Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

• Afsar, B. (2016). The impact of person-organization fit on innovative work behaviour. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, 29(2), 104–122. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHCQA-01-2015-0017.
• Barak, M. (2010). Motivating self-regulated learning in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(4), 381-401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-009-9092-x.
• Barrick, M., Mount, M., & Li, N. (2013). The theory of purposeful work behaviour: The role of personality, higher-order goals, and job characteristics. Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 132-153. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.0479.
• Bartol, K. & Srivastava, A. (2002). Encouraging knowledge sharing: The role of organizational reward systems. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9(1), 64–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/107179190200900105.
• Battistelli, A., Montani, F., & Odoardi, C. (2013). The impact of feedback from job and task autonomy in the relationship between dispositional resistance to change and innovative work behaviour. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2011.616653.
• Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P., & Zeidner, M. (2000). Handbook of Self-Regulation. San Diego: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50030-5.
• Boudreau, M., Gefen, D., & Straub, D. (2001). Validation in information systems research: a state-of-the-art assessment. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250956.
• Burke, C. (1990). The Strategic Air Command Readiness Oriented Logistics System (ROLS): A Comparison of the Work Attitudes of Aircraft Maintenance Specialists (No. AFIT/GLM/LSM/90S-8). Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH: Air Force Institute of Techonology.
• Byrne, B. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York: Routledge.
• Camelo-Ordaz, C., García-Cruz, J., Sousa-Ginel, E., & Valle-Cabrera, R. (2011). The influence of human resource management on knowledge sharing and innovation in Spain: the mediating role of affective commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(7), 1442–1463.
• Cheung, S., Gong, Y., Wang, M., Zhou, L., & Shi, J. (2016). When and how does functional diversity influence team innovation? The mediating role of knowledge sharing and the moderation role of affect-based trust in a team. Human Relations, 69(7), 1507–1531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726715615684.
• Chiu, C., Wang, E., Shih, F., & Fan, Y. (2011). Understanding knowledge sharing behaviour in virtual communities: an integration of expectancy disconfirmation and justice theories. Online Information Review, 35(1), 134-153. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111113623.
• Choi, S., Kim, K., Ullah, S., & Kang, S. (2016). How transformational leadership facilitates innovative behaviour of Korean workers. Personnel Review, 45(3), 459-479. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-03-2014-0058.
• Coelho, F., & Augusto, M. (2010). Job characteristics and the creativity of frontline service employees. Journal of Service Research, 13, 426–438. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670510369379.
• Cotton, S., Dollard, M., & De Jonge, J. (2002). Stress and student job design: Satisfaction, well-being, and performance in university students. International Journal of Stress Management, 9(3), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015515714410.
• Creswell, J. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. London: SAGE.
• Cronbach, L. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555.
• De Jong, J., & Den Hartog, D. (2010). Measuring Innovative Work Behaviour. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00547.x.
• De Spiegelaere, S., Van Gyes, G., De Witte, H., Niesen, W., & Van Hootegem, G. (2014). On the relation of job insecurity, job autonomy, innovative work behaviour and the mediating effect of work engagement. Creativity and Innovation Management, 23(3), 318-330. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12079.
• Du, R., Liu, L., Straub, D., & Knight, M. (2017). The impact of espoused national cultural values on innovative behaviour: an empirical study in the Chinese IT-enabled global service industry. Asia Pacific Business Review, 23(3), 354–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2016.1156907.
• Dwivedula, R., Bredillet, C., & Müller, R. (2017). Work motivation in temporary organizations: A review of literature grounded in job design perspective. In Leadership, Innovation and Entrepreneurship as Driving Forces of the Global Economy (pp. 609–618). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43434-6_52.
• Effeney, G., Carroll, A., & Bahr, N. (2013). Self-Regulated Learning: Key strategies and their sources in a sample of adolescent males. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 13, 58-74.
• Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: SAGE.
• Fink, L. (2007). The power of course design to increase student engagement and learning. Peer Review, 9(1), 13-17.
• Forgas, J., Baumeister, R., & Tice, D. (2009). The psychology of self-regulation: An introductory review. In J. P. Forgas, R. F. Baumeister, & D.M. Tice (Eds.), Psychology of Self-Regulation: Cognitive, Affective and Motivational Processes (Ch. 1, pp. 1–20. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
• Fowler, F. (2002). Survey Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
• French, R., McCarthy, O., Baraitser, P., Wellings, K., Bailey, J., & Free, C. (2016). Young people’s views and experiences of a mobile phone texting intervention to promote safer sex behaviour. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.4302.
• Fuller, C., Simmering, M., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y., & Babin, B. (2016). Common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3192–3198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008.
• Gaskin, J., (2016). Gaskination’s StatWiki. Retrieved from http://statwiki.kolobkreations.com.
• Hackman, J., & Oldham, G. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
• Hair, J., Anderson, R., Babin, B. & Black, W. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (Vol. 7). Upper Saddle River: Pearson. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmva.2009.12.014.
