Moving the Pendulum Back to the Middle: Reflections on and Introduction to the Inductive Research Special Issue of Journal of Business and Psychology

Journal of Business and Psychology

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 499-502

  Spector, Paul E ^a   Rogelberg, Steven G ^b   Ryan, Ann Marie ^c   Schmitt, Neal ^c   Zedeck, Sheldon ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHARLOTTE   (United States)

^c MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Deductive research; Deductive theory; Inductive research; Inductive theory; Special issue

Indexed keywords

EID: 84939884107     PISSN: 08893268     EISSN: 1573353X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10869-014-9372-7     Document Type: Editorial

References (6)

1. Author. (2014). Journal Editor Ethics 2.0. Retrieved April 23, 2014, from http://editorethics.uncc.edu/code.aspx.
2. Fanelli, D. (2010). “Positive” results increase down the hierarchy of the sciences. PLoS ONE,5(4), 1–10.
3. Hambrick, D. C. (2007). The field of management’s devotion to theory: too much of a good thing? Academy of Management Journal,50(6), 1346–1352. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2007.28166119.
4. Ho, V. T. (2012). Interpersonal counterproductive work behaviors: distinguishing between person-focused versus task-focused behaviors and their antecedents. Journal of Business and Psychology,27(4), 467–482.
5. Kacmar, K. M., & Whitfield, J. M. (2000). An additional rating method for journal articles in the field of management. Organizational Research Methods,3(4), 392–406. doi:10.1177/109442810034005.
6. Locke, E. A. (2007). The case for inductive theory building. Journal of Management, 33(6), 867–890. doi:10.1177/0149206307307636.