Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Multiprojektmanagement pp 93–123Cite as

Methodik der Datenauswertung

  • Chapter

  • 3948 Accesses

Auszug

Oftmals, so bemängeln Yuan und Bentier (2001), werden die Standardeinstellungen der Programme zur Auswertung von Daten übernommen, ohne dabei eine kritische Reflexion der zugrunde liegenden Annahmen durchzuführen.1 Als Ausgangpunkt sollte die Anzahl der vorliegenden Datensätze dienen. Da in dieser Arbeit 386 verwertbare Fragebögen bei 163 Dyaden vorliegen, ist der prinzipielle Einsatz von Faktorenanalysen — auch unter Verwendung von ML-Schätzern — möglich.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  • Yuan, K.; P. Bentler (2001): Effect of outliers on estimators and tests in covariance structure analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 54(1), 161–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bortz, J. (1999): Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler. 5. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabrigar, L. R.; D. T. Wegener; R. C. MacCallum; E. J. Strahan (1999): Evaluating the Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Psychological Research. Psychological Methods 4(3), 272–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R.; K. Widaman; K. Preacher; S. Hong (2001): Sample Size in Factor Analysis: The Role of Model Error. Multivariate Behavioral Research 36(4), 611–637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabrigar, L. R.; D. T. Wegener; R. C. MacCallum; E. J. Strahan (1999): Evaluating the Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Psychological Research. Psychological Methods 4(3), 272–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finch, J.; S. West (1997): The investigation of personality structure: Statistical Models. In: Fabrigar et al. (1999), 439–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2001): Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey. S. 288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005): Principles and practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 2. Aufl., The Guilford Press. S. 56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J.; P. Cohen; S. G. West; L. S. Aiken (2003): Applied multiple regression analysis for the behavioral science. 3. Aufl., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey. S. 450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bankhofe, U.; S. Praxmare (1998): Zur Behandlung fehlender Daten in der Marktforschungspraxis. Marketing ZFP 2, 109–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2001): Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey. S. 289 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vriens, M.; E. Melton (2002): Managing Missing Data. Marketing Research 14(3), 12–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005): Principles and practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 2. Aufl., The Guilford Press. S.54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K.; B. Erichson; W. Plinke; R. Weiber (2003): Multivariate Analysemethoden. 10. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K.; B. Erichson; W. Plinke; R. Weiber (2003): Multivariate Analysemethoden. 10. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K.; B. Erichson; W. Plinke; R. Weiber (2003): Multivariate Analysemethoden. 10. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cureton, E.; R. D’Agostino (1983): Factor Analysis — An Applied Approach. Hillsdale, New Jersey. S. 389 f.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. (1970): A Second Generation Little Jiffy. Psychometrika 35, 401–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gujarati, D. N. (1995): Basic Econometrics. 3. Aufl., McGraw-Hill. S. 238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K.; B. Erichson; W. Plinke; R. Weiber (2005): Multivariate Analysemethoden. 11. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 368 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, D. W. (2002): In Search of Underlying Dimensions: The Use (and Abuse) of Factor Analysis in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28(12), 1629–1646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curran, P.; S. West; J. Finch (1996): The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods 1(1), 16–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finch, J.; S. West (1997): The investigation of personality structure: Statistical Models. In: Fabrigar et al. (1999), 439–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, S.; J. Finch; P. Curran (1995): Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In: R. Hoyle (Hrsg.): Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications. Sage, Newbury Park, 56–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Eye, A.; C. Spiel; P. Wagner (2003): Structural Equations Modeling in Developmental Research Concepts and Applications. Methods of Psychological Research Online 8(2), 75–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bortz, J. (1999): Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler. 5. