{
  "name": "1on1・上司部下面談 研究メタデータ",
  "version": "0.1",
  "notice": "論文本文・尺度項目は含みません。各権利者の条件に従ってください。",
  "studies": [
    {
      "id": "flinchum-2022",
      "authors": "Flinchum, J. R., Kreamer, L. M., Rogelberg, S. G., & Gooty, J.",
      "year": 2023,
      "title": "One-on-One Meetings Between Managers and Direct Reports: A New Opportunity for Meeting Science",
      "journal": "Organizational Psychology Review, 13(4), 478–505",
      "doi": "10.1177/20413866221097570",
      "type": "direct 1:1 conceptual review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "マネジャーと直属部下の1on1",
      "sample": "概念・隣接文献レビュー",
      "method": "集団会議との違いを会議前・中・後に整理し研究命題を提示",
      "finding": "1on1は重要だが焦点化した実証研究が不足していると明示",
      "limitations": [
        "直接効果の実証研究ではない",
        "命題と実務示唆を効果証明として扱わない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "1on1直接・概念",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866221097570",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "kluger-denisi-1996",
      "authors": "Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A.",
      "year": 1996,
      "title": "The Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory",
      "journal": "Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284",
      "doi": "10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "フィードバック介入研究",
      "sample": "131研究、607効果量",
      "method": "フィードバック介入と業績、注意焦点等の調整要因を統合",
      "finding": "平均では改善するが、3分の1超の介入で業績が低下",
      "limitations": [
        "1on1固有ではない",
        "課題・研究設定が異質",
        "平均効果を個別面談へ直結しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "gerstner-day-1997",
      "authors": "Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V.",
      "year": 1997,
      "title": "Meta-Analytic Review of Leader–Member Exchange Theory: Correlates and Construct Issues",
      "journal": "Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(6), 827–844",
      "doi": "10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.827",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "上司部下関係研究",
      "sample": "LMX研究群",
      "method": "LMXと態度・業績・離職等、尺度課題を統合",
      "finding": "上司部下関係の質と複数の仕事結果に関連",
      "limitations": [
        "1on1の効果ではない",
        "関係の質と面談頻度を区別",
        "自己報告の共通方法"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.827",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "cawley-1998",
      "authors": "Cawley, B. D., Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E.",
      "year": 1998,
      "title": "Participation in the Performance Appraisal Process and Employee Reactions: A Meta-Analytic Review of Field Investigations",
      "journal": "Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4), 615–633",
      "doi": "10.1037/0021-9010.83.4.615",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "人事評価面談研究",
      "sample": "フィールド研究群",
      "method": "評価過程への参加と評価反応を統合",
      "finding": "参加、とくに価値表明的参加と評価反応の関連を報告",
      "limitations": [
        "評価面談であり育成1on1ではない",
        "反応と業績効果を区別"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.4.615",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "edmondson-1999",
      "authors": "Edmondson, A.",
      "year": 1999,
      "title": "Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams",
      "journal": "Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383",
      "doi": "10.2307/2666999",
      "type": "team field study",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "作業チーム",
      "sample": "51チーム",
      "method": "心理的安全性、学習行動、業績の関係を分析",
      "finding": "対人リスクを取れる環境とチーム学習の関連を提示",
      "limitations": [
        "チームレベル",
        "1on1固有ではない",
        "単独で因果確定しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "keeping-levy-2000",
      "authors": "Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E.",
      "year": 2000,
      "title": "Performance Appraisal Reactions: Measurement, Modeling, and Method Bias",
      "journal": "Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 708–723",
      "doi": "10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.708",
      "type": "measurement and field study",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "評価を受ける従業員",
      "sample": "複数標本。詳細は原文参照",
      "method": "評価反応の構造・測定と方法バイアスを検討",
      "finding": "評価の有用性・正確性・満足等の反応を区別",
      "limitations": [
        "人事評価文脈",
        "1on1固有ではない",
        "自己報告"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.708",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "locke-latham-2002",
      "authors": "Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P.",
      "year": 2002,
      "title": "Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation: A 35-Year Odyssey",
      "journal": "American Psychologist, 57(9), 705–717",
      "doi": "10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705",
      "type": "integrative theory review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "目標設定研究",
      "sample": "35年の研究",
      "method": "目標の具体性・困難度、コミットメント、フィードバック、能力等を統合",
      "finding": "具体的で挑戦的な目標は条件が整うと業績を高める",
      "limitations": [
        "1on1固有ではない",
        "学習目標・複雑課題・倫理・目標葛藤に注意"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "smither-2005",
