Theory-oriented research: contribution to theory development

We propose that any theory-oriented research starts with an explor- ation of theory and practice to find out whether or not a proposition regarding the research topic of interest is available, and, if so, if it has yet been tested in one or more tests. This exploration helps to decide whether theory-building research, initial theory-testing research, or replication theory-testing research is needed. Flowchart 2 presents a flow diagram with the order of activities that are needed for deciding about the type of theory-oriented research that should be conducted: theory-building, initial theory- testing, or replication. Theory-oriented research starts with explo- ration of theory in order to find propositions on the research topic. If one or more relevant propositions are available, practice is explored in order to find support for the relevance of the proposition or to select one or more propositions for testing from a larger number of candidate propositions. If no such propositions are found in theory, then the practical exploration may yield ideas for relevant propositions. Based on the exploration of theory and practice, the researcher will be able to formulate a proposition for testing. If exploration has not been suc- cessful in this regard, theory-building research is needed to formulate propositions. If a proposition has been identified for testing, theory- testing research is asked for. This type of research can be initial theory- testing if the proposition has never been tested before or replication if the proposition was tested before. A series of replications is needed in order to enhance a proposition’s generalizability. If the proposition is not supported in a number of tests, the researcher may want to conduct an exploration again in order to identify other propositions for testing. Propositions Object of study Theory-testing research Theory-building research Exploration Figure 3.2 The empirical cycle for developing theory by formulating and testing propositions about an object of study

3.2.3 Replication

We emphasize the importance of replication, which is a much- underestimated contribution to theory development. The scientific literature is replete with reports of outcomes of initial theory-testing research: single studies in which a hypothesis is formulated, tested, and confirmed “one-shot studies”. The study might be a single experi- ment in which it is demonstrated that an experimental stimulus has an effect, or a single case study in which evidence confirms the hypothesis, or a single survey of a population in which the likelihood of the cor- rectness of the hypothesis is proven to be “significant”. Proposition not tested before Proposition tested before Proposition not available Proposition available Proposition not available Exploration of theory for finding propositions Exploration of practice for finding propositions Exploration of practice for confirming relevance of proposition Theory-building research See Flowchart 2B Theory-testing research Initial theory-testing See Flowchart 2A Replication See Flowchart 2A Theory-oriented research Proposition available Flowchart 2 Deciding on the type of theory-oriented research Although one-shot tests of propositions can be valuable contribu- tions to theory development, results should always be treated with cau- tion because of two reasons. First, erroneous conclusions might be drawn regarding the instances studied. Second, one instance or one group of instances is not representative of the domain to which the proposition is assumed to be applicable. With respect to the first problem, even though the study would have been set up according to scientific standards, the study might have been flawed and the reported conclusion regarding the hypothesis rejection or confirmation might be erroneous. The usual checks on the veracity of published empirical work – mainly through peer review Box 3 Scientific realism We define the survey as a study in which a a single population in the real life context is selected and b scores obtained from this population are analysed in a quantitative manner. We define the case study as a study in which a one case single case study or a small number of cases comparative case study in their real life context are selected and b scores obtained from these cases are analysed in a qualitative manner. A conclusion based on one or a small number of observations cannot be generated by statistical means and can be characterized as “qualitative”. This distinction between quantitative or statistical and qualitative methods of analysis does not imply a differ- ence in epistemological grounding of these methods. Epistemologically, both approaches are the same in all relevant respects: “they attempt to develop logically consistent theories, they derive observable implications from these theories, they test these impli- cations against empirical observations or measurements, and they use the results of these tests to make inferences on how to modify the theories tested” George and Bennett 2005: 6. Basic assumptions underlying this epistemology are a that there are phenomena that exist independent of our theory and that they have attributes that exist independent of our scientific observations, b that we can make these attributes observable through scientific instruments even in those cases in which the relevant phenomena are not observable in the everyday sense of the word, and c that, subject to a recognition that scientific methods are fallible and that most scientific knowledge is approximate, we are justified in accepting findings of scientists as true descriptions of phenomena and, therefore, as facts that matter in practice. We adhere to this common sense conception of science, known as scientific realism, in this book. We see no reason to ground this position in philosophical arguments or to defend it against alternative ones, such as constructivism and other positions that argue against the possibility of approximately true knowledge of aspects of a really existing world.