• Heukamp, F. (2015). Developing Entrepreneurship Capabilities in the MBA Program. In Canals, J. (Ed.), Shaping Entrepreneurial Mindsets: Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Leadership Development (pp. 203–219). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137516671_12.
• Hill, B., Helmke, M., & Burger, C. (2009). The official Ubuntu book. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
• Hofmans, J., Gelens, J., & Theuns, P. (2014). Enjoyment as a mediator in the relationship between task characteristics and work effort: An experience sampling study. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(5), 693-705. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2013.792229.
• Holman, D., Totterdell, P., Axtell, C., Stride, C., Port, R., Svensson, R., & Zibarras, L. (2012). Job design and the employee innovation process: The mediating role of learning strategies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(2), 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9242-5.
• Kahraman, N. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of achievement goals (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Ankara, Turkey: Middle East Technical University.
• Karasek, R. (1998). Demand/control model: A social, emotional, and physiological approach to stress risk and active behaviour development. In Encyclopedia of Occupational Health and Safety (Vol. 2, pp. 34-36).
• Kline, R. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
• Langfred, C., & Rockmann, K. (2016). The push and pull of autonomy: The tension between individual autonomy and organizational control in knowledge work. Group & Organization Management, 41(5), 629-657. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601116668971.
• Laycock, A., Bailie, J., Matthews, V., & Bailie, R. (2016). Interactive dissemination: Engaging stakeholders in the use of aggregated quality improvement data for system-wide change in Australian indigenous primary health care. Frontiers in Public Health, 4, 84. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00084.
• Lee, S., Lei, M., & Brody, G. (2015). Constructing confidence intervals for effect size measures of an indirect effect. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50(6), 600-613. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2015.1040542.
• Liou, D., Chih, W., Yuan, C., & Lin, C. (2016). The study of the antecedents of knowledge sharing behaviour: the empirical study of Yambol online test community. Internet Research, 26(4), 845–868. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-10-2014-0256.
• Liu, M., & Chi, M. (2012). Investigating learner affective performance in web-based learning by using entrepreneurship as a metaphor. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 202–213.
• Lu, L., Leung, K., & Koch, P. (2006). Managerial knowledge sharing: The role of individual, interpersonal, and organizational factors. Management and Organization Review, 2(1), 15-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2006.00029.x.
• MacCallum, R., & Austin, J. (2000). Applications of structural equation modeling in psychological research. Annual review of psychology, 51(1), 201-226. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.201.
• Malhotra, M., & Grover, V. (1998). An assessment of survey research in POM: From constructs to theory. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 407−425. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(98)00021-7.
• Marsh, H., Balla, J., & McDonald, R. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391-410. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.391.
• Martín, P., Potočnik, K., & Fras, A. (2017). Determinants of students’ innovation in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 42(7), 1229-1243. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1087993.
• McGrath, R., Mitchell, M., Kim, B., & Hough, L. (2010). Evidence for response bias as a source of error variance in applied assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 450. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019216.
• Messmann, G., & Mulder, R. (2011). Innovative work behaviour in vocational colleges: Understanding how and why innovations are developed. Vocations and Learning, 4(1), 63–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-010-9049-y.
• Morgeson, F., & Campion, M. (2003). Work Design. In I. B. Weiner (Ed.), Handbook of Psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 423-452). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471264385.wei1217.
• Morgeson, F., & Humphrey, S. (2006). The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing course design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1321–1339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1321.
• Narayanan, S., Balasubramanian, S., & Swaminathan, J. (2009). A matter of balance: specialization, task variety, and individual learning in a software maintenance environment. Management Science, 55(11), 1861-1876. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1057.
• Newsom, J. (2012). Some clarifications and recommendations on fit indices. USP, 655, 123-133.
• Ngugi, J., & Goosen, L. (2017). The Effects of Course Design Characteristics, Self-Regulated Learning and Knowledge Sharing in Facilitating the Development of Innovative Behaviour among Technology Students at Universities. Proceedings of the Institute of Science and Technology Education (ISTE) Conference on Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (pp. 80-86). Mopani Camp, Kruger National Park: UNISA Press.
• Nyaundi, B. (2011). Success factors for innovation and new product development in Africa. Paper at the Marketing and Social Research Association (MSRA) Conference. Retrieved from http://www.msra.or.ke/conference.asp?f=2.
• O’Shea, D. (2011). Integrating cognitive, motivational, and emotional self-regulation in early stage entrepreneurs (Unpublished PhD Thesis). Dublin, Ireland: Dublin City University.
• Oldham, G., & Fried, Y. (2016). Job design research and theory: Past, present and future. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136, 20-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.05.002.
• Parker, S., & Zhang, F. (2016). Designing work that works in the contemporary world: Future directions for job design research. In Psychosocial Factors at Work in the Asia Pacific (pp. 135-150). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44400-0_7.
