{
  "name": "組織学習・知識共有 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": "argyris-1976",
      "authors": "Argyris, C.",
      "year": 1976,
      "title": "Single-Loop and Double-Loop Models in Research on Decision Making",
      "journal": "Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(3), 363–375",
      "doi": "10.2307/2391848",
      "type": "conceptual analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "意思決定と組織学習",
      "sample": "概念・事例分析",
      "method": "誤り修正の水準と背後の規範・前提を問い直す学習を区別",
      "finding": "行動修正と支配的前提の再検討を区別する枠組みを提示",
      "limitations": [
        "介入効果の比較試験ではない",
        "二分法を機械的診断へ使わない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "基礎理論・概念",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.2307/2391848",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "levitt-march-1988",
      "authors": "Levitt, B., & March, J. G.",
      "year": 1988,
      "title": "Organizational Learning",
      "journal": "Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319–340",
      "doi": "10.1146/annurev.so.14.080188.001535",
      "type": "integrative review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織学習研究",
      "sample": "理論・実証文献",
      "method": "経験、ルーティン、組織記憶、履歴依存を統合",
      "finding": "組織は経験をルーティンへ符号化し、歴史から学ぶと整理",
      "limitations": [
        "古典的レビュー",
        "学習が常に適応的とは限らない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.14.080188.001535",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "cohen-levinthal-1990",
      "authors": "Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A.",
      "year": 1990,
      "title": "Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation",
      "journal": "Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152",
      "doi": "10.2307/2393553",
      "type": "theory and empirical analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "企業の研究開発とイノベーション",
      "sample": "企業・産業データ",
      "method": "外部知識を認識・吸収・活用する能力を理論化し分析",
      "finding": "関連する事前知識が新しい知識の利用能力を支えると論じる",
      "limitations": [
        "R&D中心",
        "吸収能力を単一スコアへ還元しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "実証研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "march-1991",
      "authors": "March, J. G.",
      "year": 1991,
      "title": "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning",
      "journal": "Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87",
      "doi": "10.1287/orsc.2.1.71",
      "type": "formal model and theory",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織の適応",
      "sample": "シミュレーションモデル",
      "method": "探索と活用の資源配分と長期適応をモデル化",
      "finding": "短期の活用偏重が長期適応を損なう可能性を示す",
      "limitations": [
        "シミュレーション",
        "最適比率を直接示さない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "基礎理論・概念",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "huber-1991",
      "authors": "Huber, G. P.",
      "year": 1991,
      "title": "Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures",
      "journal": "Organization Science, 2(1), 88–115",
      "doi": "10.1287/orsc.2.1.88",
      "type": "integrative review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織学習研究",
      "sample": "複数研究系統",
      "method": "知識獲得、情報配布、解釈、組織記憶を整理",
      "finding": "学習を複数の情報処理過程として構造化",
      "limitations": [
        "古典的レビュー",
        "デジタル知識基盤以前"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.88",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "brown-duguid-1991",
      "authors": "Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P.",
      "year": 1991,
      "title": "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation",
      "journal": "Organization Science, 2(1), 40–57",
      "doi": "10.1287/orsc.2.1.40",
      "type": "conceptual analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "仕事・学習・イノベーション",
      "sample": "理論・事例",
      "method": "正規の手順と実際の仕事、実践共同体の関係を分析",
      "finding": "学習を仕事実践と共同体から切り離さない視点を提示",
      "limitations": [
        "概念論文",
        "共同体導入の比較試験ではない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "基礎理論・概念",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.40",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "walsh-ungson-1991",
      "authors": "Walsh, J. P., & Ungson, G. R.",
      "year": 1991,
      "title": "Organizational Memory",
      "journal": "Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 57–91",
      "doi": "10.2307/258607",
      "type": "conceptual review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織記憶",
      "sample": "理論・実証文献",
      "method": "獲得、保持施設、検索と組織記憶の構造を整理",