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2001): Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey. S. 267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curran, P.; S. West; J. Finch (1996): The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods 1(1), 16–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Micceri, T. (1989): The unicorn, the normal curve, and other improbable creatures. Psychological Bulletin 105(1), 156–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.; P. Bentler (2001): Effect of outliers on estimators and tests in covariance structure analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 54(1), 161–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gujarati, D. N. (1995): Basic Econometrics. 3. Aufl., McGraw-Hill. S. 769 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finch, J.; S. West (1997): The investigation of personality structure: Statistical Models. In: Fabrigar et al. (1999), 439–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finch, J.; S. West (1997): The investigation of personality structure: Statistical Models. In: Fabrigar et al. (1999), 439–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005): Principles and practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 2. Aufl., The Guilford Press. S. 50.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, S.; J. Finch; P. Curran (1995): Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In: R. Hoyle (Hrsg.): Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications. Sage, Newbury Park, 56–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mardia, K. (1970): Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika 57, 519–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finney, S. J.; C. DiStefano (2006): Non-normal and categorical data instructural equation modeling.. In: G. Hancock; R. Mueller (Hrsg.): Structural equation modeling: A second course. Information Age Publishing, S. 272 f.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.; P. Bentler (2001): Effect of outliers on estimators and tests in covariance structure analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 54(1), 161–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K.; B. Erichson; W. Plinke; R. Weiber (2005): Multivariate Analysemethoden. 11. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 370 f.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomarken, A.; N. Waller (2005): Structural Equation Modeling: Strengths, Limitations, and Misconceptions. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 1(1), 31–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, D. W. (2002): In Search of Underlying Dimensions: The Use (and Abuse) of Factor Analysis in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28(12), 1629–1646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.; K. Yuan (1999): Structural Equation Modeling with Small Samples: Test Statistics. Multivariate Behavioral Research 34(2), 181–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.; K. Yuan (1999): Structural Equation Modeling with Small Samples: Test Statistics. Multivariate Behavioral Research 34(2), 181–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomarken, A.; N. Waller (2005): Structural Equation Modeling: Strengths, Limitations, and Misconceptions. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 1(1), 31–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Efron, B.; R. Tibshirani (1994): An Introduction to the Bootstrap. Chapman & Hall CRC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. (2003): Practice of Business Statistics: Using Data for Decisions. W.H. Freeman & Co Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomarken, A.; N. Waller (2005): Structural Equation Modeling: Strengths, Limitations, and Misconceptions. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 1(1), 31–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2001): Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey. S. 267 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K.; R. Lennox (1991): Convential Wisdom on Measurement: A Structural Equation Perspective. Psychological Bulletin 110(2), 305–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulderer, J.; I. Baiderjahn (2006): Was unterscheidet harte und weiche Strukturgleichungsmodelle nun wirklich?. Marketing ZFP 28(1), 57–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C.; A. Giering (1996): Konzeptualisierung und Operationalisierung komplexer Konstrukte. Marketing ZFP 1(1), 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K.; R. Lennox (1991): Convential Wisdom on Measurement: A Structural Equation Perspective. Psychological Bulletin 110(2), 305–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W.; R. Cudeck (1993): Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: K. A. Bollen; J. S. Long (Hrsg.): Testing structural equation models. Sage, Newbury Park, 136–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. R.; R. P. Bagozzi (2000): On the Nature and Direction of Relationships Between Constructs and Measures. Psychological Methods 5(2), 155–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C; M. W. Browne (1993): The use of causal indicators in covariance structure models: some practical issues.. Psychological Bulletin 114(3), 533–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eggert, A.; G. Fassott: Zur Verwendung formativer und reflektiver Indikatoren in Strukturgleichungsmodellen. Ergebnisse einer Metaanalyse und Anwendungsempfehlungen. Techn. Ber. Lehrstuhl für Betriebswirtschaftslehre, insbes. Marketing Kaiserslautern (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989): Structural Equations With Latent Variables. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. R. (2001): Multidimensional constructs in organizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework. Organizational Research Methods 4(2), 144–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fassott, G. (2006): Operationalisierung latenter Variablen in Strukturgleichungsmodellen: Eine Standortbestimmung. Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung 58 (Februar), 67–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, C. B.; S. B. MacKenzie; P. M. Podsakoff (2003): A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research 30(2), 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chin, W. W. (1998): Issues and Opinion on Strctural Equation Modeling. MIS Quarterly 22(1), 7–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, C. B.; S. B. MacKenzie; P. M. Podsakoff (2003): A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research 30(2), 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C; M. W. Browne (1993): The use of causal indicators in covariance structure models: some practical issues.. Psychological Bulletin 114(3), 533–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulderer, J.; I. Baiderjahn (2006): Was unterscheidet harte und weiche Strukturgleichungsmodelle nun wirklich?. Marketing ZFP 28(1), 57–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K.; B. Erichson; W. Plinke; R. Weiber (2005): Multivariate Analysemethoden. 11. Aufl., Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bortz, J. (1999): Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler. 5. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J.; R. C. MacCallum (2003): Repairing Tom Swift’s Electric Factor Analysis Machine. Understanding Statistics 2(1), 13–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hüttner, M.; U. Schwarting (1999): Exploratorische Faktorenanalyse. In: A. Herrmann; C. Homburg (Hrsg.): Marktforschung. 2. Aufl., Gabler, 383–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabrigar, L. R.; D. T. Wegener; R. C. MacCallum; E. J. Strahan (1999): Evaluating the Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Psychological Research. Psychological Methods 4(3), 272–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J.; R. C. MacCallum (2003): Repairing Tom Swift’s Electric Factor Analysis Machine. Understanding Statistics 2(1), 13–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bortz, J. (1999): Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler. 5. Aufl., Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K.; B. Erichson; W. Plinke; R. Weiber (2003): Multivariate Analysemethoden. 10. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ueberla, K. (1971): Faktorenanalyse. 2. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 57 f.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabrigar, L. R.; D. T. Wegener; R. C. MacCallum; E. J. Strahan (1999): Evaluating the Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Psychological Research. Psychological Methods 4(3), 272–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bortz, J. (1999): Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler. 5. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 541.

    Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K.; B. Erichson; W. Plinke; R. Weiber (2003): Multivariate Analysemethoden. 10. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J.; R. C. MacCallum (2003): Repairing Tom Swift’s Electric Factor Analysis Machine. Understanding Statistics 2(1), 13–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorsuch, R. (1983): Factor Analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulaik, S. A. (1990): Blurring the distinctions between component analysis and common factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research 25(1), 53–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, D. W. (2002): In Search of Underlying Dimensions: The Use (and Abuse) of Factor Analysis in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28(12), 1629–1646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, J. (1965): A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika 30, 179–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ueberla, K. (1971): Faktorenanalyse. 2. Aufl., Springer Verlag. S. 128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reise, S.; N. Waller; A. Comrey (2000): Factor analysis and scale revision.. Psychological Assessment 12(3), 287–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finch, J.; S. West (1997): The investigation of personality structure: Statistical Models. In: Fabrigar et al. (1999), 439–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. R.; R. P. Bagozzi (2000): On the Nature and Direction of Relationships Between Constructs and Measures. Psychological Methods 5(2), 155–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. (1978): Psychometric Theory. 2. Aufl., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwick, W.; W. Velicer (1986): Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin 99, 432–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005): Principles and practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 2. Aufl., The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin, W.; P. Todd (1995): On the Use, Usefulness, and Ease of Use of Structural Equation Modeling in MIS Research: A Note of Caution. MIS Quarterly 19(2), 237–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Law, K.; C. Wong; W. Mobley (1998): Toward a Taxonomy of Multidimensional Constructs. Academy of Management Review 23(4), 741–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rindskopf, D.; T. Rose (1988): Some theory and applications of confirmatory second-order factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research 23(5), 1–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. R. (2001): Multidimensional constructs in organizational behavior research: An integrative analytical framework. Organizational Research Methods 4(2), 144–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R. A. (1994): A meta-analysis of Cronbach’s coeffienct alpha. Journal of Customer Research 21(2), 381–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C.; A. Giering (1996): Konzeptualisierung und Operationalisierung komplexer Konstrukte. Marketing ZFP 1(1), 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R.; H. Baumgartner (1994): The Evaluation of Structural Equation Models and Hypothesis Testing. In: R. Bagozzi (Hrsg.): Principles of Marketing Research. Cambridge, 386–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulland, J. (1999): Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) in Strategic Management Research: A Review of Four Recent Studies. Strategic Management Journal 20(2), 195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C.; D. Larcker (1981): Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research 18(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gatignon, H. (2003): Statistical Analysis of Management Data. Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. C. (1987): An approach for confirmatory measurement and structural equation modeling of organizational properties. Management Science 33(4), 525–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bortz, J. (1999): Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler. 5. Aufl., Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C.; D. Larcker (1981): Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research 18(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C.; A. Giering (1996): Konzeptualisierung und Operationalisierung komplexer Konstrukte. Marketing ZFP 1(1), 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R.; H. Baumgartner (1994): The Evaluation of Structural Equation Models and Hypothesis Testing. In: R. Bagozzi (Hrsg.): Principles of Marketing Research. Cambridge, 386–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989): Structural Equations With Latent Variables. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A.; H. M. Winklhofer (2001): Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research 38(2), 269–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gujarati, D. N. (1995): Basic Econometrics. 3. Aufl., McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, D. (1994): Estimator Conditioning Diagnostics for Covariance Structure Models. Sociological Methods and Research 23(2), 200–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, C. (2006): Management hochwertiger Dienstleistungen. Erfolgreiche Gestaltung von Kundenbeziehungen am Beispiel der Telemedizin.. Betriebswirtschaftliche Studien in forschungsintensiven Industrien Gabler DUV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gujarati, D. N. (1995): Basic Econometrics. 3. Aufl., McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belsley, D. (1991): Conditioning diagnostics: collinearity and weak data in regression. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A.; H. M. Winklhofer (2001): Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research 38(2), 269–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K.; B. Erichson; W. Plinke; R. Weiber (2005): Multivariate Analysemethoden. 11. Aufl., Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005): Principles and practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 2. Aufl., The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C.; H. Baumgartner (1995): Beurteilung von Kausalmodellen. Marketing ZFP 17(3), 162–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2001): Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C; M. W. Browne; H. M. Sugawara (1996): Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods 1, 120–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W.; R. Cudeck (1993): Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: K. A. Bollen; J. S. Long (Hrsg.): Testing structural equation models. Sage, Newbury Park, 136–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayduk, L. A.; D. N. Glaser (2000): Jiving the Four-Step, Waltzing Around Factor Analysis, and Other Serious Fun. Structural Equation Modeling 7(1), 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaccard, J.; R. Turrisi (2003): Interaction effects in multiple regression. 2. Aufl., Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J.; P. Cohen; S. G. West; L. S. Aiken (2003): Applied multiple regression analysis for the behavioral science. 3. Aufl., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N. (1989): The concept of fit in strategy research: toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review 14(3), 423–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S.; R. M. Durand; O. Gur-Arie (1981): Identification and analysis of moderator variables. Journal of Marketing Research 18, 291–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bortz, J. (1999): Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler. 5. Aufl., Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison, P. D. (1977): Testing for Interaction in Multiple Regression. American Journal of Sociology 83, 144–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S.; R. M. Durand; O. Gur-Arie (1981): Identification and analysis of moderator variables. Journal of Marketing Research 18, 291–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, J.; W. Laatz (2005): Statistische Datenanalyse mit SPSS für Windows. 5. Aufl., Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag Dr.Th. Gabler | GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

(2008). Methodik der Datenauswertung. In: Multiprojektmanagement. Gabler. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-9761-6_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation