Digital literacy training MKTG7260 Marketing and S.docx

Digital literacy training
MKTG7260
Marketing and Stakeholder
Communication
Information Resources
ANU Library anulib.anu.edu.au/training
[email protected]
MKTG7260
© The Australian National University
This work by The Australian National University is licensed
under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivative Works 4.0
Australia License.
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0

MKTG7260
Table of Contents
Analyse your topic
...............................................................................................
....... 1
Break down your assignment question
.......................................................................... 1
Brainstorm related terms and synonyms
....................................................................... 1
SuperSearch
...............................................................................................
................ 2
Subject Guides
...............................................................................................
............ 2
Databases
...............................................................................................
.................... 3
Business Source Complete
........................................................................................... 4
Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies
....................................................................... 4
Data and Statistical Sources
....................................................................................... 5

Other resources
...............................................................................................
........... 8
MKTG7260
Analyse your topic
In order to formulate a search strategy and choose keywords for
searching, you must first
understand and analyse your topic.
Break down your assignment question
Break it into instructions (what to write) limiters (defining the
boundaries of your research)
and key concepts (these will be your search terms).
Example question: “Experts and celebrities are good media to
create market trust in our brand
because they know therefore they make the right choice. We can
therefore make the same
choice because they were right.”
Instructions: Write a Critical Appraisal of a topic (CAT)
Limiters: Usually geographic (e.g. only in Australia; only in
OECD countries) or temporal (e.g.
research published in the last 10 years)
Key concepts: celebrities, market, trust, brand, choice, correct
Brainstorm related terms and synonyms

Not all journal articles will use the exact same terminology; and
the terminology in the
published research may be different from the terminology in
your assignment question.
Related terms:
• Endorsement
• Celebrity endorsement
• Consumer perception
• Consumer decision making
• Consumer choice
• Source credibility
• Consumer behaviour
Synonyms:
• Stars
• Star power
• Advertising
• Promotion
• Product
• Selection

Alternate spelling
Take into account American spellings. Wildcard symbols
(usually a question mark) can be used
to pick up both American and British spelling:
E.g. Behavi?r will find both behaviour and behavior
Digital literacy training 1
MKTG7260
SuperSearch
SuperSearch provides a single search across the Library’s
collections and databases.
SuperSearch finds journal articles, newspaper articles, books,
book chapters, theses,
dissertations, audio-visual content, book reviews and more.
It can be a useful place to start searching as it will search
almost all databases and will give an
idea of what information has been published on a particular
topic. For more refined searching,
search within subject specific databases.
Example search: celebrit* endors* consumer perception
The asterisk is a truncation symbol that picks up all alternate
endings to a word.
Use the left hand side menu to refine your search.

Subject Guides
A useful starting point for literature searching are the Library’s
online Subject Guides.
From the Library’s homepage > Subject Guides (under Library
information) > Arts & social
sciences
The most relevant guide is:
• Business, Management & Accounting
2 Digital literacy training
https://anulib.anu.edu.au/find-access/supersearch
https://anulib.anu.edu.au/
https://anulib.anu.edu.au/find-access/subject-guides
https://anulib.anu.edu.au/find-access/subject-guides/arts-social-
sciences
https://anulib.anu.edu.au/find-access/subject-guides/arts-social-
sciences
https://libguides.anu.edu.au/business-management-accounting
MKTG7260
Databases
Most databases function in very similar ways. Below, two
databases are given as examples,
but there are other useful databases as well. Reading the
description of a database will help
decide if it will be useful for your research.

There are two main ways to find databases relevant to
marketing/business/management:
• Visit the Databases page of the Business, Management &
Accounting subject guide
• From the Library’s home page, click on the E-Resources &
databases link, then select
the appropriate subject from the ‘Search by subject’ drop down
menu and click ‘GO’
https://libguides.anu.edu.au/c.php?g=828054&p=6014703
https://anulib.anu.edu.au/find-access/e-resources-databases
MKTG7260
Business Source Complete
BSC is full-text content and peer-reviewed business journals. It
covers all disciplines of
business, including marketing, management, accounting,
banking, finance and more.
Example search: celebrity endorsement AND consumer
perception
Use the left hand side menu to refine your search

Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies
A collection of peer reviewed case studies focusing on business
decision making and
management development throughout key global emerging
markets. Cases are written
primarily by case-writers working in developing economies.
MKTG7260
Example search: celebrity endorsement
Tick the box next to ‘Only content I have access to’
Click on ‘View summary and detail’ to see if the case study will
be useful
Click on the title to see the entire case.
Data and Statistical Sources
It can be useful to verify claims with source data, or discover
more about industries or
companies using data.
Visit the Data and statistical sources page of the Business,
Management & Accounting subject
guide to see available data sources and choose the appropriate
resource to search.
E.g. Euromonitor provides company, industry, economies and

consumer data.
Example search: an industry that often utilises celebrity
endorsements
https://libguides.anu.edu.au/c.php?g=828054&p=6057295
MKTG7260
The initial statistics page can be altered by clicking on different
headings or stats type to see
different aspects of the data. It defaults to sorting the results by
market size from largest to
smallest.
Example data: Click on the dark blue square (brand shares) next
to Australia to see which
brands have the biggest share of the Australian market. This can
then be compared to which
brands use celebrity endorsement in their Australian marketing.
.

MKTG7260
Other resources
Training notes
To access training notes, visit the Research & learn webpage
anulib.anu.edu.au/research-learn
and select the skill area followed by the relevant course. You
can register for a workshop and
find other information.
Research & learn how-to guides
Explore and learn with the ANU Library’s how to guides
(anulib.anu.edu.au/howto). Topics
covered are:
• Citations & abstracts
• E-books
• EndNote
• Evaluating Sources
• Finding books and more
• Finding journal articles and more
• Finding theses
• Increasing your research impact
• ORCID iD (Open Researcher and
Contributor ID)
• Research Data Management
• Text and Data Mining
• Topic analysis
Subject guides
Find subject-specific guides (anulib.anu.edu.au/subjectguides)
and resources on broad range
of disciplines. Such as:

• Asia Pacific, Southeast Asia and East
Asian studies
• Business, economics, art, music and
military studies
• Criminal, human rights and taxation
law
• History, indigenous studies, linguistics
and philosophy
• Biological, environment, physical &
mathematical sciences, engineering &
computer science, health & medicine
Navigating the sea of scholarly communication
An open access course designed to build the capabilities
researchers need to navigate the
scholarly communications and publishing world. Topics covered
include finding a best-fit
publisher, predatory publishing, data citations, bibliometrics,
open access, and online research
identity. Five self-paced modules, delivered by international
and local experts/librarians
(anulib.anu.edu.au/publishing).
Online learning
Online learning is available through ANU Pulse, which can be
accessed from both on and off
campus by all ANU staff and students (ql.anu.edu.au/pulse).
Modules available in ANU Pulse
• Microsoft Office (Access, Excel, OneNote, Outlook,
PowerPoint, Project, Visio, Word)

• Microsoft Office (Mac)
• Adobe suite (Illustrator, Photoshop)
• Type IT
Training
A range of workshops are offered to help with your academic
research and studies
(anulib.anu.edu.au/training-register).
Feedback
Please provide feedback about workshops on the online
feedback form (ql.anu.edu.au/survey).
http://anulib.anu.edu.au/research-learn
http://anulib.anu.edu.au/find-access/how-guides
http://anulib.anu.edu.au/find-access/subject-guides
https://goo.gl/bC7mkf
http://anu.interactiontraining.net/register.aspxMKTG7260Marke
ting and Stakeholder CommunicationAnalyse your topicBreak
down your assignment questionBrainstorm related terms and
synonymsSuperSearchSubject GuidesDatabasesBusiness Source
CompleteEmerald Emerging Markets Case StudiesData and
Statistical SourcesOther resourcesTraining notesResearch &
learn how-to guidesSubject guidesNavigating the sea of
scholarly communicationOnline learningTrainingFeedback
MKTG 7260 MARKETING AND STAKEHOLDER
COMMUNICATION
SEMINAR GROUP 2
WEDNESDAY

1
LIST OF CLAIMS FROM SEMINAR GROUP 2
Customers are increasingly buying more products from
companies that promote CSR.
Using celebrities in advertisements will increase market share
of products.
Using influencers on social media is an effective, cost efficient
and low risk way to increase
product awareness.
Limiting the production stock will make our products more
attractive
Luxury and beauty products have no market in Africa.
Low price is the key driver to boost smart phones market share
worldwide.
people tend to focus on brand itself rather than the actual
quality of the products.
Customers are less loyal on simple, low priced products

Marketing in countries where consumer laws are weaker
(protect the consumer less) is easier
and more profitable for companies than in countries where laws
are stronger
Millennials do not respond positively to brands which
implement aggressive marketing
strategies in a traditional advertising/sales way
Targeting one market segment too strongly can have the
negative unintended consequence of
actively deterring other segments
Products with short life spans have higher sales rates as the
consumer needs to replace them
more frequently
If a company is very successful in producing one product, it
will be more difficult for the
company to introduce a new, different product
The existence/availability of fake products/unauthorized
replicas of products decreases total
sales of the real products
Highly satisfied customers are more likely to be show high
customer loyalty
Misleading and factually inaccurate advertising negatively
impacts customer loyalty

High product quality positively impacts customer loyalty
Internal marketing to employees increases the motivation and
productivity of the organisation
Companies that successfully satisfy customers’ needs are very
profitable.
Copying star products can help a company acquire a share of the
market
COMMUNICATION
SEMINAR GROUP 2
WEDNESDAY
2
Expanding sales channels will automatically increase sales
Creative products attract more customers and therefore increase
the market share
Social media are posing enormous threats and challenges to
traditional advertising
Globalization has increased positive impacts of marketing
worldwide
Culture plays the most important role in the marketing strategy
of a product

