Calls for the inclusion of levels of analysis in theory building and testing have increased over the last 25 years. Through analysis of 539 published articleswe assess the prevalence of incorporation of levels of analysis in theory/hypothesis formulationmeasurement data analysis and subsequent theory–data alignment (i.e. article quality) within charismatic and transformational leadership research. Additionally we examine the relationship between incorporation of levels of analysis into research and publication source quality as reflected by journal impact factors or when not available estimated journal impact factors. When controlling for the level of analysis within all articles results revealed that increasing the complexity of the level of analysis (i.e. higher than individual level) increased the likelihood thatmeasurement analysis and alignment of theory and data would be presented at the appropriate levels of analysis. In contrast for articles with published impact factorswhen controlling for the level of analysis results revealed that increasing the complexity of the level of analysis (i.e. higher than individual level) decreased the likelihood that measurement analysis and alignment of theory and data would be presented at the appropriate levels of analysis.