      "finding": "記憶が個人だけでなく文化・変換・構造・環境等に保持されると整理",
      "limitations": [
        "古典的概念レビュー",
        "デジタル基盤以前",
        "保持が常に有益とは限らない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.2307/258607",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "nonaka-1994",
      "authors": "Nonaka, I.",
      "year": 1994,
      "title": "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation",
      "journal": "Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37",
      "doi": "10.1287/orsc.5.1.14",
      "type": "conceptual theory",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織的知識創造",
      "sample": "理論・事例",
      "method": "暗黙知と形式知の相互作用を理論化",
      "finding": "知識創造を個人と組織、水準間の動的過程として提示",
      "limitations": [
        "概念理論",
        "SECIを普遍的段階モデルとして扱わない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "基礎理論・概念",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "szulanski-1996",
      "authors": "Szulanski, G.",
      "year": 1996,
      "title": "Exploring Internal Stickiness: Impediments to the Transfer of Best Practice Within the Firm",
      "journal": "Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 27–43",
      "doi": "10.1002/smj.4250171105",
      "type": "field study",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "企業内ベストプラクティス移転",
      "sample": "企業内移転事例",
      "method": "知識・送り手・受け手・文脈の障害を分析",
      "finding": "因果曖昧性、受け手能力、関係等が移転の粘着性に関係",
      "limitations": [
        "ベストプラクティス移転文脈",
        "単純な情報共有とは異なる"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "実証研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171105",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "crossan-1999",
      "authors": "Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E.",
      "year": 1999,
      "title": "An Organizational Learning Framework: From Intuition to Institution",
      "journal": "Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522–537",
      "doi": "10.2307/259140",
      "type": "conceptual framework",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "個人・集団・組織水準",
      "sample": "理論統合",
      "method": "直観、解釈、統合、制度化の4I枠組みを提示",
      "finding": "学習が水準間を行き来し制度化される過程を整理",
      "limitations": [
        "概念枠組み",
        "段階を機械的に線形適用しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "基礎理論・概念",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.2307/259140",
      "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": "心理的安全性とチーム学習行動の関連を提示",
      "limitations": [
        "単独で因果確定しない",
        "安全性は低基準や無責任と同義でない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "実証研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "argote-ingram-2000",
      "authors": "Argote, L., & Ingram, P.",
      "year": 2000,
      "title": "Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms",
      "journal": "Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150–169",
      "doi": "10.1006/obhd.2000.2893",
      "type": "integrative review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織内知識移転",
      "sample": "実験・フィールド文献",
      "method": "人、道具、課題とそのネットワークに埋め込まれた知識を統合",
      "finding": "知識移転は経験が別単位の成果・行動へ影響することで捉えられる",
      "limitations": [
        "競争優位文脈",
        "リポジトリ単独の効果ではない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2893",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "lewis-2003",
      "authors": "Lewis, K.",
      "year": 2003,
      "title": "Measuring Transactive Memory Systems in the Field: Scale Development and Validation",
      "journal": "Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 587–604",
      "doi": "10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.587",
      "type": "measurement and field study",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "実務チーム",
      "sample": "複数チーム標本",
      "method": "専門分化、信頼、調整からなるTMS尺度を開発・検証",
      "finding": "誰が何を知るかの共有認知を測る枠組みを提示",
      "limitations": [
        "自己報告を含む",
        "尺度項目は再配布しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "実証研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.587",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "feldman-pentland-2003",
      "authors": "Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T.",
      "year": 2003,
      "title": "Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change",
      "journal": "Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94–118",
      "doi": "10.2307/3556620",
      "type": "conceptual theory",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織ルーティン",
      "sample": "理論・事例",
      "method": "ルーティンの抽象的側面と実演される側面を区別",
