| spelling |
oapen-20.500.12657-528842022-02-16T10:10:54Z Data, Methods and Theory in the Organizational Sciences Murphy, Kevin organizational research; SIOP; SIOP Organizational Frontiers; SIOP Organizational Frontiers Series; organizational frontiers; organizations; Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology; I/O psychology bic Book Industry Communication::K Economics, finance, business & management::KJ Business & management::KJU Organizational theory & behaviour bic Book Industry Communication::J Society & social sciences::JM Psychology bic Book Industry Communication::J Society & social sciences::JM Psychology::JMJ Occupational & industrial psychology In both Management and I/O Psychology, contributions to theory remain an important, and in many cases, sole criterion for evaluating submissions to top journals. In many ways, the definition of theory and the primacy of theory in the organizational sciences is an outlier; in most sciences, articles rarely even mention theories, much less build themselves around advancing theory. We propose that the classic description of the scientific methods provides a better guide to understanding the relationships between data, methods and theory than our current model, which often starts and ends with proposing a theory, which may never again be referenced or tested. We describe a pyramid of types of evidence that is useful for assessing the reliability and worth of particular sorts of data and show how this approach to evidence informs the scientific method and assists in identifying and building useful theories. 2022-02-16T10:05:04Z 2022-02-16T10:05:04Z 2022 book 9780367857707 9780367857646 9781003015000 https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/52884 eng Taylor & Francis Routledge 10.4324/9781003015000 10.4324/9781003015000 7b3c7b10-5b1e-40b3-860e-c6dd5197f0bb 735a2c82-897f-4c5e-afba-da0077df77e3 9780367857707 9780367857646 9781003015000 Routledge open access
|
| description |
In both Management and I/O Psychology, contributions to theory remain an important, and in many cases, sole criterion for evaluating submissions to top journals. In many ways, the definition of theory and the primacy of theory in the organizational sciences is an outlier; in most sciences, articles rarely even mention theories, much less build themselves around advancing theory. We propose that the classic description of the scientific methods provides a better guide to understanding the relationships between data, methods and theory than our current model, which often starts and ends with proposing a theory, which may never again be referenced or tested. We describe a pyramid of types of evidence that is useful for assessing the reliability and worth of particular sorts of data and show how this approach to evidence informs the scientific method and assists in identifying and building useful theories.
|
