Midlands State University Library
Image from Google Jackets

Organizational sciences’ obsession with “that’s interesting!” consequences and an alternative created by Madan M. Pillutla and Stefan Thau

By: Contributor(s): Material type: TextTextSeries: Organizational Psychology Review ; Volume 3, number 2,Los Angeles Sage 2012Content type:
  • text
Media type:
  • unmediated
Carrier type:
  • volume
ISSN:
  • 2041-3866
Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: We suggest that the organizational science’s increasing preoccupation with “interesting” theories and “counterintuitive” facts can lead to nonreplicable findings, fragmented theory, and irrelevance. The focus on the interesting and novel reveals a profound misunderstanding of the scientific enterprise. Organizational scholarship will be better off if it reverts to according primacy to the problem being solved over novel theory development.
Reviews from LibraryThing.com:
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Vol info Copy number Status Notes Date due Barcode
Journal Article Journal Article Main Library - Special Collections HF5548.8 ORG (Browse shelf(Opens below)) Vol. 3, No. 2 pages 187-194 SP16949 Not for loan For in-house use only

We suggest that the organizational science’s increasing preoccupation with “interesting” theories and “counterintuitive” facts can lead to nonreplicable findings, fragmented theory, and irrelevance. The focus on the interesting and novel reveals a profound misunderstanding of the scientific enterprise. Organizational scholarship will be better off if it reverts to according primacy to the problem being solved over novel theory development.

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.