Replication in strategic management: scientific testing for validity, generalizability, and usefulness

Replication in strategic management: scientific testing for validity, generalizability, and... A number of studies have shown that little replication and extension research is published in the business disciplines. This has deleterious consequences for the development of a cumulative body of knowledge in these same areas. It has been speculated, but never formally tested, that replication research is more likely to be published in lower tiers of the journal hierarchy. The present paper indicates very low levels of replication in management and strategic management journals, regardless of their prestige. Moreover, even those replications that are published tend not to be critical—odd in applied social sciences that are largely preparadigmatic and where extensibility, generalizability and utility of scientific constructs tend to be low. The goal of science is empirical generalization, or knowledge development. Systematically conducted replications with extensions facilitate this goal. It is clear, however, that many editors, reviewers, and researchers hold attitudes toward replication research that betray a lack of understanding about its role. Long‐run strategies to dispel these misconceptions must involve changes in graduate training aimed at making the conduct of such vital work second nature. It is further suggested that journals in all tiers create a section specifically for the publication of replication research, and that top‐tier journals take the lead in this regard. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Strategic Management Journal Wiley

Replication in strategic management: scientific testing for validity, generalizability, and usefulness

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/replication-in-strategic-management-scientific-testing-for-validity-HpA8cXElht
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
ISSN
0143-2095
eISSN
1097-0266
DOI
10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199803)19:3<243::AID-SMJ951>3.0.CO;2-0
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

A number of studies have shown that little replication and extension research is published in the business disciplines. This has deleterious consequences for the development of a cumulative body of knowledge in these same areas. It has been speculated, but never formally tested, that replication research is more likely to be published in lower tiers of the journal hierarchy. The present paper indicates very low levels of replication in management and strategic management journals, regardless of their prestige. Moreover, even those replications that are published tend not to be critical—odd in applied social sciences that are largely preparadigmatic and where extensibility, generalizability and utility of scientific constructs tend to be low. The goal of science is empirical generalization, or knowledge development. Systematically conducted replications with extensions facilitate this goal. It is clear, however, that many editors, reviewers, and researchers hold attitudes toward replication research that betray a lack of understanding about its role. Long‐run strategies to dispel these misconceptions must involve changes in graduate training aimed at making the conduct of such vital work second nature. It is further suggested that journals in all tiers create a section specifically for the publication of replication research, and that top‐tier journals take the lead in this regard. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Journal

Strategic Management JournalWiley

Published: Mar 1, 1998

References

  • Peer review for journals: Evidence on quality control, fairness, and innovation
    Armstrong, Armstrong
  • The development of strategic management: Journal quality and article impact
    Franke, Franke; Edlund, Edlund; Oster, Oster
  • How are the mighty fallen: Rejected classic articles by leading economists
    Gans, Gans; Shepherd, Shepherd
  • Management by panacea: Accounting for transience
    Gill, Gill; Whittle, Whittle
  • An empirical comparison of published replication research in accounting, economics, finance, management, and marketing
    Hubbard, Hubbard; Vetter, Vetter
  • Investment performance of common stocks in relation to insider ownership
    Kim, Kim; Lee, Lee; Francis, Francis
  • Publication system biases associated with the statistical testing paradigm
    Lindsay, Lindsay
  • Assessment of statistical power in contemporary strategy research
    Mazen, Mazen; Hemmasi, Hemmasi; Lewis, Lewis
  • The influence of ownership on performance: An empirical study
    Oswald, Oswald; Jahera, Jahera
  • The impact of formalized strategic planning on financial performance in small organizations
    Robinson, Robinson; Pearce, Pearce

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off