Slogans effectively enhance the image of the brand, helps the
consumer to identify and recall
the brand and create brand differentiation.
Change in consumer behaviour forces companies to re-brand
themselves and become more
consumer-centric.
After-sales service influences the sales of the product, even
though the product which is
marketed is of inferior quality.
In developing economies imported products from developed
countries are considered to be of
better quality than the locally manufactured product.
Competition in marketing will ultimately lead to monopoly
Price cuts can offset brand loyalty
Communication with more customers can generate more
transactions.
Social Media advertising is more effective than traditional print
media advertising

Brand Loyalty in Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) is
being challenged by consumers’
desire to try new things
Social media and mobile preference analytics are the most
efficient and effective sources for
the identification and analysis of customer needs and wants.
Sales is more important than marketing in B2B business
In China On-line shopping is more popular than shopping in
retail outlets
Using pictures in advertisement is more convincing than just
words
Reviews from previous customers are more trustworthy than
advertising for new customers
People will choose the products of the brands that they like
rather than choose brand products
that are lower in price

COMMUNICATION
SEMINAR GROUP 2
WEDNESDAY
3
People tend to forget easily about the damages caused by a
company’s bad behaviour.
Exaggerated information is more attractive to customers than
factual information.
Marketing online is much more efficient than via traditional
media such as billboards and
TV.
Marketing in video games causes teenagers to behave violently
Enterprises use “hunger marketing,” to limit access to their
products and cause expansion in
consumer demand for their products.
Firms’ global presence enhances global career opportunities for
marketing professionals.
Key Opinion Leaders (KOL) improve marketing sales based on
the lifestyle programming.

Socially responsible firms recognize that including a strong
social orientation in business is a
sound strategy that is in both their own and their customers’
best interest.
Setting unrealistic high consumer expectations of the product
through advertising may lead to
higher initial sales, but it eventually will result in
dissatisfaction if the product fail to achieve
high performance expectations.
Competitive advantage based on location cannot be duplicated.
A single strategy (e.g. either low prices or excellent service) is
not enough to build a
sustainable competitive advantage.
A competitive advantage acts like a wall that the firm has built
around its position in a
market. This wall makes it hard for outside competitors to
contact customers inside.
Marketers must develop a strategy based on a particular
organization’s buying behaviour and
on the buying situation.
A company must investigate local customs first before
considering any expansion of its

overseas markets.
As long as the product is of good quality, it will not be hard to
sell.
Market segmentation is basically defined as the finer the better.
When products show similar performance, people tend to choose
products from their own
country.
High customer satisfaction does not equate customer loyalty.
Companies that do not consider environmentally friendly
measures in their marketing are
more likely to fail.
CEBMa
center for
Evidence-Based Management
CEBMa Guideline for
Critically
Appraised Topics
in Management and Organizations

Version 1.1
Editors: Eric Barends, Denise M. Rousseau, Rob B. Briner
CEBMa
center for
Guideline for Critically Appraised Topics in Management and
Organizations
Contents
Critically Appraised Topics 3
Steps in the CAT process 4
Step 1. Background: What is the context of the CAT question 5
Step 2. Formulating the CAT question: What does the CAT
answer? 6
Step 3. Defining inclusion criteria: Which studies will be taken
into account? 9
Step 4. Search strategy: How should the studies be sought? 10
Step 5. Study selection: How should you select the studies? 12
Step 6. Data extraction: What information should be extracted?

13
Step 7. Critical appraisal: How should the quality of the studies
be judged? 15
Step 8. Results: What did you find? 18
Step 9. Conclusion 22
Step 10. Limitations 24
Step 11. Implications and recommendations 25
Checklist 28
References 29
Appendix: Summarizing scientific literature 30
© CEBMa, 2017
Pubished by the Center for Evidence-Based Management,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
No rights reserved. All parts of this publication may be
reproduced in any form or by any
means without the prior permission of CEBMa. First published
2017
ISBN: 978-90-826957-1-7
For further information on CEBMa, visit our website:
www.cebma.org
http://www.cebma.org

CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Critically Appraised Topics
A Critically Appraised Topic (CAT) provides a quick and
succinct assessment of what is known (and
not known) in the scientific literature about an intervention or
practical issue by using a systematic
methodology to search and critically appraise primary studies.
However, in order to be quick, a CAT
makes concessions in relation to the breadth, depth and
comprehensiveness of the search. Aspects
of the search may be limited to produce a quicker result:
• Searching: a limited number of databases may be consulted,
and unpublished research
can be excluded. Sometimes a CAT may be limited to only
meta-analyses and/or
controlled studies.
• Data Extraction: only a limited amount of key data may be
extracted, such as year,
population, sector, sample size, main findings, and effect size.
• Critical Appraisal: quality appraisal is often limited to
methodological appropriateness.
Due to these limitations, a CAT is more prone to selection bias

than a systematic review or rapid
evidence assessment.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Steps in the CAT process
A CAT involves the following steps:
1. Background
2. Question
3. Inclusion Criteria
4. Search Strategy
5. Study Selection
6. Data Extraction
7. Critical Appraisal
8. Results
8.1. Definitions

8.2. Causal Mechanism
8.3. Main Findings
9. Conclusion
10. Limitations
11. Implications and recommendations
6
7
8
9
10
11
5
4
3
2
1
CEBMa
center for

Organizations
Step 1. Background: What is the context of the CAT
question
The background should clearly state what the rationale for the
CAT was and explain why the question
being asked is important. You may also indicate how it might
relate to a wider understanding of a
general problem. Most CATs occur in the context of a specific
organization. You should address
this context (e.g. sector, history, characteristics), help specify
the rationale for the CAT, and explain
why the question is important for the organization, its members
or its clients. In formulating the CAT
question, it is important to reflect on the potential stakeholders
relevant to the general problem being
addressed in order to tap deeper insight into the issues involved
(e.g., internal stakeholders such as
employees at different organizational levels or external
stakeholders like clients or the community).
EXAMPLE 1
As a change consultant, I am expected to contribute to the
realization of organizational
change. The outcomes of change can be both positive and
negative, depending on
the type of change and the specific individual or group affected.
Particularly when the
change has predominantly negative outcomes (e.g., lay-offs), I

think it is of utmost
importance that the change process is fair and just. I am curious
about the impact
procedural justice has on the way people perceive the outcomes
of organizational
change.
EXAMPLE 2
Interviewing and who got what job how are the most talked
about subject on campus.
Most students are getting ready to either get internships or full
time jobs this summer.
It is widely believed that smiling during a job interview may
increase your chances of
getting hired. This CAT was conducted to understand whether
this claim is supported
by scientific evidence.
EXAMPLE 3
Hoping to imitate the innovative and flexible work
environments found at start-ups
and companies like Google, my organization’s Executive
Director is considering
implementing a bullpen style, open-plan layout. Currently, our
office is divided into
individual workspaces with half walls. The Executive Director
and Controller both have
private offices. With 15 employees working in a relatively small
space, I worry that the
distractions created by a new, open layout may undermine our
ability to focus and to
be productive at work. To draw a more informed conclusion on
the effect that such a
layout might have at our office, I have gathered and assessed

the quality of available
scientific evidence, outlined key findings, and summarized their
practical implications.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Step 2. Formulating the CAT question: What does the
CAT answer?
You can use a CAT to answer many different types of questions.
For the purposes of this guideline,
we split these into ‘impact’ and ‘non-impact’ questions. This
distinction is not ideal but reflects the
fact that the most common CAT question are about
• the effect an intervention, factor, or independent variable.
• the drivers (antecedents) of a certain outcome.
EXAMPLE 1
What is known in the scientific literature about the impact of
goal setting on the task
performance of sales agents?
EXAMPLE 2

What is known in scientific literature about the impact of
smiling during job interviews:
Do people who smile more have better chances of getting hired?
EXAMPLE 3
What is known in the scientific literature about the impact of
flexible work schedules on
task performance?
EXAMPLE 4
What is known in the scientific literature about the effect of
open-office layouts on
workers’ task performance?
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Non-impact questions
You can, however, use CATs to answer a range of other
questions, which can be grouped as:
• Needs: What do people want or need?
• Attitude: What do people think or feel?

• Experience: What are peoples’ experiences?
• Prevalence: How many / often do people / organizations ...?
• Procedure: How can we implement ...?
• Process: How does it work?
• Exploration: Why does it work?
EXAMPLE
Main question
What is known in the scientific literature about the prevalence
of burnout among
nurses in the US?
Supplementary questions
• What is burnout?
• What are the symptoms of burnout more widely and for nurses
more specifically?
• Are there reliable and valid instruments available to measure
burnout?
PICOC
A PICOC is a mnemonic used to assist reviewers to search for
studies that are relevant to the
professional context described in Step 1 (Background). The
PICOC acronym stands for:

Population Who?
Type of employee, subgroup,
people who may be affected by the
outcome
I ntervention What or How?
Management technique/method,
factor, independent variable
Comparison Compared to what?
Alternative intervention, factor,
variable
Outcome
What are you trying to accomplish /
improve / change?
Purpose, objective, dependent
variable
Context
In what kind of organization /
circumstances?
Type of organization, sector, relevant
contextual factors
CEBMa
center for
Organizations

