of changes in
leaders behaviors by peers, team members, and supervisors. It is recommended that
future research be performed to clarify the relationship between change in self-efficacy,
change in perspective taking, and change in transformational leadership behavior.

Summary
Understanding and applying the framework of annotated bibliographies are not enough, and
not only in a scholarly application. Also required are the understanding of statistics, its
concepts, and applications. To understand this weeks assignment, one must understand
statistical fundamentals: the types studies, population, samples, instruments, data analysis and
its various toolkits, and the limitations and recommendations of the studies themselves. It is
now clear in this assignment, why courses and degreed programs have prerequisites and why
the various programs are structured the way they are.

References
Bentahar, O., & Cameron, R. (2015). Design and Implementation of a Mixed Method Research
Study in Project Management. Electronic Journal Of Business Research Methods, 13(1), 315
Delice, A. (2010). The Sampling Issues in Quantitative Research. Educational Sciences: Theory
And Practice, 10(4), 2001-2018
Delost, M. E., & Nadder, T. S. (2014). Guidelines for Initiating a Research Agenda: Research
Design and Dissemination of Results. Clinical Laboratory Science, 27(4), 237-244
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Chenwei, L., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant Leadership and Serving
Culture: Influence on Individual and Unit Performance. Academy Of Management Journal,
57(5), 1434-1452. doi:10.5465/amj.2013.0034
Mason, C., Griffin, M., & Parker, S. (2014). Transformational Leadership Development.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(3), 174-194.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-05-2012-0063
Hagan, T. L. (2014). Measurements in Quantitative Research: How to Select and Report on
Research Instruments. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(4), 431-433.
doi:10.1188/14.ONF.431-433
Harland, N., & Holey, E. (2011). Research and Learning Methodologies Including open-ended
questions in quantitative questionnaires--theory and practice. International Journal Of
Therapy & Rehabilitation, 18(9), 482-486
Ingham-Broomfield, R. (. (2016). A Nurses' Guide to Mixed Methods Research. Australian
Journal Of Advanced Nursing, 33(4), 46-52.
Landrum, B., & Garza, G. (2015). Mending fences: Defining the Domains and Approaches of
Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Qualitative Psychology, 2(2), 199-209.
doi:10.1037/qup0000030
Muenjohn, N., Jun, I., Yusuke, S., & Chhetri, P. (2015). Leadership, Design Process, and Team
Performance: a Comparison Between the Japanese and Australian R&d Teams. Journal of
Developing Areas, 49(6), 489-496

Overeem, K., Wollersheim, H., Driessen, E., Lombarts, K., van de Ven, G., Grol, R., & Arah, O.
(2009). Doctors Perceptions of Why 360-Degree Feedback Does (Not) Work: A
Qualitative Study. Medical Education, 43(9), 874. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03439.x
Park, J., & Park, M. (2016). Qualitative versus Quantitative Research Methods: Discovery or
Justification?. Journal Of Marketing Thought, 3(1), 1-7. doi:10.15577/jmt.2016.03.01.1
Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmHFFFpOVZs
Retrieved from https://login.proxy1.ncu.edu/login?
url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/edinburghds/qualitative/0?
PHPSESSID=plveo69es50nivaf4lum8l00t5
Quantitative. (2004). In et. al. et al., A dictionary of sociolinguistics. Edinburg, UK: Edinburgh
University Press. Retrieved from https://login.proxy1.ncu.edu/login?
url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/edinburghds/quantitative/0
Qualitative/quantitative. (2007). In Z. O'Leary, The social science jargon-buster. London, UK:
Sage UK. Retrieved from https://login.proxy1.ncu.edu/login?
url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/sageukssjb/qualitative_quantitative/0
Mixed methods research. (2010). In A. Powers, Dictionary of nursing theory and research. New
York, NY: Springer Publishing Company. Retrieved from
https://login.proxy1.ncu.edu/login?
url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/spnurthres/mixed_methods_research/0
Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., & Sullivan, Y. W. (2016). Guidelines for Conducting Mixed-methods
Research: An Extension and Illustration. Journal Of The Association For Information
Systems, 17(7), 435-495
Wester, K. L., Borders, L. D., Boul, S., & Horton, E. (2013). Research Quality: Critique of
Quantitative Articles in the "Journal of Counseling & Development". Journal Of
Counseling & Development, 91(3), 280-290
Yilmaz, K. (2013). Comparison of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Traditions:
Epistemological, Theoretical, and Methodological Differences. European Journal Of
Education, 48(2), 311-325. doi:10.1111/ejed.12014