      "finding": "ルーティンは安定だけでなく変化の源にもなり得ると論じる",
      "limitations": [
        "概念論文",
        "変更効果の比較試験ではない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "基礎理論・概念",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.2307/3556620",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "deholan-phillips-2004",
      "authors": "de Holan, P. M., & Phillips, N.",
      "year": 2004,
      "title": "Remembrance of Things Past? The Dynamics of Organizational Forgetting",
      "journal": "Management Science, 50(11), 1603–1613",
      "doi": "10.1287/mnsc.1040.0273",
      "type": "qualitative field study",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織的忘却",
      "sample": "企業のフィールド研究",
      "method": "知識の喪失と意図的な忘却の過程を分析",
      "finding": "忘却には偶発的損失と意図的管理の異なる過程があると整理",
      "limitations": [
        "少数事例",
        "忘却の効果を普遍化しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "実証研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0273",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "van-dyck-2005",
      "authors": "van Dyck, C., Frese, M., Baer, M., & Sonnentag, S.",
      "year": 2005,
      "title": "Organizational Error Management Culture and Its Impact on Performance: A Two-Study Replication",
      "journal": "Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1228–1240",
      "doi": "10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1228",
      "type": "cross-national field studies",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織・従業員",
      "sample": "2研究",
      "method": "エラー管理文化と組織成果の関係を国をまたいで分析",
      "finding": "エラー後の共有・対処を重視する文化と成果の関連を報告",
      "limitations": [
        "観察研究",
        "エラー容認・安全規則軽視と同義でない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "実証研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1228",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "cannon-edmondson-2005",
      "authors": "Cannon, M. D., & Edmondson, A. C.",
      "year": 2005,
      "title": "Failing to Learn and Learning to Fail (Intelligently)",
      "journal": "Long Range Planning, 38(3), 299–319",
      "doi": "10.1016/j.lrp.2005.04.005",
      "type": "conceptual review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織の失敗学習",
      "sample": "理論・事例",
      "method": "失敗の特定・分析・意図的実験と障害を整理",
      "finding": "失敗を一括せず種類と文脈を区別して学ぶ必要を論じる",
      "limitations": [
        "概念レビュー",
        "失敗礼賛ではない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2005.04.005",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "ellis-davidi-2005",
      "authors": "Ellis, S., & Davidi, I.",
      "year": 2005,
      "title": "After-Event Reviews: Drawing Lessons From Successful and Failed Experience",
      "journal": "Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 857–871",
      "doi": "10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.857",
      "type": "field experiments",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "軍事訓練チーム",
      "sample": "2研究",
      "method": "成功・失敗経験のレビュー内容と学習を比較",
      "finding": "結果と期待の差、成功と失敗の双方を分析するレビューの有用性を示唆",
      "limitations": [
        "軍事訓練文脈",
        "一般職場へ直接一般化しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "実証研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.857",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "lane-2006",
      "authors": "Lane, P. J., Koka, B. R., & Pathak, S.",
      "year": 2006,
      "title": "The Reification of Absorptive Capacity: A Critical Review and Rejuvenation of the Construct",
      "journal": "Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 833–863",
      "doi": "10.5465/amr.2006.22527456",
      "type": "critical review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "吸収能力研究",
      "sample": "先行研究",
      "method": "構成概念の利用と理論的逸脱を批判的に検討",
      "finding": "吸収能力を単純な代理指標へ固定しない必要を指摘",
      "limitations": [
        "概念レビュー",
        "測定の統一解を提供しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.22527456",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "van-wijk-2008",
      "authors": "Van Wijk, R., Jansen, J. J. P., & Lyles, M. A.",
      "year": 2008,
      "title": "Inter- and Intra-Organizational Knowledge Transfer: A Meta-Analytic Review and Assessment of Its Antecedents and Consequences",
      "journal": "Journal of Management Studies, 45(4), 830–853",
      "doi": "10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00771.x",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織内・組織間知識移転",
      "sample": "定量研究群",
      "method": "知識、組織、ネットワーク要因と結果を統合",
      "finding": "移転の先行要因・結果は文脈、方向、測定により異なる",
      "limitations": [
        "研究の異質性",
