There is a heavy reading load for the class meeting on Monday, May 12. All students must at least try to read the items that the syllabus indicates for the class meeting of Monday, May 12. The most valuable of the readings is the classic book, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research, by Donald T. Campbell and Julian C. Stanley.

For this class meeting, it is the turn of each of the following students to write a paper: Yue Liu, Bixia Xu, Silvia Ponce, Rashmi Assudani, Xiao Yun Wang, and [one additional student to be named]. The paper is to consist of an answer to the designated question. Remember that you must write your paper as if you were presenting your responses to an audience of other researchers (for instance, other doctoral students, professors, journal readers) who are completely unfamiliar with the topic and who have not read the papers that you have read. This is not a group assignment; each paper is to be completed individually.

When writing your paper, be sure to state the question at the beginning of the paper.

The paper must be submitted no later than Sunday, May 11, at 10am. Follow the instructions in the syllabus for submitting the paper to AllenLee@Management.McGill.ca. By noon, all of the papers will be forwarded to the entire class via the electronic discussion list, Lee-PhD@Management.McGill.ca. All students must read these papers in preparation for class.

1. (Yue Liu.) In the book by Campbell & Stanley, some key concepts (see pages 1 to 33) include internal validity, external validity, eight threats to internal validity, four threats to external validity, and true experimental designs. One might wonder how these concepts pertain to the 4 studies that Schmitt, Dubé & Leclerc conducted and that they report in their article. Read this article where you focus on the two paragraphs that follow the "Study 1" subheading and the two paragraphs that follow the "Method" subheading on page 808. Using some of the Campbell & Stanley concepts, make a judgment on the quality of the research design of Study 1 and explain your judgment.

2. (Silvia Ponce.) In the book by Campbell & Stanley, some key concepts (see pages 1 to 33) include internal validity, external validity, eight threats to internal validity, four threats to external validity, and true experimental designs. One might wonder how these concepts pertain to the 4 studies that Schmitt, Dubé & Leclerc conducted and that they report in their article. Read this article where you focus on the one paragraph that follows the "Study 2" and "Method" subheadings on page 809. Using some of the Campbell & Stanley concepts, make a judgment on the quality of the research design of Study 2 and explain your judgment.

3. (Xiao Yun Wang.) In the book by Campbell & Stanley, some key concepts (see pages 1 to 33) include internal validity, external validity, eight threats to internal validity, four threats to external validity, and true experimental designs. One might wonder how these concepts pertain to the 4 studies that Schmitt, Dubé & Leclerc conducted and that they report in their article. Read this article where you focus on the one paragraph that follows the "Study 3" subheading on page 810 and all the paragraphs in the "Method" subsection on page 811. Using some of the Campbell & Stanley concepts, make a judgment on the quality of the research design of Study 3 and explain your judgment.

4. (Bixia Xu.) In the book by Campbell & Stanley, some key concepts (see pages 1 to 33) include internal validity, external validity, eight threats to internal validity, four threats to external validity, and true experimental designs. One might wonder how these concepts pertain to the 4 studies that Schmitt, Dubé & Leclerc conducted and that they report in their article. Read this article where you focus on all of page 812 and the portion of page 813 preceding the "Results" subheading. Using some of the Campbell & Stanley concepts, make a judgment on the quality of the research design of Study 4 and explain your judgment.

5. (Rashmi Assudani and [one additional student to be named].) In the book by Campbell & Stanley, some key concepts (see pages 1 to 33) include internal validity, external validity, eight threats to internal validity, four threats to external validity, and true experimental designs. One might wonder how these concepts pertain to Rosabeth Moss Kanter's study, Men and Women of the Corporation, which is examined in the assigned article by Lee. Read this article where you focus on the subsection that begins with the subheading, "Conducting a Case Study as a Natural Experiment"; in particular, note how Lee proposes that one could empirically test (1) Kantor's prediction that "a difference in the gender of the supervisor of employees who are women, and who occuppy organizational positions which are the same with respect to the three variables, will make no difference to the job satisfaction which these women employees experience" and (2) Kantor's prediction that "women employees who have supervisors of the same gender, but who occupy organizational positions which differ with respect to just one of the three variables... , will show a difference in the job satisfaction which they experience." Using some of the Campbell & Stanley concepts, make a judgment on the quality of how Lee proposes to test these two predictions and explain your judgment.