• Parker, S., Van den Broeck, A., & Holman, D. (2017). Work design influences: A synthesis of multilevel factors that affect the design of jobs. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 267-308. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2014.0054.
• Pintrich, P. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 544-555. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.544.
• Pintrich, P., & De Groot, E. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33.
• Pintrich, P., Smith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (Technical Report 91-B-004). Michigan: The Regents of the University of Michigan.
• Podsakoff, P., & Organ, D. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638601200408.
• Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common method biases in behavioural research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
• Pukienė, A., & Škudienė, V. (2016). Innovative work behaviour-the role of human resource management and affective commitment. Retrieved on February 20, 2012 from ISM University of Management and Economics: http://archive.ism.lt/handle/1/635.
• Radaelli, G., Lettieri, E., Mura, M., & Spiller, N. (2014). Knowledge Sharing and Innovative Work Behaviour in Healthcare: A Micro-Level Investigation of Direct and Indirect Effects. Creativity and Innovation Management, 23(4), 400–414. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12084.
• Raja, U., & Johns, G. (2010). The joint effects of personality and job scope on in-role performance, citizenship behaviors, and creativity. Human Relations, 63, 981–1005. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709349863.
• Ramayah, T., Yeap, J., & Ignatius, J. (2014). Assessing knowledge sharing behaviour Among Academics: A Validation of the knowledge sharing behaviour Behavior Scale (knowledge sharing behaviour). Evaluation Review, 38(2), 160–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X14539685.
• Rego, A., Sousa, F., Marques, C., & e-Cunha, M. (2012). Authentic leadership promoting employees’ psychological capital and creativity. Journal of Business Research, 65(3), 429–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.003.
• Rockinson-Szapkiw, A., Wendt, J., & Lunde, R. (2013). Electronic versus print text-books: The influence of textbook format on university students’ self-regulated learn-ing strategies, motivation, and text anxiety. The American Journal of Distance Education, 27(3), 179. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2013.796230.
• Ryu, S., Ho, S., & Han, I. (2003). Knowledge sharing behavior of physicians in hospitals. Expert Systems with applications, 25(1), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0957-4174(03)00011-3.
• Schraw, G., Crippen, K., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in science education, 36(1-2), 111-139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8.
• Schreiber, J., Nora, A., Stage, F., Barlow, E. & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of educational research, 99(6), 323–338. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338.
• Schumacker, R., & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A Beginners Guide to Structural Equation Modeling, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Scott, S., & Bruce, R. (1994). Determinants of innovative behaviour: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in the Workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580–607. https://doi.org/10.5465/256701.
• Seo, H., Kim, M., Chang, K., & Kim, T. (2016). Influence of interpersonal trust on innovative behaviour of service workers: mediating effects of knowledge sharing. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(02), 1650026. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919616500262.
• Seraphin, K., Philippoff, J., Kaupp, L., & Vallin, L. (2012). Metacognition as Means to Increase the Effectiveness of Inquiry-Based Science Education. Science Education International, 23(4), 366–382.
• Shrout, P., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and non-experimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.4.422.
• Su, H., Cuskelly, M., Gilmore, L., & Sullivan, K. (2017). Authoritative parenting of Chinese mothers of children with and without intellectual disability. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(4), 1173–1183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-016-0628-x.
• Tabata, L., & Johnsrud, L. (2008). The impact of faculty attitudes toward technology, distance education, and innovation. Research in University Education, 49(7), 625-646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9094-7.
• Titi Amayah, A. (2013). Determinants of knowledge sharing in a public sector organization. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(3), 454-471. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-11-2012-0369.
• Tofighi, D., & MacKinnon, D. (2016). Monte Carlo confidence intervals for complex functions of indirect effects. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 23(2), 194-205. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2015.1057284.
• World Bank (2011). World Development Report 2011–Conflict, Security, and Development. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-8439-8.
• Yi, J. (2009). A measure of knowledge sharing behaviour: scale development and validation. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 7(1), 65–81. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2008.36.
• Zhang, X., & Bartol, K. (2010). Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 107–128. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.48037118.
• Zheng, W., Skelton, G., Shih, H., Leggette, E., & Pei, T. (2009). Nurture motivated, confident, and strategic learners in engineering through cognitive and psychological instructions for an entry-level course. Proceedings of the Annaul Conference & Exibition (pp. 100-105). Washington: American Society for Engineering Education.
• Zimmerman, B., & Schunk, D. (2012). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice. Heidelberg: Springer.
• Zimmerman, B., Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P., & Zeidner, M. (2000). A social cognitive perspective. In Handbook of Self-Regulation (Vol. 13, pp. 695-716). San Diego: Academic Press.

APA

Ngugi, J., & Goosen, L. (2018). Modelling Course-Design Characteristics, Self-Regulated Learning and the Mediating Effect of Knowledge-Sharing Behavior as Drivers of Individual Innovative Behavior. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(8), em1575. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/92087

Vancouver

Ngugi J, Goosen L. Modelling Course-Design Characteristics, Self-Regulated Learning and the Mediating Effect of Knowledge-Sharing Behavior as Drivers of Individual Innovative Behavior. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2018;14(8):em1575. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/92087

AMA

Ngugi J, Goosen L. Modelling Course-Design Characteristics, Self-Regulated Learning and the Mediating Effect of Knowledge-Sharing Behavior as Drivers of Individual Innovative Behavior. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2018;14(8), em1575. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/92087

Chicago

Ngugi, James, and Leila Goosen. "Modelling Course-Design Characteristics, Self-Regulated Learning and the Mediating Effect of Knowledge-Sharing Behavior as Drivers of Individual Innovative Behavior". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2018 14 no. 8 (2018): em1575. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/92087

Harvard

Ngugi, J., and Goosen, L. (2018). Modelling Course-Design Characteristics, Self-Regulated Learning and the Mediating Effect of Knowledge-Sharing Behavior as Drivers of Individual Innovative Behavior. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(8), em1575. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/92087

MLA

Ngugi, James et al. "Modelling Course-Design Characteristics, Self-Regulated Learning and the Mediating Effect of Knowledge-Sharing Behavior as Drivers of Individual Innovative Behavior". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 14, no. 8, 2018, em1575. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/92087