        "相関研究を多く含む"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00771.x",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "tsang-zahra-2008",
      "authors": "Tsang, E. W. K., & Zahra, S. A.",
      "year": 2008,
      "title": "Organizational Unlearning",
      "journal": "Human Relations, 61(10), 1435–1462",
      "doi": "10.1177/0018726708095710",
      "type": "conceptual review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織的アンラーニング",
      "sample": "理論・先行研究",
      "method": "アンラーニングの対象・過程・再学習との関係を概念化",
      "finding": "古い知識の破棄と新しい知識の獲得を区別して整理",
      "limitations": [
        "概念論文",
        "削除や忘却と単純同一視しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726708095710",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "keith-frese-2008",
      "authors": "Keith, N., & Frese, M.",
      "year": 2008,
      "title": "Effectiveness of Error Management Training: A Meta-Analysis",
      "journal": "Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 59–69",
      "doi": "10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.59",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "エラー管理訓練参加者",
      "sample": "訓練研究群",
      "method": "エラーを用いる訓練と転移・遂行を統合",
      "finding": "エラー管理訓練の肯定的平均効果を報告",
      "limitations": [
        "訓練課題中心",
        "実事故の容認を意味しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.59",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "mesmer-dechurch-2009",
      "authors": "Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & DeChurch, L. A.",
      "year": 2009,
      "title": "Information Sharing and Team Performance: A Meta-Analysis",
      "journal": "Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 535–546",
      "doi": "10.1037/a0013773",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "チームの情報共有",
      "sample": "情報共有研究群",
      "method": "情報共有とチーム成果、モデレーターを統合",
      "finding": "情報共有とチーム成果の正の関連を報告",
      "limitations": [
        "共有量と情報品質を区別",
        "因果方向に注意"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013773",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "wang-noe-2010",
      "authors": "Wang, S., & Noe, R. A.",
      "year": 2010,
      "title": "Knowledge Sharing: A Review and Directions for Future Research",
      "journal": "Human Resource Management Review, 20(2), 115–131",
      "doi": "10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.10.001",
      "type": "integrative review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "職場の知識共有",
      "sample": "定量・定性研究",
      "method": "個人、対人、組織、文化、動機要因を整理",
      "finding": "知識共有は多水準の条件に左右されると整理",
      "limitations": [
        "レビュー時点が2010年",
        "共有と利用を区別"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.10.001",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "decuyper-2010",
      "authors": "Decuyper, S., Dochy, F., & Van den Bossche, P.",
      "year": 2010,
      "title": "Grasping the Dynamic Complexity of Team Learning: An Integrative Model for Effective Team Learning in Organisations",
      "journal": "Educational Research Review, 5(2), 111–133",
      "doi": "10.1016/j.edurev.2010.02.002",
      "type": "integrative review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織のチーム学習",
      "sample": "概念・実証文献",
      "method": "共有、共同構築、建設的対立、境界横断等を統合",
      "finding": "チーム学習を循環的で相互的な行動過程として整理",
      "limitations": [
        "概念統合",
        "教育・組織研究を含む"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.02.002",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "ren-argote-2011",
      "authors": "Ren, Y., & Argote, L.",
      "year": 2011,
      "title": "Transactive Memory Systems 1985–2010: An Integrative Framework of Key Dimensions, Antecedents, and Consequences",
      "journal": "Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 189–229",
      "doi": "10.1080/19416520.2011.590300",
      "type": "integrative review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "チーム・組織のTMS研究",
      "sample": "25年の研究",
      "method": "専門分化、信頼、調整と先行要因・結果を統合",
      "finding": "誰が何を知るかの共有システムの形成と結果を整理",
      "limitations": [
        "TMSと共有データベースは同義でない",
        "文脈差"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2011.590300",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "connelly-2012",
      "authors": "Connelly, C. E., Zweig, D., Webster, J., & Trougakos, J. P.",
      "year": 2012,
      "title": "Knowledge Hiding in Organizations",
      "journal": "Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(1), 64–88",
      "doi": "10.1002/job.737",
