Compare and contrast the views
Similarities among the views Gelso’s (2006) view of theory is similar, in some respects, to that of Wacker’s (1998). The reason for this conclusion is that there are similarities due to the criteria that determine the testability of the theory, as testability has a close relationship with generalizability. The reason for this conclusion is that testability infers generalizability as well, as if the theory can be tested, it should be generalizable in order to be useful. Research that is not generalizable is usually not worth doing. Also, both Gelso’s (2006) theory view and Wacker’s (1998) view stress logic as being an important criterion for a theory. What this means is that both views stress internal consistency as being important. In addition, they also stress the ability to understand theory on a general level as well.
An additional similarity is between the term retroduction used by Harlow (2009) and abstraction. This is a term used by Wacker (1998) to explain situations in which either data from many sources in the form of multiple case studies or many relationships, in the case of abstraction, are used to strengthen a theory. What this also means is that the research itself will be strengthened, resulting in a higher rate of trustworthiness of the data. …show more content…
Choosing organizations that have a strategy in place to take advantage of the skills of their employees can provide study participants that are in a positive situation, and create the best opportunity for primary research to succeed (Vandarajan & Jayachandran, 1999). What this means is that, to improve the relationship between theory and research, researchers will want to choose companies to participate in the process that have a value-creating strategy in place. This type of strategy creates a positive atmosphere in which to conduct a study (Vandarjan & Jayachandran,
Similarities among the views Gelso’s (2006) view of theory is similar, in some respects, to that of Wacker’s (1998). The reason for this conclusion is that there are similarities due to the criteria that determine the testability of the theory, as testability has a close relationship with generalizability. The reason for this conclusion is that testability infers generalizability as well, as if the theory can be tested, it should be generalizable in order to be useful. Research that is not generalizable is usually not worth doing. Also, both Gelso’s (2006) theory view and Wacker’s (1998) view stress logic as being an important criterion for a theory. What this means is that both views stress internal consistency as being important. In addition, they also stress the ability to understand theory on a general level as well.
An additional similarity is between the term retroduction used by Harlow (2009) and abstraction. This is a term used by Wacker (1998) to explain situations in which either data from many sources in the form of multiple case studies or many relationships, in the case of abstraction, are used to strengthen a theory. What this also means is that the research itself will be strengthened, resulting in a higher rate of trustworthiness of the data. …show more content…
Choosing organizations that have a strategy in place to take advantage of the skills of their employees can provide study participants that are in a positive situation, and create the best opportunity for primary research to succeed (Vandarajan & Jayachandran, 1999). What this means is that, to improve the relationship between theory and research, researchers will want to choose companies to participate in the process that have a value-creating strategy in place. This type of strategy creates a positive atmosphere in which to conduct a study (Vandarjan & Jayachandran,