The Presence of Something or the Absence of Nothing: Increasing Theoretical Precision in Management Research

By J. Edwards, James W. Berry. 2010

224 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7facde437b26feccd4e69078421537cb1f90f5f5

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Understanding “It Depends” in Organizational Research (2017, background): “As noted on the left-hand portion of the figure, there are varying levels of precision at which one might advance an interaction hypothesis as a function of the maturity of theory development and research in a particular domain (cf. Edmondson & McManus, 2007; Edwards & Berry, 2010).”
Are Counterproductive Work Behavior and Withdrawal Empirically Distinct? A Meta-Analytic Investigation (2017, methodology): “The specific boundary conditions of this expectation should align with existing guidelines and empirical evidence regarding indicators of a common construct (Edwards & Berry, 2010).”
The ABC for Studying the Too-Much-of-a-Good-Thing Effect (2016, background): “First, we elaborate on how it can guide theorizing (cf. Edwards & Berry, 2010).”
Meaningful Mediation Analysis: Plausible Causal Inference and Informative Communication (2017, methodology): “Such hypotheses will commonly be ranges rather than point estimates (Edwards and Berry 2010).”
Using Anchor-Based Methods to Determine the Smallest Effect Size of Interest (2019, background): “…is important not only in psychology, but in many other quantitative research fields, including organizational research (Cortina & Landis, 2011; Edwards & Berry, 2010), education research (Hill et al., 2008), communication research (Levine et al., 2008), and clinical psychology (Ferguson,…”
Spotlights, Floodlights, and the Magic Number Zero: Simple Effects Tests in Moderated Regression (2012, unknown): “Edwards and Berry (2010) argue that moving beyond hypotheses that merely postulate the sign of some effect to specifying the range of values where the effect holds can increase theoretical precision.”
At what sample size do correlations stabilize (2013, methodology): “Several authors, however, have argued that any field of science should move from binary decisions derived from the NHST procedure towards giving a more precise point estimate of the magnitude of an effect (Edwards & Berry, 2010; Kelley & Maxwell, 2003).”
Scientific Contributions of Within-Person Research in Management: Making the Juice Worth the Squeeze (2018, background): “As a point of comparison, Edwards and Berry (2010) found that fewer than 25% of propositions in articles published in Academy of Management Review provided predictions with conditions such as time.”
The Connection Between Varying Treatment Effects and the Crisis of Unreplicable Research (2015, background): “As Edwards and Berry (2010) note in the context of management research, methodological advances can simply make it easier for researchers to uncover statistically significant but scientifically unimportant effects.”
Enhancing Rigor in Quantitative Entrepreneurship Research (2019, background): “Furthermore, as the field matures, the relevant questions are no longer binary questions of whether or not, but of how much (e.g., Calin- Jageman & Cumming, 2019; Edwards & Berry, 2010).”
Psychology, Science, and Knowledge Construction: Broadening Perspectives from the Replication Crisis (2018, background): “As a by e w o r U n number of authors have argued in recent years (Edwards & Berry 2010, Fiedler 2017, d e d can be used to develop more nuanced theoretical propositions and more effective interventions.”
Eight Simple Guidelines for Improved Understanding of Transformations and Nonlinear Effects (2021, background): “Unfortunately, despite recent calls for more precise theorizing, the current theories still provide limited support for determining the functional form (Cortina, 2016; Edwards & Berry, 2010; Ferris et al., 2012).”
Evaluating and Developing Theories in the Information Systems Discipline (2012, background): “…constructs will be associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.70), or enunciated contingent (moderated) associations, more rigorous research designs are more likely to lead to obtaining data that shows lack of support for the theory (Edwards & Berry, 2010; Leavitt, Mitchell, & Peterson, 2010).”
HARKing's Threat to Organizational Research: Evidence From Primary and Meta‐Analytic Sources (2016, unknown): “, Fanelli, 2009; John et al., 2012). Research Question 1: To what extent are hypothesized status and effect size related? Table 1 shows meta-analytic results for the complete set of 247 effect sizes and each of the nine relations, corrected and uncorrected for unreliability. An omnibus meta-analytic”
The Too-Much-of-a-Good-Thing Effect in Management (2013, background): “Collectively, an issue raised by these articles is that, in order to make important advancements, theories should include a greater level of specificity (Edwards & Berry, 2010).”