      "type": "construct development and field studies",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "職場の知識要請と応答",
      "sample": "複数研究",
      "method": "回避的隠匿、知らないふり、合理的隠匿を定義・測定",
      "finding": "知識隠匿を共有の単なる欠如と区別",
      "limitations": [
        "自己報告",
        "合理的な守秘を悪意と決めつけない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "実証研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1002/job.737",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "junni-2013",
      "authors": "Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Taras, V., & Tarba, S. Y.",
      "year": 2013,
      "title": "Organizational Ambidexterity and Performance: A Meta-Analysis",
      "journal": "Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 299–312",
      "doi": "10.5465/amp.2012.0015",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織の探索・活用と成果",
      "sample": "組織研究群",
      "method": "両利き性と成果の関連・調整要因を統合",
      "finding": "両利き性と成果の肯定的関連を報告するが文脈差がある",
      "limitations": [
        "相関中心",
        "万能な組織構造を示さない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0015",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "witherspoon-2013",
      "authors": "Witherspoon, C. L., Bergner, J., Cockrell, C., & Stone, D. N.",
      "year": 2013,
      "title": "Antecedents of Organizational Knowledge Sharing: A Meta-Analysis and Critique",
      "journal": "Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(2), 250–277",
      "doi": "10.1108/13673271311315204",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "組織の知識共有",
      "sample": "46研究、約10,487人",
      "method": "態度・意図、報酬、組織文化の先行要因を統合",
      "finding": "複数の先行要因と共有意図・行動の関連を報告",
      "limitations": [
        "研究協力者の協力バイアス",
        "研究間異質性",
        "実利用を直接示さない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271311315204",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "frese-keith-2015",
      "authors": "Frese, M., & Keith, N.",
      "year": 2015,
      "title": "Action Errors, Error Management, and Learning in Organizations",
      "journal": "Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 661–687",
      "doi": "10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015205",
      "type": "integrative review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "個人・組織の行為エラー",
      "sample": "理論・実証文献",
      "method": "予防、検知、損害制御、学習、革新を統合",
      "finding": "エラー予防をエラー後の管理で補完する必要を論じる",
      "limitations": [
        "レビュー",
        "高危険領域では予防を弱めない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015205",
      "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",
      "sample": "136独立標本、22,000人超、約5,000集団",
      "method": "先行要因・結果・水準を統合",
      "finding": "心理的安全性と学習、発言、業績等の関連を整理",
      "limitations": [
        "因果確定ではない",
        "チーム・個人水準を区別"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12183",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "koeslag-2018",
      "authors": "Koeslag-Kreunen, M., Van den Bossche, P., Hoven, M., Van der Klink, M., & Gijselaers, W.",
      "year": 2018,
      "title": "When Leadership Powers Team Learning: A Meta-Analysis",
      "journal": "Small Group Research, 49(4), 475–513",
      "doi": "10.1177/1046496418764824",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "チームリーダーシップと学習",
      "sample": "43研究、92効果量",
      "method": "人志向・課題志向リーダーシップと課題型を統合",
      "finding": "リーダー行動がチーム学習行動の分散の18%を説明",
      "limitations": [
        "関連研究を含む",
        "課題型で関係が異なる"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496418764824",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "keiser-arthur-2021",
      "authors": "Keiser, N. L., & Arthur, W.",
      "year": 2021,
      "title": "A Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of the After-Action Review (or Debrief) and Factors That Influence Its Effectiveness",
      "journal": "Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(7), 1007–1032",
      "doi": "10.1037/apl0000821",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "AAR・デブリーフ参加者",
      "sample": "61研究、107効果量、915チーム・3,499人",
      "method": "AARと複数の訓練評価基準、設計条件を統合",
      "finding": "全体でd=0.79の改善を報告し、整合・客観資料等の条件差を提示",
      "limitations": [
        "訓練・軍事・医療等の文脈",
        "効果は設計条件の組合せで異なる",
        "日常業務へ単純外挿しない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000821",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "wiese-2022",
      "authors": "Wiese, C. W., Burke, C. S., Tang, Y., Hernandez, C., & Howell, R.",
      "year": 2022,
      "title": "Team Learning Behaviors and Performance: A Meta-Analysis of Direct Effects and Moderators",