      "authors": "Smither, J. W., London, M., & Reilly, R. R.",
      "year": 2005,
      "title": "Does Performance Improve Following Multisource Feedback? A Theoretical Model, Meta-Analysis, and Review of Empirical Findings",
      "journal": "Personnel Psychology, 58(1), 33–66",
      "doi": "10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.514_1.x",
      "type": "meta-analysis and review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "多面評価参加者",
      "sample": "多面フィードバック研究群",
      "method": "多面評価後の業績変化と条件を統合",
      "finding": "改善は一般に小さく、受容・目標・行動・支援等に左右される",
      "limitations": [
        "1on1固有ではない",
        "多面評価",
        "平均効果と個人差"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.514_1.x",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "detert-burris-2007",
      "authors": "Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R.",
      "year": 2007,
      "title": "Leadership Behavior and Employee Voice: Is the Door Really Open?",
      "journal": "Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869–884",
      "doi": "10.5465/amj.2007.26279183",
      "type": "multisource field study",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "従業員と管理職",
      "sample": "複数職場標本。詳細は原文参照",
      "method": "変革型行動・管理職の開放性と従業員voiceを分析",
      "finding": "管理職の開放性が改善提案の発言と関係",
      "limitations": [
        "観察研究",
        "発言機会と実際に聞かれることを区別",
        "1on1固有ではない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.26279183",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "pulakos-2011",
      "authors": "Pulakos, E. D., & O’Leary, R. S.",
      "year": 2011,
      "title": "Why Is Performance Management Broken?",
      "journal": "Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4(2), 146–164",
      "doi": "10.1111/j.1754-9434.2011.01315.x",
      "type": "evidence-informed conceptual review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed focal article",
      "population": "業績管理制度",
      "sample": "研究・実務文献",
      "method": "制度設計と日常の管理行動の乖離を整理",
      "finding": "形式的制度より日常の目標・フィードバック・関係が重要と論じる",
      "limitations": [
        "1on1頻度の実験ではない",
        "概念・実務レビュー"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2011.01315.x",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "pichler-2012",
      "authors": "Pichler, S.",
      "year": 2012,
      "title": "The Social Context of Performance Appraisal and Appraisal Reactions: A Meta-Analysis",
      "journal": "Human Resource Management, 51(5), 709–732",
      "doi": "10.1002/hrm.21499",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "人事評価研究",
      "sample": "評価の社会的文脈研究群",
      "method": "上司満足・支援・信頼、参加、評価結果と反応を統合",
      "finding": "上司部下関係の質は評価反応と強く関連",
      "limitations": [
        "評価反応が中心",
        "1on1固有ではない",
        "因果方向"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21499",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "anseel-2015",
      "authors": "Anseel, F., Beatty, A. S., Shen, W., Lievens, F., & Sackett, P. R.",
      "year": 2015,
      "title": "How Are We Doing After 30 Years? A Meta-Analytic Review of the Antecedents and Outcomes of Feedback-Seeking Behavior",
      "journal": "Journal of Management, 41(1), 318–348",
      "doi": "10.1177/0149206313484521",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "従業員のフィードバック探索",
      "sample": "30年の研究群",
      "method": "探索の先行要因・結果・方法を統合",
      "finding": "目標志向、動機、文脈等がフィードバック探索と関連",
      "limitations": [
        "フィードバックを求める行動であり1on1効果ではない",
        "観察研究中心"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313484521",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "theeboom-2014",
      "authors": "Theeboom, T., Beersma, B., & van Vianen, A. E. M.",
      "year": 2014,
      "title": "Does Coaching Work? A Meta-Analysis on the Effects of Coaching on Individual Level Outcomes in an Organizational Context",
      "journal": "Journal of Positive Psychology, 9(1), 1–18",
      "doi": "10.1080/17439760.2013.837499",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織文脈のコーチング参加者",
      "sample": "コーチング研究群",
      "method": "業績・技能、ウェルビーイング、対処、態度等を統合",
      "finding": "複数の個人結果に肯定的な平均効果を報告",
      "limitations": [
        "外部・専門コーチを含む",
        "管理職1on1と同義でない",
        "研究数・質の制約"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2013.837499",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "morrison-2014",
      "authors": "Morrison, E. W.",
      "year": 2014,
      "title": "Employee Voice and Silence",
      "journal": "Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 173–197",
      "doi": "10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091328",
      "type": "integrative review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "従業員voice・沈黙研究",
      "sample": "理論・実証文献",
      "method": "発言の動機、対象、結果、沈黙を整理",
      "finding": "発言は便益と対人リスクの評価に左右される",
      "limitations": [
        "1on1固有ではない",
        "voiceを引き出すことと応答することを区別"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091328",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "jones-2016",
      "authors": "Jones, R. J., Woods, S. A., & Guillaume, Y. R. F.",
      "year": 2016,
      "title": "The Effectiveness of Workplace Coaching: A Meta-Analysis of Learning and Performance Outcomes from Coaching",