Each element of the PICOC is vital in focusing the question and
searching effectively for the most
relevant evidence.
EXAMPLE 1
P: physicians
I: 360-degree feedback
C: coaching
O: increased task performance
C: university hospital that has recently undergone significant
organizational
restructuring
EXAMPLE 2
P: software developers
I: agile working
C: business as usual / status quo
O: reduced software development costs
C: large international IT firm in a highly competitive market
In addition, your PICOC will help you to determine whether the
findings of a study will be generalizable
and applicable to your organizational context. More

specifically, your PICOC helps answer the
question of whether your population, outcome of interest, and
organizational characteristics are so
different from those in the study that its results may be difficult
to apply. After all, some psychological
principles are generalizable to all human beings, but sometimes
what works in one narrowly defined
setting might not work in another.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Step 3. Defining inclusion criteria: Which studies will be
taken into account?
One of the features that distinguishes a CAT from a traditional
review is the pre-specification of criteria
for including and excluding studies. The inclusion criteria (also
referred to as eligibility criteria) help the
reviewer(s) to determine whether a study will be included in the
CAT when reviewing its abstract and/
or full text. The inclusion criteria should be guided by your
CAT question and objectives, and by the
outcome measures that you will be considering to answer your
question. They define the studies that
the search strategy is attempting to locate.
EXAMPLE

Inclusion criteria
1. Date: published in the period 1980 to 2016 for meta-analyses
and the period 2000
to 2016 for primary studies
2. Language: articles in English
3. Type of studies: quantitative, empirical studies.
4. Study design: only meta-analyses or controlled studies
5. Measurement: a) studies in which the effect of goal setting on
organizational
outcomes was measured or b) studies in which the effect of
moderators and/or
mediators on the outcome of goal setting was measured.
6. Outcome: task performance
7. Context: studies related to workplace settings.
Exclusion criteria
1. Studies including goal setting as part of health-, lifestyle- or
treatment-related
interventions.
CEBMa
center for

Organizations
Step 4. Search strategy: How should the studies be
sought?
Based on the question, you next have to conduct a structured
search for all relevant studies in the
international research literature. In the first instance, you
should concentrate your search on relevant
bibliographical databases using clearly defined search terms. At
the very least, conduct your search
using ABI/INFORM from ProQuest and Business Source
Premier from EBSCO. Depending on the
CAT question, you may also need to search in databases that are
aimed at neighbouring disciplines
such as psychology (PsycINFO), education (ERIC) or healthcare
(PubMed).
EXAMPLE
The following four databases were used to identify studies:
ABI/INFORM Global and
PsycINFO. The following generic search filters were applied to
all databases during the
search:
1. Scholarly journals, peer-reviewed
2. Published in the period 1980 to 2016 for meta-analyses and
the period 2000 to
2016 for primary studies
3. Articles in English

A search was conducted using combinations of different search
terms, such as ‘job
interview’, ‘employment interview’, ‘selection interview’ and
‘smiling’.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Documentation of the search
It is important that the search conducted is transparent,
verifiable and reproducible. For this reason,
the search process should be clearly documented, preferably in
the form of a table that shows which
search terms were used, how search terms were combined, and
how many studies were found at
every step. An example is provided below.
ABI/Inform Global, PsycINFO
peer reviewed, scholarly journals, July 2016
Search terms ABI PSY
S1: ti(“job interview*”) OR ab(“job interview*”) 76 231
S2: ti(“employment interview*”) OR ab(“employment
interview*”) 122 368

S3: ti(“selection interview*”) OR ab(“selection interview*”) 70
130
S4: S1 OR S2 OR S3 259 583
S5: ti(smil*) OR ab(smil*) 736 2,673
S6: S4 AND S5 7 5
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Step 5. Study selection: How should you select the
studies?
In general, a search will yield a large number of studies –
sometimes more than hundred. Some
studies will not be directly relevant to the research question and
PICOC. Hence, the next step is to
screen them to check that they meet the inclusion criteria.
Screening is usually a two-stage process,
the first involves reviewing the abstracts and the second,
reviewing the full studies.
Review abstracts
This involves reading the abstracts that have been found

through the searching. Each abstract should
be compared against the inclusion criteria and if the abstract
meets the criteria then the full study
should be read. Not all abstracts will contain information on all
the inclusion criteria (this is particularly
a problem with electronic searching). In these cases, decisions
need to be made on whether or not to
include the study on the information available. When in doubt,
the study should be included.
Review full studies
You should read the full article and compare it against the
inclusion criteria.
EXAMPLE
Selection took place in two phases. First, the titles and abstracts
of 83 studies
identified were screened for their relevance to this CAT. In case
of doubt, the study
was included. Duplicate publications were removed. This first
phase yielded 2 meta-
analyses and 12 controlled and/or longitudinal studies.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations

Step 6. Data extraction: What information should be
extracted?
Data extraction involves the collation of the results and other
information of the studies included. From
each study, information relevant to the CAT question, such as
year of publication, research design,
sample size, population (e.g., industry, type of employees),
outcome measures, main findings, effect
sizes, weaknesses, and the final level of trustworthiness (see 7)
should be reported, preferably in the
form of a clearly structured table. An example is provided on
the next page.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
A
u
th
o
r
&

