|
|
|
|
CONTRIBUTORS:
|
|
|
JOURNAL:
|
|
|
YEAR:
|
1995
|
|
PUB TYPE:
|
Journal Article
|
|
SUBJECT(S):
|
Organization-Philosophy; Organization-Research; Social-sciences-Authorship
|
|
DISCIPLINE:
|
No discipline assigned
|
|
HTTP:
|
|
|
LANGUAGE:
|
English
|
|
PUB ID:
|
103-344-260
(Last edited on
2005/03/10 10:22:38 US/Mountain)
|
|
SPONSOR(S):
|
|
|
ABSTRACT:
A commentary on Robert I. Sutton and Barry M. Staw's "What Theory is Not," which appears in this issue. Sutton and Staw are concerned with theory as a product rather than as a process. The theorizing process intermittently produces reference lists, data, lists of variables, diagrams, and lists of hypotheses--the five elements that Sutton and Staw contend are not theory. These emergent products summarize progress, provide direction, and function as placemarkers. Although they contain elements of theory, they are not fully-fledged theories. The key is in the context, which can be phrased in terms of the five elements. If prior and subsequent steps in theorizing are simply more of the same, the theorizing is less vigorous and promising than if people are progressing from one element to another. References and data seem to have less generality and seem to be further from theory than lists, diagrams, and hypotheses. This suggests that it is easier to dismiss papers that employ the first two elements in lieu of theory than those that employ the last three.
|
|
|
|
STATISTICS
|
|
Click on # to view
|
|
Citations
|
|
0
|
|
References
|
|
0
|
|
Comments
|
|
0
|
|
Quality
|
|
0/0.00
|
|
Interest
|
|
0/0.00
|
|
View(er)s
|
|
7/1386
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Prev |
Next |
|