      "journal": "Group & Organization Management, 47(3), 571–611",
      "doi": "10.1177/10596011211016928",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "チーム学習行動と成果",
      "sample": "113効果量、7,758チーム",
      "method": "学習行動の概念化とチーム・課題・方法条件を統合",
      "finding": "特にチーム内学習行動が成果を独自に予測",
      "limitations": [
        "相関を多く含む",
        "尺度幅・課題型等で差",
        "因果効果ではない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011211016928",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "arain-2024",
      "authors": "Arain, G. A., Bhatti, Z. A., Hameed, I., Khan, A. K., & Rudolph, C. W.",
      "year": 2024,
      "title": "A Meta-Analysis of the Nomological Network of Knowledge Hiding in Organizations",
      "journal": "Personnel Psychology, 77(2), 651–682",
      "doi": "10.1111/peps.12562",
      "type": "meta-analysis",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "職場の知識隠匿",
      "sample": "104研究、31,822人",
      "method": "25先行要因、7結果、3下位次元を統合",
      "finding": "知識隠匿の関連網と知識共有との差異を整理",
      "limitations": [
        "自己報告・横断研究を含む",
        "守秘・拒否権と悪意ある隠匿を区別"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12562",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "keiser-2024",
      "authors": "Keiser, N. L.",
      "year": 2024,
      "title": "A Systematic Review of Technology in the After-Action Review (or Debrief)",
      "journal": "Organizational Psychology Review, 14(3), 449–477",
      "doi": "10.1177/20413866241245314",
      "type": "systematic review",
      "status": "peer-reviewed",
      "population": "技術を用いるAAR・デブリーフ",
      "sample": "91実証研究、113 AAR",
      "method": "技術を使う段階、利用者、種類、用途を系統的に整理",
      "finding": "技術は一般的だが、最適な使い方を示す指針・根拠は限られる",
      "limitations": [
        "AAR・訓練文脈",
        "技術の種類・用途が異質",
        "録画・AI利用の一律推奨ではない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "統合研究",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866241245314",
      "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": "労働者データの目的限定・透明性・権利保護を提示",
      "limitations": [
        "拘束的条約ではない",
        "国内法を別途確認"
      ],
      "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-2020",
      "authors": "World Health Organization",
      "year": 2020,
      "title": "Patient Safety Incident Reporting and Learning Systems: Technical Report and Guidance",
      "journal": "World Health Organization, ISBN 9789240010338",
      "url": "https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240010338",
      "type": "official technical guidance",
      "status": "official guidance",
      "population": "医療安全インシデント報告・学習システム",
      "sample": "該当なし",
      "method": "報告データの目的、限界、分析、持続的改善を整理",
      "finding": "報告だけでなく慎重な解釈と学習・リスク低減への接続が必要",
      "limitations": [
        "医療分野",
        "他産業への適用は原則レベル"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "公式指針・ガバナンス",
      "source_url": "https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240010338",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "unesco-2021",
      "authors": "UNESCO",
      "year": 2021,
      "title": "Recommendation on Open Science",
      "journal": "UNESCO Legal Affairs",
      "url": "https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/recommendation-open-science",
      "type": "intergovernmental recommendation",
      "status": "official recommendation",
      "population": "科学・研究・知識基盤",
      "sample": "該当なし",
      "method": "開放性、再利用、公平性、知識主権、正当な制限の原則を提示",
      "finding": "知識は可能な限り開き、権利・プライバシー・機密等に基づく制限は比例的に正当化すべき",
      "limitations": [
        "職場KM専用ではない",
        "各法・契約を別途確認"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "公式指針・ガバナンス",
      "source_url": "https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/recommendation-open-science",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    },
    {
      "id": "nist-2024",
      "authors": "National Institute of Standards and Technology",
      "year": 2024,
      "title": "Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile",
      "journal": "NIST AI 600-1",
      "doi": "10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1",
      "type": "official risk management profile",
      "status": "official guidance",
      "population": "生成AIの設計・導入・運用",
      "sample": "リスク・対策の公的整理",
      "method": "ガバナンス、来歴、評価、インシデント開示等の推奨行動を提示",
      "finding": "虚偽生成、プライバシー、情報完全性、知財、過信等のリスク管理を要求",
      "limitations": [
        "任意のリスク管理枠組み",
        "組織知識基盤専用ではない"
      ],
      "evidence_role": "公式指針・ガバナンス",
      "source_url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1",
      "last_human_verified": "2026-07-12"
    }
  ]
}