ye
a
r
S
e
c
to
r
/
P
o
p
u
la
ti
o
n
D
e
si
g
n
+
sa
m

p
le
s
iz
e
M
a
in
fi
n
d
in
g
s
E
ff
e
c
t
si
ze
L
im
it
a
ti

o
n
s
L
e
ve
l
A
b
ra
h
am
&
G
ra
h
am
-
R
o
w
e
(2

0
0
9
)
S
ys
te
m
at
ic
re
vi
ew
;
2
/3
R
C
T;
1
/3
q
u
as

i-
ex
p
er
im
en
ta
l
W
o
rk
si
te
;
8
st
u
d
ie
s;
N
=
6

2
4
e
m
p
lo
ye
es
W
o
rk
si
te
p
h
ys
ic
al
a
ct
iv
ity
in
te

rv
en
tio
n
s
w
h
ic
h
in
cl
u
d
e
sp
ec
ifi
c
g
o
al
se
tt
in

g
,
g
o
al
r
ev
ie
w
s
(i.
e.
f
o
llo
w
-u
p
) a
n
d
g
ra
d
ed

t
as
ks
h
av
e
a
sm
al
l,
p
o
si
tiv
e
im
p
ac
t
o
n
fi
tn
es
s-

re
la
te
d
o
u
tc
o
m
es
S
m
al
l
L
im
ite
d
re
le
va
n
ce

t
o
th
e
re
vi
ew
q
u
es
tio
n
A
A
B
an
d
u
ra
&
L

o
ck
e
(2
0
0
3
)
G
en
er
al
p
o
p
u
la
tio
n
Tr
ad
iti
o
n
al

lit
er
at
u
re
r
ev
ie
w
D
is
cu
ss
es
t
h
e
im
p
o
rt
an
ce

o
f
se
lf-
ef
fic
ac
y
fo
r
u
n
d
er
st
an
d
in
g
,
p
re
d
ic
tin

g
an
d
c
h
an
g
in
g
p
eo
p
le
's
p
er
fo
rm
an
ce
o
r
g

o
al
a
tt
ai
n
m
en
t.
S
el
f-
ef
fic
ac
y
is
st
at
ed
t
o
b
e

re
la
te
d
(b
as
ed
o
n
m
et
a-
an
al
yt
ic
al
fi
n
d
in
g
s
fr
o

m
p
re
vi
o
u
s
st
u
d
ie
s)
,
am
o
n
g
o
th
er
s,
t
o
m
o

re
p
ro
ac
tiv
e
(s
el
f-
se
t)
g
o
al
-s
et
tin
g
,
ch
al
le
n
g
in

g
g
o
al
s,
a
n
d
f
as
te
r
g
o
al
a
tt
ai
n
m
en
t,
a
s

w
el
l a
s
ef
fo
rt
a
n
d
p
er
fo
rm
an
ce
.
N
o
e
ffe
ct
s

iz
es
p
ro
vi
d
ed
N
o
s
ys
te
m
at
ic
se
ar
ch
,
n
o
in

fo
rm
at
io
n
re
g
ar
d
in
g
d
es
ig
n
o
f
in
cl
u
d
ed

st
u
d
ie
s
D
B
ro
w
n
,
2
0
0
5
C
an
ad
ia
n
g
o
ve

rn
m
en
t
em
p
lo
ye
es
in
a
t
ra
in
in
g
p
ro
g
ra
m
R

an
d
o
m
iz
ed
co
n
tr
o
lle
d
t
ra
il,
N
=
7
4
,
fie
ld

se
tt
in
g
B
o
th
p
ar
tic
ip
an
ts
w
h
o
w
er
e
u
rg
ed
t
o
d

o
t
h
ei
r
b
es
t
an
d
t
h
o
se
w
h
o
se
t
p
ro
xi
m
al

(s
h
o
rt
er
-t
er
m
) a
s
w
el
l a
s
d
is
ta
l (
=
lo
n
g
er
-t
er

m
) g
o
al
s
h
ad
in
cr
ea
se
d
t
ra
n
sf
er
o
f
tr
ai
n
in
g

(=
m
ai
n
te
n
an
ce
o
f
le
ar
n
ed
m
at
er
ia
l o
ve
r
tim
e
an

d
g
en
er
al
iz
at
io
n
o
f
le
ar
n
ed
m
at
er
ia
l f
ro
m
t
h
e

cl
as
sr
o
o
m
t
o
t
h
e
w
o
rk
p
la
ce
c
o
n
te
xt
) r
el
at

iv
e
to
t
h
o
se
w
h
o
s
et
o
n
ly
d
is
ta
l o
u
tc
o
m
e
g

o
al
s.
T
h
er
e
w
as
n
o
s
ig
n
ifi
ca
n
t
d
iff
er
en
ce
in

t
h
e
tr
an
sf
er
le
ve
l o
f
p
ar
tic
ip
an
ts
u
rg
ed
t
o
d
o

t
h
ei
r
b
es
t
an
d
t
h
o
se
w
h
o
s
et
p
ro
xi
m
al
p
lu

s
d
is
ta
l g
o
al
s.
In
ad
d
iti
o
n
,
th
er
e
w
as
n
o
d
iff

er
en
ce
b
et
w
ee
n
t
h
e
ex
p
er
im
en
ta
l c
o
n
d
iti
o
n

s
re
g
ar
d
in
g
t
h
e
ef
fe
ct
o
n
s
el
f-
ef
fic
ac
y.
T
h
is

s
u
g
g
es
ts
t
h
at
s
u
p
p
o
rt
t
h
e
co
n
cl
u
si
o
n
t

h
at
d
is
ta
l o
u
tc
o
m
e
g
o
al
s
ar
e
n
o
t
ef
fe
ct
iv
e

in
b
rin
g
in
g
a
b
o
u
t
an
in
cr
ea
se
in
t
ra
n
sf
er
w
h

en
p
ar
tic
ip
an
ts
a
re
le
ar
n
in
g
n
ew
s
ki
lls
S
m
al
l
S

h
o
rt
t
im
e
fr
am
e
b
et
w
ee
n
tr
ai
n
in
g
a
n
d
m

ea
su
re
m
en
t
(s
ix
w
ee
ks
)
A
F
u
,
2
0
0
9
In
d
u
st

ria
l s
al
es
p
eo
p
le
B
ef
o
re
a
ft
er
,
w
ith
d
o
u
b
le

p
o
st
-t
es
t
(3
m
o
n
th
s
an
d
6
m
o
n
th
s)
N
=
1
4

3
T
h
e
st
u
d
y
in
d
ic
at
es
f
u
rt
h
er
t
h
at
s
el
f-
se

t
g
o
al
s
fu
lly
m
ed
ia
te
t
h
e
re
la
tio
n
sh
ip
b
et
w
ee
n
a

ss
ig
n
ed
g
o
al
s
an
d
s
el
lin
g
e
ffo
rt
(a
ss
g
o
al
s
im

p
ac
t
ss
g
a
n
d
t
h
en
s
el
lin
g
e
ffo
rt
).
In
a
d
d
iti
o

n
,
th
e
lo
n
g
itu
d
in
al
d
at
a
in
d
ic
at
e
th
at
c
o
m
p

an
y-
as
si
g
n
ed
g
o
al
s,
s
el
f-
se
t
g
o
al
s,
a
n
d
s
el

lin
g
e
ffo
rt
al
l p
o
si
tiv
el
y
in
flu
en
ce
f
u
tu
re
n
ew
p
ro

d
u
ct
s
al
es
,
b
u
t
n
o
t
se
lf-
ef
fic
ac
y
(n
o
t
si
g
n
ifi

ca
n
t)
.
In
te
re
st
in
g
ly
,
th
e
re
su
lts
o
f
th
e
st
u
d
y

fa
il
to
c
o
n
fir
m
a
n
in
ve
rt
ed
,
U
-s
h
ap
ed
r
el
at
io

n
sh
ip
b
et
w
ee
n
a
ss
ig
n
ed
g
o
al
s
an
d
e
ffo
rt
M
o
d

er
at
e
N
o
s
er
io
u
s
lim
ita
tio
n
s
C
S
ch
w
ei
tz
er
et

a
l,
2
0
0
4
U
n
d
er
g
ra
d
u
at
e
st
u
d
ie
s,
U
S
R
C

T,
n
=
1
5
9
R
es
u
lts
o
f
a
la
b
o
ra
to
ry
e
xp
er
im
en
t

u
til
iz
in
g
h
ig
h
,
lo
w
,
in
cr
ea
si
n
g
,
d
ec
re
as
in
g

,
an
d
‘‘
d
o
y
o
u
r
b
es
t’’
g
o
al
s
tr
u
ct
u
re
s
ac

ro
ss
m
u
lti
p
le
r
o
u
n
d
s
p
ro
vi
d
e
ev
id
en
ce
t
h
at

d
ep
le
tio
n
m
ed
ia
te
s
th
e
re
la
tio
n
sh
ip
b
et
w
ee
n
g
o

al
st
ru
ct
u
re
s
an
d
u
n
et
h
ic
al
b
eh
av
io
r,
an
d
t

h
at
t
h
is
e
ffe
ct
is
m
o
d
er
at
ed
b
y
th
e
n
u
m
b
er
o
f

co
n
se
cu
tiv
e
g
o
al
s
as
si
g
n
ed
.
V
er
y
sm
al
l
A
rt
ifi

ci
al
st
u
d
en
ts
A
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
15
Step 7. Critical appraisal: How should the quality of the
studies be judged?
Methodological appropriateness
You can usually find a study to support or refute almost any
theory or claim. It is thus important that
you determine which studies are trustworthy (i.e. valid and
reliable) and which are not. You should
first determine the trustworthiness of a scientific study by its
methodological appropriateness.

For cause-and-effect claims (i.e. if we do A, will it result in
B?), a study has a high methodological
appropriateness when it fulfills the three conditions required for
causal inference: co-variation, time-
order relationship, and elimination of plausible alternative
causes (Shaughnessy & Zechmeister, 2006).
A study that uses a control group, random assignment and a
before-and-after measurement is
therefore regarded as the ‘gold standard’ for effect studies1.
Non-randomized studies and before-after studies come next in
terms of appropriateness. Cross-
sectional studies (surveys) and case studies are regarded as
having the greatest chance of showing
bias in their results and thus fall lower in the ranking of
appropriateness. Systematic reviews or meta-
analyses based on pooled results of randomized controlled
studies are thus regarded as the most
appropriate design.
To determine the methodological appropriateness of effect
studies and impact evaluations, we
recommend using the following six levels of appropriateness,
which are based on the classification
system of Shadish, Cook and Campbell (2002), and Petticrew
and Roberts (2006).
Design Level
Systematic review or meta-analysis of randomized controlled
studies AA
Systematic review or meta-analysis of non-randomized
controlled and/or before-after
studies A

Randomized controlled study
Systematic review or meta-analysis of controlled studies
without a pretest or
uncontrolled study with a pretest
BNon-randomized controlled before-after study
Interrupted time series
Systematic review or meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies
C
Controlled study without a pretest or uncontrolled study with a
pretest
Cross-sectional study (survey) D
Case studies, case reports, traditional literature reviews,
theoretical papers E
1 It should be noted that randomized controlled studies are
often conducted in an artificial (lab-type) setting – with
students
carrying out prescribed work tasks – which may restrict their
generalizability. Non-randomized studies in a field setting –
with employees carrying out their normal tasks within an
organizational setting – on the other hand, have a lower level of
trustworthiness, but can still be useful for management practice.
CEBMa
center for

Organizations
Note, however, that the level of methodological appropriateness
as explained above is only relevant
in assessing the validity of a study that examines a cause-and-
effect relationship that might exist
between an intervention (e.g. performance appraisal) and its
outcomes (e.g performance). When
the CAT question concerns a non-effect or non-impact question,
for example the prevalence of
phenomenon (‘How many / often do people / organizations
...?’), a cross-sectional study may be the
most appropriate design (Petticrew and Roberts, 2003).
EXAMPLE 1
The overall quality of the studies included was high. Of the 4
meta-analyses, 3 included
randomized and/or non-randomized controlled studies and were
therefore qualified
as level A or AA. The remaining meta-analysis was graded as
level C, because it was
insufficiently clear what type of studies were included. The
actual level of evidence of
this meta-analysis (and as result the overall quality of the
studies included in this CAT)
may therefore be higher. All 3 primary studies used a cross-
sectional design and were
therefore graded level D.
EXAMPLE 2

After critical appraisal of the 24 studies, only four studies were
included. Most studies
were excluded because they had serious methodological
shortcomings. One of the
studies included concerned a systematic review, representing
the results of 18 studies.
The overall quality of the included studies, however, was low.
For instance, all but two
of the studies included in the systematic review were self-report
surveys, and due to
heterogeneity between studies it was not possible to calculate a
pooled estimate of
effect. The three single primary studies used a cross-sectional
design. As a result, the
trustworthiness of the scientific evidence supporting the
following main findings is very
limited.
Effect Sizes
An outcome can be statistically significant, but it may not
necessarily be practically relevant. Note
that even a trivial effect can be statistically significant if the
sample size is large. This works the other
way around as well: even a large, practical relevant effect can
be statistically non-significant if the
sample size is small. Also, keep in mind that p-values do NOT
measure the probability that the studied
hypothesis is true, or the probability that the data were
produced by random chance alone (Ziliak,
2016). Nor can a p-value tell you the size of an effect, the
strength of the evidence or the importance
of a result.
For this reason, you should pay little attention to the p-value
but instead assess the ‘effect size’ – a

standard measure of the magnitude of the effect – of the studies
included when addressing impact
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
questions. To determine the magnitude of an effect, apply
Cohen’s rules of thumb (Cohen, 1988; see
below). According to Cohen a ‘small’ effect is an effect that is
only visible through careful examination.
A ‘medium’ effect, however, is one that is ‘visible to the naked
eye of the careful observer’. Finally, a
‘large’ effect is one that anybody can easily see because it is
substantial.
Effect size Small Medium Large
Standardized mean difference: d, ∆, g ≤ .20 .50 ≥ .80
Correlation: r, ρ ≤ .10 .30 ≥ .50
Correlation: r2 ≤ .01 .09 ≥ .25
ANOVA: η2, ω2 ≤ .01 .06 ≥ .14
Chi-square: ω2 ≤ .10 .30 ≥ .50

Simple regression: β ≤ .10 .30 ≥ .50
Multiple regression: β ≤ .20 .50 ≥ .80
Multiple regression: R2 ≤ .02 .13 ≥ .26
Note, however, that Cohen’s rules of thumb were meant to be
exactly that - ‘rules of thumb’ - and
are for many reasons arbitrary (Cooper & Lindsay, 1998). For
example, a standard mean difference
of .20 may be regarded as ‘small’ when the outcome concerns
job satisfaction but ‘large’ when the
outcome concerns fatal medical errors. When assessing impact,
it is therefore important to relate the
effect size directly to the outcome that was measured.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Step 8. Results: What did you find?
Step 8.1. Definition: What is meant by X?
Most CAT questions include one or more key elements /
constructs, for which several definitions are
available. In this step, you should provide an overview of the
most common definition(s).