      "journal": "Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(2), 249–277",
      "doi": "10.1111/joop.12119",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "内部・外部コーチによる職場コーチング",
      "sample": "k=17",
      "method": "学習・情動・個人結果を統合",
      "finding": "組織結果に肯定的な平均効果を報告",
      "limitations": [
        "管理職—部下コーチングを明示的に除外",
        "研究数17",
        "1on1へ直接外挿できない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12119",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "martin-2016",
      "authors": "Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O.",
      "year": 2016,
      "title": "Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) and Performance: A Meta-Analytic Review",
      "journal": "Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 67–121",
      "doi": "10.1111/peps.12100",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "上司部下関係",
      "sample": "LMX・業績研究群",
      "method": "LMXとタスク・市民行動、評価者、媒介・調整を統合",
      "finding": "関係の質と業績の関連を報告",
      "limitations": [
        "1on1の頻度・構造の効果ではない",
        "因果方向",
        "関係格差の倫理"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12100",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "frazier-2017",
      "authors": "Frazier, M. L., Fainshmidt, S., Klinger, R. L., Pezeshkan, A., & Vracheva, V.",
      "year": 2017,
      "title": "Psychological Safety: A Meta-Analytic Review and Extension",
      "journal": "Personnel Psychology, 70(1), 113–165",
      "doi": "10.1111/peps.12183",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "職場の心理的安全性研究",
      "sample": "136独立標本、約5,000チーム・2万人超",
      "method": "先行要因・結果・水準を統合",
      "finding": "心理的安全性と発言・学習・業績等の関連を整理",
      "limitations": [
        "主にチーム研究",
        "1on1固有ではない",
        "因果確定ではない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12183",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "kluger-itzchakov-2022",
      "authors": "Kluger, A. N., & Itzchakov, G.",
      "year": 2022,
      "title": "The Power of Listening at Work",
      "journal": "Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 9, 121–146",
      "doi": "10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-091013",
      "type": "integrative review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "職場の傾聴研究",
      "sample": "実験・フィールド文献",
      "method": "良質な傾聴の定義、先行条件、結果、機序を統合",
      "finding": "傾聴は話者の認知・感情・関係等に影響し得る",
      "limitations": [
        "1on1固有ではない",
        "傾聴の測定・文脈が異質",
        "聞くことと同意を区別"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-091013",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "cannon-bowers-2023",
      "authors": "Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Bowers, C. A., Carlson, C. E., Doherty, S. L., Evans, J., & Hall, J.",
      "year": 2023,
      "title": "Workplace Coaching: A Meta-Analysis and Recommendations for Advancing the Science of Coaching",
      "journal": "Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1204166",
      "doi": "10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1204166",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "職場コーチング",
      "sample": "現代のコーチング研究群",
      "method": "組織結果と調整要因を更新統合",
      "finding": "肯定的平均効果を報告しつつ科学的基盤の未成熟を指摘",
      "limitations": [
        "介入・コーチの異質性",
        "管理職1on1固有でない",
        "出版バイアス・研究品質"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "隣接研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1204166",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "ilo-1997",
      "authors": "International Labour Organization",
      "year": 1997,
      "title": "Protection of Workers’ Personal Data: An ILO Code of Practice",
      "journal": "International Labour Organization",
      "url": "https://www.ilo.org/publications/protection-workers%E2%80%99-personal-data-ilo-code-practice",
      "type": "official code of practice",
      "status": "official guidance",
      "population": "労働者個人データ",
      "sample": "該当なし",
      "method": "収集・利用・保管・アクセス等の原則を提示",
      "finding": "労働者データは正当な目的・最小限・透明性・権利保護の下で扱うべき",
      "limitations": [
        "拘束的条約ではない",
        "国内法を別途確認",
        "1997年文書"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "公式指針・ガバナンス",
      "source_url": "https://www.ilo.org/publications/protection-workers%E2%80%99-personal-data-ilo-code-practice",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "who-2022",
      "authors": "World Health Organization",
      "year": 2022,
      "title": "WHO Guidelines on Mental Health at Work",
      "journal": "World Health Organization, ISBN 9789240053052",
      "url": "https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240053052",
      "type": "official evidence-based guideline",
      "status": "official guideline",
      "population": "働く人と職場",
      "sample": "組織介入、管理職・労働者研修、個人介入、復職等",
      "method": "ガイドライン開発手続に基づく推奨",
      "finding": "職場の心理社会的リスクへ組織的に対処することを推奨",
      "limitations": [
        "1on1専用ではない",
        "管理職面談を治療の代替にしない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "公式指針・ガバナンス",
      "source_url": "https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240053052",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    }
  ]
}