The following is a summary for readings undertaken in my OB seminar this afternoon. It is a formal essay submitted for discussions and circulated among the other three PhD students before my posting here in my blog. Should you find any errors, mistakes and/or ideas that discomfort you, don’t be hesitated to drop me a few lines.
Popper’s Deductive Method and Kilduff’s Publishing Theory
To justify inductive inferences, a principle of induction needs to be established. While this principle on a higher level seems to be improbable to some extent, and Popper doesn’t say what this principle is, he does give his own idea on induction as science and everyday life can proceed without using induction. Popper’s method is purely deductive, very strictly following the process of inductive inference and arguing from negative singular to negative universal statement, thus Popper steps further on that verified predictions are “no reason to believe the hypothesis is true or even probable”. Popper also believes that scientific theories can be supported by the evidence, but even with evidence support, theories may not be scientific, thus he argues an acceptable theory in empirical science must conform to three requirements: 1) the theory cannot be judged true of false only by its meaning; 2) the theory can be contradicted by observation; and 3) they theory is corroborated and has passed all its tests.
The importance of Popper’s deductive method is that he points out the weakness of the widely employed inductive methods as we have to regard a universal statement as true from our experience and cannot always find the ultimate highest level of the principle. His method of deductive inference is purely logical and he indicates how people can judge a hypothesis, not by verified predictions even though it may seem to increase the probability. Popper’s requirements of a true theory give us an easy but succinct way to judge its acceptability.
Kilduff’s publishing theory is mainly a guide for people who are interested in publishing in AMR, but his extrapolation means much for starters as well as for veterans as the topic covers theory value enhancement and common mistakes people have been making in submission of papers.
Kilduff argues a good theory paper requires “nurturing, development, and revision before submission”. He suggests ways of a careful development process including 1) offering big ideas, 2) structuring original ideas, and 3) revision to “sharpen the clarity, logic, vividness, precision, succinctness, and surprise of your writing”.
The importance of this article lies in the following aspects. First, it tells the process of all stages that a good and acceptable paper should go through (initial inspiration, discussion with colleagues, formal discussion, critiques from experts and conferences, and submission, and perhaps revision at the next circle) so that people will know how to follow step by step. Second, it explains the importance of each stage and how to complete these stages, for example, the importance of an abstract. Third, this article also lists five major cautions to help avoid rejection at the final phase of publication, which is meaningful to even successful submitters.
Popper and Kilduff both talk about theory development. Popper indicates the false point in developing a good theory, i.e., by using inductive method, proposes his own of deductive method, and finalize by raising examples to help clarify misunderstandings. Kilduff gives recommendations before pointing out major but common mistakes in the process of developing theories and submission. If combined, the two articles show the whole process of doing research.