EXAMPLE 1
An incentive is commonly defined as “something that arouses
action or activity” (http://
www.merriam-webster.com). In the domain of management,
incentives can be defined
as “…plans that have predetermined criteria and standards, as
well as understood
policies for determining and allocating rewards” (Doe, 2011, p.
219). Incentives include
all forms of rewards (and punishments) that are based on an
employee’s performance
or behavior. Promotions, grades, awards, praise, and recognition
are therefore all
incentives. However, financial incentives such as money, bonus
plans, or stock options
are the most commonly used (Doe, 2014). Formally, incentives
differ from rewards.
Incentives refer to all stimuli that are provided in advance,
whereas rewards are offered
after a given performance (Doe, 2014). In the scientific
literature and management
practice, however, these terms are used interchangeably.
EXAMPLE 2
A smile is defined as a pleased, kind, or amused expression,
typically with the corners
of the mouth turned up and the front teeth exposed. A neutral
expression is a blank
facial expression characterized by neutral positioning of the
facial features, implying a
lack of strong emotion.
EXAMPLE 3

The concept of self-managing teams is referred to in various
ways, using terms such
as ‘autonomous groups’, ‘shared’ or ‘self-directed teams’; all of
these terms refer
to teams that are hallmarked by autonomy. We use the term
‘self-managing teams’
to cover all of the different descriptions of this concept. Doe et
al (2012) refer to the
standard definition of autonomous groups as “groups
responsible for a complete
product or service, or a major part of a production process.
They control members’
task behavior and make decisions about task assignment and
work methods” (Doe,
2005: p. 341).
http://www.merriam-webster.com
http://www.merriam-webster.com
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Step 8.2. Causal mechanism: How is X assumed to have an
effect
on Y?
A causal mechanism spells out the process by which an
intervention, construct or phenomenon is

expected to have an effect on a certain outcome. The causal
mechanism is often based on one or
more (social or psychological) theories that explain why the
assumed effect occurs and under which
circumstances.
EXAMPLE 1
As Doe et al. describe, the presumed causal mechanism behind
open-plan offices
works as follows:
• Breaking down physical office barriers increases one’s
exposure to teammates
• Increased exposure facilitates communication among
teammates
• Facilitated communication increases collaboration
• Increased collaboration increases overall productivity and
performance
However, one can also presume that increased exposure to
teammates might also
cause increases in visual and auditory distractions,
counteracting positive benefits to
some degree.
EXAMPLE 2
The construct of perceived supervisory support stems from the
norm of reciprocity,
which states that people treat others as they would like to be
treated, repaying
kindness with kindness and retaliating against those who inflict

harm (Doe et al.,
2013; Doe, 1960). Put differently, when a manager helps his or
her employees in
times of need or recognizes their extra effort, the employees
will feel inclined to act to
benefit that manager (e.g., by meeting goals and objectives) and
thus the organization
as a whole (Doe, 2013; Doe et al, 1986). Not surprisingly,
physicians experiencing
inadequate supervisory support tend to describe their
commitment to the hospital and
its patients in negative terms, which in turn negatively affects
their performance (Doe et
al, 2013).
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Step 8.3. Main findings
In this section, you should provide an overview of the main
findings relevant to the CAT question. For
each finding, you should present the main evidence from the
CAT, including its level of trustworthiness
and (if available) effect size.
EXAMPLE 1

Smiling is weakly correlated with job interview success (level
D)
Putting on a smile may be advantageous by comparison with
remaining neutral, which
may be seen as reflecting a lack of interest or involvement. But
there are other factors
at play too during the interview and just smiling is weakly
correlated to success (Doe et
al, 2009).
EXAMPLE 2
Overall, financial incentives have a moderate positive effect on
performance (level A)
There is strong evidence that financial incentives tend to have a
moderate positive
effect on performance (Doe, et al., 2014; Doe & Doe, 2014;
Doe, et al., 2010). This
positive effect is often referred to as the ‘price effect’: the
financial incentive increases
the intention to perform well because of the monetary benefit.
However, this effect
differs between forms of incentives, types of motivation, and
performance outcomes,
as described in the following findings. Moreover, when
financial incentives are high they
can hamper performance by interfering with learning and
promoting inappropriate risk
taking (Doe et al., 2009).
EXAMPLE 3
When employees must first acquire requisite knowledge or

skills to perform the task,
specific and challenging goals can have a large negative effect
on performance
(level A)
Several randomized controlled studies have demonstrated that
when a task requires
the acquisition of knowledge before it can be performed
effectively, a general goal
(e.g. ‘do your best’) leads to higher performance than a specific
high goal (Doe & Doe,
1989; Doe, 1995). In fact, when knowledge acquisition is
necessary for effectively
performing a task, setting a specific but extremely high
performance goal can lead
people to ruminate on the potential negative consequences of
failure rather than focus
on task-relevant ways to attain the goal (Doe et al, 2002).
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
EXAMPLE 4
Arousing fear leads employees to engage in short-term thinking
(level B)

Fear can be aroused in people with a specific goal in mind; to
take preventive
measures, or to stimulate proactive behavior. However, there is
strong evidence
indicating that fear (e.g. job insecurity) tends to lead people to
engage in short-term
thinking, narrowing their attention to immediate consequences
(Doe, 1999).
EXAMPLE 5
The outcome of the managers’ own performance appraisal has a
large effect on how
they evaluate their employees (level A)
A combination of studies (including a randomized controlled
study) demonstrated that
managers who receive positive feedback about their
performance subsequently rate
their employee higher than managers who receive negative
feedback regarding their
own performance (Doe, 2008). Surprisingly, this effect even
occurred when managers
knew their own evaluation was bogus.
EXAMPLE 6
Managers’ power level has a large to moderate effect on how
they rate both others
and themselves (level A)
A meta-analysis of 46 studies indicates that as a manager’s
power level grows, his/her
evaluation of others becomes increasingly negative, whereas
evaluations of him/herself
become ever more positive (Doe & Doe, 1998). This finding

suggests that performance
evaluations by supervisors should be considered in light of their
hierarchical position
and power level.
EXAMPLE 7
Managing the customer experience may have a moderate
positive effect on a
company’s financial performance (level D)
Findings from cross-sectional studies suggest that proactive
customer experience
management (CEM), such as customer touch points, customer
focus, goals for
customer experiences, customer insight, employee recruitment
and training, etc., may
have a positive effect on a company’s financial performance
(Doe, 2015).
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Step 9. Conclusion
You should make the conclusion of your CAT a concise
statement (of two or three sentences) on the
main findings on the CAT question.

EXAMPLE 1
Scientific research literature supports my assumption that a fair
change process
is important to realizing successful change, given the moderate
positive effect of
procedural justice on organizational outcomes. Although the
effects are mostly small
to medium, the indications are that there is indeed a positive
relationship between
procedural justice and acceptance, commitment and behavior
during organizational
change.
EXAMPLE 2
We can conclude that financial incentives can have a positive
impact on performance,
also known as the ‘price effect’. However, financial incentives
also have a negative
impact on the intrinsic motivation of employees, which is
known as the ‘crowding-
out’ effect. The net result of these two opposing effects
determines a possible gain or
loss in performance. In addition, the net effect is influenced by
several mediating and
moderating variables.
EXAMPLE 3
Goal-setting is one of the most powerful and evidence-based
interventions for
enhancing performance, provided that moderating factors such
as goal attribute, type
of task, organizational context and employee characteristics are

carefully taken into
account.
EXAMPLE 4
The scientific literature does not support the claim that
organizational change requires
leaders with strong emotional intelligence.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
EXAMPLE 5
While I was unable to derive a direct cause-effect relationship
based on this CAT, we
can observe general trends that can inform practice. For
example, taking proactive
action to meet the needs of volunteers is likely to improve their
well-being, foment
loyalty among volunteer corps, and tend to improve the work of
nonprofit and
voluntary organizations. However, the studies are too limited
and flawed to recommend
wholesale changes across the nonprofit sector, but their
conclusions can at least
prompt some internal assessment for the nonprofit manager

considering further
investment in a volunteer program.
EXAMPLE 6
Corporate social responsibility has been shown to have a
positive correlation
with corporate financial performance as defined by both
accounting and market
performance. That being said, causality has yet to be proven.
There is a bi-directional
correlation between the two variables, meaning that financial
performance is correlated
with social performance and vice versa. Furthermore, while firm
size and year of
observation have been shown not to have an effect on the CSP-
CFP relationship,
other confounding variables such as national culture, research
methodology, and types
of interventions may still effect the observed correlation.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Step 10. Limitations
In a CAT you are aiming to provide a balanced assessment of
what is known (and not known) in the

scientific literature about an intervention or practical issue by
using a systematic methodology to
search and critically appraise empirical studies. Nevertheless,
all CAT have limitations. In your CAT you
should explicitly describe any limitations and discuss how they
possibly impacted the findings of the
assessment. Below is an example of a description of limitations
that are inherent to CATs.
EXAMPLE
Concessions were made in relation to the breadth and depth of
the search process. As
a consequence, some relevant studies may have been missed.
A second limitation concerns the critical appraisal of the studies
included. This CAT
did not conduct a comprehensive review of the psychometric
properties of the tests,
scales and questionnaires used.
A third limitation concerns the fact that the evidence on several
moderators is often
based on a limited number (sometimes only one) of studies.
Although most of these
studies were well controlled or even randomized, no single
study can be considered to
be strong evidence – it is merely indicative.
Finally, this CAT focused only on meta-analyses. As a
consequence, relevant findings
may have been missed.
Given these limitations, care must be taken not to present the
findings presented in a
CAT as conclusive.

CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Step 11. Implications and recommendations
Once you have used the evidence found to answer the CAT’s
main question, you should use the final
part of the assessment to relate the findings to the background
of the CAT and the PICOC described
in step 1 and 2. For example: Is the evidence supportive of
current practice? What are the estimated
benefits and harms? What, based on the evidence found, are
your specific recommendations for
action? Importantly, how might you consider the concerns and
interests of different organizational
stakeholders in your recommendations?
EXAMPLE 1
The fair process effect in organizations is observed when
change leaders increase
aspects of their decision-making process, specifically
consistency, accuracy, lack
of bias, and openness to employee input. When procedural
justice is not taken into
account, employees may feel treated unfairly and resistance to
change may increase.

To actively design a fair change process, the six classic criteria
for procedural justice
specified by Doe (1980) may serve as a useful checklist. These
criteria can be
turned into practical guidelines for the purpose of
organizational change as follows:
(a) the change approach needs to be consistently applied to all
employees at all
times; (b) it needs to be impartial, i.e. prejudice or stereotyping
are eliminated; (c) the
information on which decisions are based needs to be accurate;
(d) opportunities
should be provided to correct or change plans or processes; (e)
those responsible for
the organizational change (the change managers or leaders) need
to represent the
interests of all stakeholders affected by the change; and (f) the
ethical standards and
values of those involved should never be disregarded.
EXAMPLE 2
Financial incentives can be used to increase the employee
motivation and performance
needed to support change. However, upper management should
have a clear vision
about the change in performance or behavior that it desires, as it
requires different
approaches to incentivizing. Intrinsically motivated employees
executing interesting
tasks and quality outcomes should be encouraged by indirect
incentives (e.g.,
opportunities to do valued activities) in order to avoid eroding
that motivation. Direct
financial incentives are effective when extrinsic motivation and
quantitative performance

need to be stimulated. Upper management should therefore
frequently ‘calculate’ the
proposed net effect (positive price effect versus negative
crowding-out effect) when
defining a pay plan. Lastly, if the plan is designed to increase
team performance, all
incentives should not be distributed equally, as this may harm
individual motivation.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
EXAMPLE 3
The continuation of the client’s mentoring program should be
seriously weighed
at this time, given the evidence that (a) the effect of youth
mentoring on academic
outcomes is small and (b) fidelity to matching relationships and
sustaining them over
the long term may provide greater benefit. Given that the
organization’s program is
school-based and effective long-term mentors are challenging to
recruit and retain,
the organization may want to consider suspending its mentor
program. Given that the
organization’s staff is overextended and that budget allocations

across programs are
at-risk, I would recommend that mentoring activities be
suspended at the end of the
school year.
EXAMPLE 5
This CAT demonstrates that Emotional Intelligence (EI) is not a
radical new construct
in leadership. Even though EI has (some) positive effects, these
effects can also be
explained by the overlap with other psychological constructs. In
addition, the claims
made by well-known consultancy firms such as Hay Group that
“EI can make the
difference between a highly effective and an average
professional contributor” is not
supported by the outcome of this CAT. For this reason, I advise
against investing in
training courses that claim to develop our executives’ EI.
EXAMPLE 4
Since the research evidence does not provide us with a decisive
answer to the
question whether self-managing teams perform better, no clear
recommendations for
practice can be given on whether our organization should
implement self-managing
teams. Neither can it be determined whether self-managing
teams will help our
organization to change more successfully. Instead, we suggest
that our organization
should be extra careful about implementing self-managing
teams when the divisions
involved have high levels of hierarchy, centralized decision

making or bureaucratic
formalization. Divisions characterized by high-tech novelty and
radical innovation,
however, do not need to be as cautious in implementing self-
managing teams. The
latter do need to be aware of the potential for conflict within
their teams and the
negative impact that this could have on team performance. The
available knowledge
on these contextual factors is still limited due to the current
embryonic state of
research evidence on this subject. Any introduction of self-
managing teams should
therefore be considered carefully.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
EXAMPLE 6
Over the last 20 years, there has been a huge increase in
consumer awareness,
tighter environmental regulations, and a shift towards more
environmentally friendly
business practices. This review demonstrates that corporate
social responsibility (CSR)
strategies are both required to mitigate environmental and

regulatory risk and correlate
with higher financial performance. This relationship is
recognized regardless of industry,
firm size, or the year of study. Therefore, I would recommend
that managers explore
and assess opportunities to unlock value from CSR strategies
throughout business
operations.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
28
Checklist
1. Have you clearly described the background and context of the
CAT question?
2. Does the CAT address a clearly focused question? Is it clear
what the CAT will answer?
3. Have you used the PICOC framework to focus the CAT
question?
4. Have you clearly defined the inclusion criteria (e.g.
population, outcomes of interest, study design)?
5. Have you conducted a comprehensive literature search using

relevant research databases
(i.e. ABI/INFORM, Business Source Premier, PsycINFO, Web
of Science, etc.)?
6. Is the search systematic and reproducible (e.g. were searched
information sources listed, were
search terms provided, were search results reported)?
7. Have you selected the studies using explicit inclusion and
exclusion criteria?
8. Have you clearly described the key features (year of
publication, population, sample size, study
design, outcome measures, effect sizes, limitations, level of
trustworthiness) of all studies included?
9. Have you assessed the methodological appropriateness of
each study using predetermined
quality criteria?
10. Have you provided definitions of the key
elements/constructs in the CAT question?
11. Have you clearly described the assumed causal mechanism?
12. Have you provided an overview with the main findings,
including their level of trustworthiness and
effect size?
13. Have you provided a clear, succinct conclusion on the main
findings on the CAT question?
14. Have you clearly described all limitations and discussed
how they may impact on the findings of
the CAT?

15. Have you clearly described what the implications for
practice are?
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
References
Antman, E. M. (1992). A comparison of results of meta-
analyses of randomized controlled trials and
recommendations of clinical experts. Journal of the American
Medical Association, 286(2), pp. 240-
248.
Ariely, D., Gneezy, U., Loewenstein, G., & Mazar, N. (2009).
Large stakes and big mistakes. The
Review of Economic Studies, 76(2), 451-469.
Bushman, B., & Wells, G. (2001). Narrative impressions of
literature: The availability bias and
corrective properties of meta-analytic approaches. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(9),
1123-1130.
Chalmers, I., Enkin, M., & Keirse, M. (1993). Preparing and
updating systematic reviews of
randomized controlled trials of health care. Millbank Quarterly
(71), 411-437.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral
sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Cooper, H. M., & Lindsay, J. L. L. (1998). Research synthesis
and meta-analysis. p. 271-285. Sage
Publications.
Denyer, D (2014) The stages of a systematic review. Retrieved
from http://www.restore.ac.uk/
logicofenquiry/logicofenquiry/gst/SR/stages/Pages/default.html
Fink, A. (1998). Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From
Paper to the Internet. London:
Sage Publications.
Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (Eds.). (2012). An
introduction to systematic reviews. Sage.
Government Social Research Service (2009) GSR rapid
evidence assessment toolkit (Online), www.
civilservice.gov.uk/my-civil-
service/networks/professional/gsr/resources/gsr-rapid-evidence-
assessment-toolkit.aspx
Hallgren, K. A. (2012). Computing inter-rater reliability for
observational data: an overview and tutorial.
Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology, 8(1), 23.
Higgins, J., & Green, S. (Eds.). (2006). Cochrane Handbook for
Systematic Reviews of Interventions
(Vol. Version 5.1.0. (updated March 2011)). Chichester, UK:
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009).

Preferred reporting items for systematic
reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of
internal medicine, 151(4), 264-269.
Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Altman, D. G. (2001). The
CONSORT statement: revised recommendations
for improving the quality of reports of parallel group
randomized trials. BMC Medical Research
Methodology, 1(1)
Newman M, Elbourne D (2005) Improving the usability of
educational research: guidelines for the
reporting of primary empirical research Studies in Education
(the REPOSE guidelines). Evaluation and
Research in Education 18 (4), 201-212.
Petticrew, M. (2001). Systematic reviews from astronomy to
zoology: myths and misconceptions.
British Medical Journal, 322(January), 98-101.
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2008). Systematic reviews in the
social sciences: A practical guide.
John Wiley & Sons.
Shadish, W., Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (2002). Experimental
and Quasi-Experimental Designs for
Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Company.
Ziliak, S. (2016). Statisticians Found One Thing They Can
Agree On: It's Time To Stop Misusing
P-Values. Retrieved January 04, 2017, from
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/statisticians-found-
one-thing-they-can-agree-on-its-time-to-stop-misusing-p-values/
http://www.restore.ac.uk/logicofenquiry/logicofenquiry/gst/SR/s

tages/Pages/default.html
http://www.restore.ac.uk/logicofenquiry/logicofenquiry/gst/SR/s
tages/Pages/default.html
CEBMa
center for
Organizations
Appendix: Summarizing scientific literature
Evidence summaries come in many forms. One of the best-
known types is the conventional literature
review, which provides an overview of the relevant literature
published on a topic. However, a
conventional literature review’s trustworthiness is often low:
clear criteria for inclusion are often lacking
(including whether cited work is peer reviewed), studies are
selected based on the researcher’s
individual preferences, and the research methodology is
generally not subjected to a critical appraisal
(Antman, 1992; Bushman & Wells, 2001; Chalmers, Enkin, &
Keirse, 1993; Fink, 1998). As a result,
most conventional literature reviews are prone to severe bias
and are therefore largely considered
untrustworthy as an answer to questions relevant to practice.
For this reason, many evidence-based
disciplines use so-called ‘systematic reviews’ instead. This type
of review is a specific methodology
that aims to comprehensively identify all relevant studies on a
specific topic, and to select appropriate

