The significant difference paradigm promotes bad science

Journal of Business Research

Volumn 66, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 1393-1397

  Hubbard, Raymond ^a   Murray Lindsay, R ^b  

^a DRAKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Causal explanation; Practical applications; Predictive precision; Progressive science; Statistical power

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878135292     PISSN: 01482963     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.05.004     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Abelson R.P. A retrospective on the significance test ban of 1999 (if there were no significance tests, they would be invented). What If There Were No Significance Tests? 1997, 117-141. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. L.L. Harlow, S.A. Mulaik, J.H. Steiger (Eds.).
2. Balakrishnan R., Linsmeier T.J., Venkatachalam M. Financial benefits from JIT adoption: Effects of customer concentration and cost structure. The Accounting Review 1996, April, 71:183-205.
3. Ball D., Sawyer A. Issues involving the use of significant sameness in testing replications and generating knowledge. Journal of Business Research. 2013, 66(9):1389-1392. (this issue).
4. Bauer H.H. Scientific literacy and the myth of the scientific method 1992, University of Illinois Press, Urbana.
5. Box G.E.P. Statistics and quality improvement. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A 1994, 157:209-229.
6. Brown W., Coney K.A. Building a replication tradition in marketing. Marketing 1776-1976 and beyond 1976, 622-625. American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL. K.L. Bernhardt (Ed.).
7. Bunge M. Mechanism and explanation. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 1997, 24(4):410-465.
8. Bunge M. How does it work?: The search for explanatory mechanisms. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 2004, 34(2):182-210.
9. Christensen C.M., Carlile P.R. Course research: Using the case method to build and teach management theory. The Academy of Management Learning and Education 2009, June, 8:240-251.
10. Christensen C.M., Raynor M.E. Why hard-nosed executives should care about management theory. Harvard Business Review 2003, September, 81:66-74.
11. Cohen J. The statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research: A review. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 1962, September, 65:145-153.
12. Cohen J. The earth is round (pandlt;.05). American Psychologist 1994, December, 49:997-1003.
13. Cohen J., Cohen P. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences 1983, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. 2nd edn.
14. Combs J.G. Big samples and small effects: let's not trade relevance and rigor for power. Academy of Management Journal 2010, February, 53:9-13.
15. Cook T.D. Quasi-experimentation: Its ontology, epistemology, and methodology. Beyond Method 1983, 74-94. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA. G. Morgan (Ed.).
16. Cook T.D., Campbell D.T. Quasi-experimentation: Design andamp; analysis issues for field settings 1979, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
17. Czyzewski A.B., Dickinson H.D. Factors leading to the rejection of accountants' manuscripts. Journal of Accounting Education 1990, Spring, 8:93-104.
18. Danermark B., Ekstroanddie;m M., Jakobsen L., Karlsson J.C. Explaining society: Critical realism in the social sciences 2002, Routledge, London.
19. Easley R.W., Madden C.S., Dunn M.G. Conducting marketing science: The role of replication in the research process. Journal of Business Research 2000, April, 48:83-92.
20. Eden D. Replication, meta-analysis, scientific progress, and AMJ's publication policy. Academy of Management Journal 2002, October, 45:841-846.
21. Ehrenberg A.S.C., Bound J.A. Predictability and prediction (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A 1993, 156:167-206.
22. Hacking I. Representing and Intervening 1983, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
23. Haig B.D. An abductive theory of scientific method. Psychological Methods 2005, 10(4):371-388.
24. Hubbard R., Armstrong J.S. Replications and extensions in marketing: Rarely published but quite contrary. International Journal of Research in Marketing 1994, June, 11:233-248.
25. Huber J. Journal of Marketing Research in the new competitive journalistic environment. Journal of Marketing Research 2007, February, 44:1-3.
26. Jones T.C., Dugdale D. The ABC bandwagon and the juggernaut of modernity. Accounting, Organizations and Society 2002, 27:121-163.
27. Ketokivi M., Mantere S. Two strategies for inductive reasoning in organizational research. Academy of Management Review 2010, 35(2):315-333.
28. Kinney W.R., Wempe W.F. Further evidence on the extent and origins of JIT's profitability effects. The Accounting Review 2002, January, 77:203-225.
29. Kuhn T.S. The structure of scientific revolutions 1970, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 2nd edn.
30. Ladyman J. Understanding Philosophy of Science 2002, Routledge, London.
31. Lindsay R.M. Incorporating statistical power into the test of significance procedure: A methodological and empirical inquiry. Behavioral Research in Accounting 1993, 5:211-236.
32. Lindsay R.M. Reconsidering the status of tests of significance: An alternative criterion of adequacy. Accounting, Organizations and Society 1995, 20(1):35-53.
33. Lindsay R.M., Ehrenberg A.S.C. The design of replicated studies. The American Statistician 1993, August, 47:217-228.
34. Lindsay R.M., Hubbard R. Making progress in theory development in applied management accounting research (part 1): thinking of case studies in a largely unexplored way following from a critical realist perspective. Working Paper 2010, University of Lethbridge.
35. Locke E.A. The case for inductive theory building. Journal of Management 2007, December, 33:867-890.
36. Madden C.S., Easley R.W., Dunn M.G. How journal editors view replication research. Journal of Advertising 1995, 24:77-87.
37. Meehl P.E. Theory-testing in psychology and physics: A methodological paradox. Philosophy of Science 1967, June, 34:103-115.
38. Mezias S.J., Regnier M.O. Walking the walk as well as talking the talk: Replication and the normal science paradigm in strategic management research. Strategic Organization 2007, 5(3):183-196.
39. Nash L.K. The Nature of the Natural Sciences 1963, Little, Brown and Co, Boston.
40. Nelder J.A. Statistics, science and technology (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A 1986, 149:109-121.
41. Neuliep J.W., Crandall R. Editorial bias against replication research. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality 1990, 5:85-90.
42. Neuliep J.W., Crandall R. Reviewer bias against replication research. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality 1993, 8:22-29.
43. Ottley D.T., Pollanen R.M. Budgetary criteria in performance evaluation: A critical appraisal using new evidence. Accounting, Organizations and Society 2000, May-July, 25:483-496.
44. Popper, K.R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.
45. Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and Refutations. London: Routledge.
46. Ravetz, J. R. (1971). Scientific knowledge and its social problems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
47. Reid, L. N., Soley, L. C., and Wimmer, R. D. (1981). Replication in advertising research: 1977, 1978, 1979. Journal of Advertising, 10, 3-13.
48. Rosenthal, R. (1990). Replication in behavioral research. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 1-30.
49. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
50. Stewart, D. W. (2002, October). Getting published: Reflections of an old editor. Journal of Marketing, 66, 1-6.
51. Suppe, F. (1977). Critical introduction and afterword. In F. Suppe (Ed.), The Structure of Scientific Theories (2nd edn.). University of Illinois PressUrbana 3-241 and 617-730.
52. Tsang, E. W. K., and Kwan, K. M. (1999, October). Replication and theory development in organizational science: A critical realist perspective. Academy of Management Review,24, 759-780.
53. Weick, K. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 385-390.
54. Ziliak, S. T., and McCloskey, D. N. (2008). The cult of statistical significance: How the standard error costs us jobs, justice, and lives. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan
55. Ziman, J. (1978). Reliable knowledge: An exploration of the grounds for belief in science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.