studies based on explicit criteria. In addition, the
methodological quality of the studies included is
assessed by on the basis of explicit criteria, such as the
presence of a pre-test or a control group
(Higgins & Green, 2006; Petticrew & Roberts, 2006). In
contrast to a conventional literature review,
a systematic review (SR) is transparent, verifiable, and
reproducible, and, as a result, the likelihood
of bias is considerably smaller. Many SRs also include a meta-
analysis, in which statistical analysis
techniques are used to combine the results of individual studies
to arrive at a more accurate estimate
of effects 2.
Although the SR methodology was originally developed in the
field of medicine, its added value
is evident in disciplines such as nursing, education, policing,
criminology, public policy, and
management (Petticrew, 2001). In disciplines in which
evidence-based practice is well established,
SRs are provided by global communities such as the Cochrane
and Campbell collaborations, and
by organizations such as the EPPI Centre. In management,
however, the SR methodology is not yet
widely adopted, and systematic reviews are consequently
scarce.
Rapid Evidence Assessments (REAs) and Critically Appraised
Topics (CATs) are two other types of
evidence summaries that can inform practice. Both apply the
same systematic approach to selecting
the studies – the methodological quality and practical relevance
of the studies are assessed based
on explicit criteria; thus, summaries are transparent, verifiable
and reproducible. The main way in
which these three types of summaries vary is in relation to the

time and resources used to produce
them and the scope and depth of the results produced. CATs are
the quickest to produce and may
take one skilled person a few days to produce. REAs might take
two skilled persons several days to
weeks. A SR usually takes a team of academics several months
to produce, as it aims to identify all
published and unpublished relevant studies (see table on the
next page).
In general, an organization will not have time or financial
means to hire a team to conduct a SR on a
managerial topic of interest. A CAT, on the other hand, may be
a good way to get a quick impression
of the available scientific evidence regarding the effect of a
specific intervention, but it may be lacking
rigor. As a result of these practical limitations, an REA is the
most widely used method of reviewing
the scientific literature within Evidence-Based Management.
2 The difference between a systematic review and a meta-
analysis is not always clear. Many studies defined as systematic
reviews include a meta-analysis aggregating statistical effects;
conversely, studies defined as meta-analyses often include
a systematic review of the literature.
CEBMa
center for
Organizations

Quality criteria SR REA CAT LR
The search for studies is systematic and reproducible 4 4 4 7
All relevant research databases are searched 4 4 7 7
Attempts are made to locate unpublished research 4 4/7 7 7
Studies are selected based on explicit inclusion and exclusion
criteria 4 4 4 7
The study selection is conducted by two reviewers,
independently
of each other 4 4 7 7
The selection process is clearly documented, for example, in the
form of a flow chart that shows how many studies are excluded
and why
4 4 7 7
The process to extract data are clearly defined and is presented
in a table 4 4 7 7
The methodological appropriateness of each study included is
appraised using predetermined quality criteria 4 4 4 7
The methodological quality of each study included is appraised
using predetermined quality criteria 4 4 7 7
The appraisal of the methodological quality is conducted by two
reviewers, independently of each other 4 4/7 7 7
The practical and methodological heterogeneity of the studies is

assessed. 4 4 7 7
The statistical heterogeneity of the studies is assessed. 4 7 7 7
Statistical analysis techniques (meta-analyses) are used to
combine the results of individual studies to arrive at a more
accurate estimate of effects
4/7 7 7 7
CEBMa
center for
Center for Evidence Based Management
www.cebma.org
Amsterdam
Critically Appraised TopicsSteps in the CAT processStep 1.
Background: What is the context of the CAT
questionStep 2. Formulating the CAT question: What
does the CAT answer?Step 3. Defining
inclusion criteria: Which studies will be taken into
account?Step 4. Search strategy: How should the studies be
sought?Step 5. Study selection: How should you
select the studies?Step 6. Data extraction:
What information should be extracted?Step 7.
Critical appraisal: How should the quality of the
studies be judged?Step 8. Results: What did you
find?Step 9. ConclusionStep 10. LimitationsStep 12.

Implications and
recommendationsChecklistReferencesAppendix: Summarizing
scientific literature
Button 3: Button 2: Page 2: Page 31: Page 42: Page 53: Page 64:
Page 75: Page 86: Page 97: Page 108: Page 119: Page 1210:
Page 1311: Page 1412: Page 1513: Page 1614: Page 1715: Page
1816: Page 1917: Page 2018: Page 2119: Page 2220: Page 2321:
Page 2422: Page 2523: Page 2624: Page 2725: Page 2826: Page
2927: Page 3028: Page 3129: Button 4:
COMMUNICATION
Dr. Patrick L’Espoir Decosta
Individual Assignment: (Individual mini Critical Appraisal of a
Topic)
1
IMPORTANT DATES FOR ASSESSMENT TASK 3
Words: 1000 to 1500 words (excluding references)
Work approach: By group for discussion about claims in
marketing and stakeholder
communication and consumer behavior in general
Due Date to submit list of claims on Wattle: Thursday
15.08.2019 at 23.45(Week 4)
Work submission: by individual members
Due Date (formative) of individual outline: Thursday
30.08.2019 at 23.45 (Week 6)

Due Date (Summative) of individual final mini- CAT: Saturday
18.10.2019 (Week11)
A. Overview of the Individual Critical Appraisal of a Topic
(mini-CAT)
N.B. This is NOT a (Big) CAT (Refer to CEBMa’s Guideline
for Critically Appraised Topics
(CAT) in Management and Organizations available in
ASSESSMENTS toggle in your Wattle
course site)
This mini-CAT is adapted from the official CEBMa Guideline
for Critically Appraised Topics
(CAT) in Management and Organizations and is therefore a
diluted version of the CAT but with
the hope of raising awareness among students of the necessity
to critically assess the quality of
the evidence or claim that they are supposed to accept without
any question.
The goal of the mini-CAT is to help you learn the steps
involved in assessing “what is known
about” an intervention, a phenomenon, problematic, claim or
practical issue in scientific
literature by using a systematic methodology to “search” for
primary studies in Marketing,
Consumer Behaviour and Stakeholder Communication, and
“critically appraise” them.
In other words, the mini-CAT assessment wants you to explore
and analyze the current state
of the debate [on the practical issue, problematic, intervention,

claim or phenomenon] based on
appropriate, deep and comprehensive SEARCH.
Indeed, this is the opportunity when you will put into practice
your database and library search
skills honed in your EBM course.
COMMUNICATION
Topic)
2
Learning outcomes of the mini-CAT
1. Identify the problem explicated or implicated in the
statement/claim provided – tip: look
for claims that are often offshoots or oversimplification of
theoretical explanations
2. Apply the principles of evidence-based management as
provided in section C below
3. Explore the current state of the debate on the question/ claim
at hand
4. Show that you indeed know how to search databases for the
right data and information
relevant to the mini-CAT question – you may consider looking

for meta-analysesi,
systematic reviews and/or controlled studies
5. Select the information and evidence that you think are
relevant to the mini-CAT question
6. Extract information and evidence relevant to the mini-CAT
question based on year,
population, sector, sample size, main findings, and effect size
7. Assess the trustworthiness of the information and evidence
(are they reliable and valid?)
8. Critically analyze the information and evidence collected in
view of the mini-CAT
question
9. Synthesize the findings of the mini-CAT in a concise
statement of a few sentences
10. Reflect on the findings to highlight the limitations of the
mini-CAT, the implications for
current practice
11. Propose specific recommendations for actions towards the
claim based on the findings
from the evidence presented in the mini-CAT
For this mini-CAT, you will be required to provide a statement
that will require that (i) you go
beyond “cause and effect” to (ii) effectively look at how often
[frequency/prevalence] the issue
at hand as set in the statement or question has been tackled in
scientific literature, (iii) at whether
what you found in the scientific literature is evidence good
enough for marketing practitioners to
rely on them in making future decision related to their

professional domains, and (iv) you turn
into (formulate) an appropriate CAT question related here to
procedure, prevalence (frequency),
process and procedure.
B. The statement for the mini-CAT – Formulate your own
research question
With your group members come up with at least one claim or
statement per member in any area
of interest to you in the Marketing domain. The statement or
claim should be clear, simple and
reflective of common knowledge, belief or attitude in
Marketing. Group members should help
each other write the claims/statements after thorough
discussions within the group.
Example
Below is an example of a claim or statement on the
effectiveness of tourism policy making
(based on theoretical knowledge in the domain)
COMMUNICATION
Topic)
3

“For tourism policy to be effective at a destination, there
requires a carefully developed strategic
sustainable tourism planning process which requires the
involvement of all stakeholders at
national, regional and international levels.”
A CAT of the above statement would require that I
1. Use the steps of the mini-CAT as described below to
2. Write an analytical essay that
3. Discusses (using critical and analytical thinking) whether the
above statement is correct,
to eventually
4. Synthesize (conclude and reflect) my findings based on
evidence in the scientific
literature about whether what is spelled out in a tourism plan is
effectively integrated
and implemented in tourism policy.
C. Steps when writing the mini-CAT (1 to 9) or (1 to 11):
1. Ascertain the requirement or goal of the mini-CAT question –
provide in the
Introduction a background that explains the rationale for the
mini-CAT (why you are
doing a mini-CAT), for the problem it is identifying, and for
why the question being
asked is important. In this case, you will have to come up with
the question that
according to you reflects the mini-CAT. Specify the rationale
for the mini-CAT by

addressing the context (in the example I use: tourism sector,
planning function at
destination, policy function at different levels, characteristics of
these two functions), the
elements/factors involved and relevant to the problem at hand. [
In my example
, it would
be important that I “reflect” on how these contextual elements
together with the
stakeholders at the different levels can provide deeper insights
in the issues suggested by
the min-CAT.] If necessary, you may develop supplementary
questions to help you
answer the main question of the mini-CAT.
2. Search for studies relevant to the professional context of the
question (In my example:
destination management? levels of planning?) as a way to focus
the question and to
effectively search for the most relevant evidence. As a reviewer,
ask pertinent and
relevant questions to search for studies that are relevant to the
context described in the
background/introduction. Questions may include the following:
a. Who may be affected by the outcome of this mini-CAT? [
In my example:
Planners? Policy-makers? Managers at destinations?
Destinations? Tourists?
Governmental departments? Regional organizations?
Supranational

organizations? Hotels? Attractions?]
b. What type of alignment and integration among the articles –
in relation to the
claim - are you looking for here? Are these articles talking of
marketing
management techniques, methods that are holistic, sustainable
and address
somehow either integrally or peripherally the claim you put
forth? What are the
articles about when you try to link and connect them with the
claim? Etc.
COMMUNICATION
Topic)
4
c. Are there articles out there that consider comparable issues,
problems or systems
and phenomena related to the claim? How different are they?
How would you
qualify or characterize the differences? Are they at the level of
premises,
rationale, theory, method, analytical frames, etc.?
d. What are the articles trying to accomplish, improve or
change? Are their purpose
and objectives in line with the outcome they were set to
achieve? Are the results

in the articles showing dissonance? Are they cognizant of the
limitations of the
research/study they are presenting?
e. In which kind of organizations or circumstances are these
studies being carried
out? Are the units of analysis individuals, companies,
institutions, governments,
celebrities, brands, products, product lines, etc.?
Tackling the above questions will also help you determine
whether the findings of a study
will be generalizable and applicable in the context of your mini-
CAT. In effect, the
questions will help answer the question of whether the
Population, type of Intervention,
Comparison, Outcome, andContext (PICOC) of interest to the
mini-CAT (identified in
the lists of questions) are so different from the ones in the
studies that come out of your
search that their results may be difficult to apply and integrate
in your answer.
3. Define the criteria you will use to identify studies you will
include in your mini-
CAT. In other words, pre-specify the criteria for including and
excluding studies. You
will use these criteria when reviewing the abstracts and/or
section and/or full text of those
studies that come out of your search. The criteria for inclusion
should be guided by your
mini-CAT question and objectives. The criteria define the
studies that the search strategy
is attempting to locate. Examples of inclusion criteria:

a. Date – period of publication of types of articles you are
looking for
b. Language – all articles in English only and other languages if
you can speak and
write them
c. Type of studies you are looking for: empirical studies?
Quantitative studies?
Qualitative studies? Mixed-method studies? [remember – what
is your research
question?]
d. Study design: What types of study design do you intend
include in your search of
scientific articles?
i. Systematic reviews or meta-analysis
ii. Cross sectional studies (surveys) with frequency
iii. Case studies, case reports, traditional literature reviews,
theoretical papers
e. Measurement: what did the studies use as measures? Effects?
Presence or absence
of processes? Frequency? Correlations?
f. Outcome: alignment, integration, implementation, dissonance,
inefficiency,
g. Context: consumption, market, segmentation, international
marketing, social
media, mobile marketing, digital marketing, generational
demand, etc.
4. Conduct a structured and transparent search for all relevant
studies in the

international research literature using tourism and business
related databases at the
university. I am arranging for a library to come present a
session of information on how
COMMUNICATION
Topic)
5
to search the library databases for the information you require.
This will be a skill that is
lifelong and that you will use throughout your studies and later
on in life.
5. Apply the following generic search filters to all databases
during your search:
a. Scholarly journals that are peer reviewed
b. Published in the period 1980 to 2017 for meta-analyses and
the period 2000 to
2019 for primary studies
c. Articles in English
d. Combine different search terms, such as “social marketing”
“integrated marketing
communication,” “consumer research” etc.
Remember to make the search you have conducted transparent,
verifiable and

reproducible. In other words, document the search process
preferably in the form of a
table that shows which search terms were used, how search
terms were combined, and
how many studies were found at each and every step. See page
11 of CEBMA’s
guideline to the CAT.
6. Select the studies from the large number of studies your
search would yield by
screening them to check that they meet the inclusion criteria as
defined in step 3 above.
Screening is done in two stages:
a. Review the abstracts - read the abstracts found through the
searching. Compare
each abstract against the inclusion criteria and if the abstract
meets the criteria
then the full study should be read.
b. Review full studies – Skim through the main sections of the
full article to
compare against the inclusion criteria
7. Extract data and information of the studies you will include
in your mini-CAT by
collating the results and other information of the studies
included. From each study,
information relevant to the CAT question, such as year of
publication, research design,
sample size, population (e.g. industry, sector, type marketing or
advertising activity,
levels of organizations, etc.), outcome measures, main findings,

effect sizes, weaknesses
and the final level of trustworthiness (see step 7 below) should
be reported, preferably in
the form of a clearly structured table (See example in CEBMA’s
guideline for the CAT
on p. 14).
8. Critically appraise the studies you have included in your
mini-CAT by determining
whether they are trustworthy (i.e. valid and reliable) or not and
rank their level of
appropriateness. Simply put, at this stage you need to judge the
methodological
appropriateness. Unlike the CAT’s classification of articles
which is based on
determining the methodological appropriateness of effect
studies and impact evaluations
(see p. 15 in CEBMA’s guideline for the CAT), the mini-CAT
question in this
assignment does not necessarily examine cause-and-effect
relationship but rather a non-
effect or non-impact question related to the prevalence or
frequency of phenomenon (how
many/how often do people/organizations…?). To that effect, a
cross sectional study may
COMMUNICATION
Topic)
6

be the most appropriate study design (Petticrew and Roberts,
2003). In other words, just
the research design (and not the statistical jumbo mambo)
should give you an idea of the
quality of the studies for which you are looking. You will need
to demonstrate critical
and analytical appreciation of the study designs you found in
meta-analyses, critical
reviews and journal articles, methods used, samples, and
frequency measurement (%, no.
of times, averages, etc.)
9. Provide an overview of the (list of) main findings relevant to
the requirements of the
mini-CAT question by
a. providing an overview of the most common definition(s),
b. Presenting the main evidence from the mini-CAT, including
its level of
trustworthiness and effect size in the form of a table
(intellectually engage with
what you wrote in step 7)
10. Conclude your mini-CAT by synthesizing the main findings
on the CAT question in a
very concise statement that actually answers the question. Tell
us in the conclusion
whether the scientific literature that you have scoured support
the claim made in the
statement set for this essay
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------
11. Explicitly describe any limitations of the mini-CAT you

have conducted and discuss how
they possibly impacted the findings of the assessment – these
limitations may be related
to the search approach, search terms, the extraction of data, the
findings and the answer to
the question
12. Spell out clearly the implications of your findings and based
on the evidence found, what
would be your specific recommendations for action for the
professional context involved.
D. Structure of your mini-CAT essay
The following is merely one suggested frame/structure for your
mini-CAT essay. You may want
to take a completely different approach with a different
structure but make sure you that you can
effectively show you are achieving the requirements of the
mini-CAT and successfully
demonstrate you have fully considered and implemented the
steps involved in the mini-CAT. To
that effect, you may consider including in the appendix tables
that will explicitly show:
(i) the terms (alternative and academic) you looked for to define
the major constructs in the
mini-CAT question – use thesaurus, synonyms (related to b.
search descriptions part of
your essay)
(ii) the search terms you finally select and the principles you
used for your selection,
(iii) the search queries from the major tourism databases
specifying the results for (a) each

(separate) of the search terms selected and (b) the terms in
combination
COMMUNICATION
Topic)
7
a. Introduction – relates to steps 1, 2 [overview, rationale to the
mini-CAT, the
issue/problem at hand and developing related research
question]. Remember
to show that you know how to identify the problem here and
focus the
question
b. Search descriptions – relates to steps 3, 4, 5 & 6 and related
tables of studies
selected and data extracted in the appendix. At this point you
should give us a
snapshot table of your search terms, combinations of search
terms and no. of
results. You may have a separate snapshot table for (i) terms
and alternative
terms used from thesaurus, (ii) search terms selected and
principles used for
selection, and (iii) search queries from the major tourism
databases
c. Critical Appraisal and presentation of findings-- relates to

steps 7 & 8
d. Conclusion
e. Limitations
f. Implications
g. References
h. Appendix with snapshots of all the tables that you think will
provide granular
details of the information that you searched
See examples of mini-CATs in various domains will be made
available in the toggle for the
mini-CAT assessment.
MKTG 7260 Patrick L’Espoir Decosta
08.08.2019
i Meta-analysis refers to the analysis of analyses. I use it to
refer to the statistical analysis of a large collection of
results from individual studies for the purpose of integrating
findings. It connotes a rigorous alternative to the
casual, narrative discussions of research studies which typify
our attempts to make sense of the rapidly expanding
literature (Gene Glass, 1976).
A. Overview of the Individual Critical Appraisal of a Topic
(mini-CAT)B. The statement for the mini-CAT – Formulate
your own research questionC. Steps when writing the mini-CAT
(1 to 9) or (1 to 11):D. Structure of your mini-CAT essaya.

Introduction – relates to steps 1, 2 [overview, rationale to the
mini-CAT, the issue/problem at hand and developing related
research question]. Remember to show that you know how to
identify the problem here and focus the questionb. Search
descriptions – relates to steps 3, 4, 5 & 6 and related tables of
studies selected and data extracted in the appendix. At this
point you should give us a snapshot table of your search terms,
combinations of search terms and no. of results. Y...c. Critical
Appraisal and presentation of findings-- relates to steps 7 & 8d.
Conclusione. Limitationsf. Implicationsg. Referencesh.
Appendix with snapshots of all the tables that you think will
provide granular details of the information that you searched

Digital literacy training MKTG7260 Marketing and S.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Digital literacy training MKTG7260 Marketing and S.docx

Similar to Digital literacy training MKTG7260 Marketing and S.docx (20)

More from cuddietheresa

More from cuddietheresa (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Digital literacy training MKTG7260 Marketing and S.docx