IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/maorev/v10y2014i03p381-389_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reflections on Choosing the Appropriate Level of Abstraction in Social Science Research

Author

Listed:
  • Murmann, Johann Peter

Abstract

Although researchers often do it subconsciously, every explanation involves choosing a level of abstraction at which the argument proceeds. The dominant North American style of research in Organization Theory, Strategy, and International Business encourages researchers to frame their explanations at the highest level of abstraction where country-level contextual factors are suppressed or ignored. Yet to provide powerful explanations for recent developments in China, researchers are drawn to a greater level of context specificity. This tension is evident in the Child and Marinova (2014) paper. One way to reduce the tension is to identify general causal mechanisms that combine in different ways to produce different results depending on context. This research strategy is more effective than seeking invariant, general patterns of development across all times and places.

Suggested Citation

  • Murmann, Johann Peter, 2014. "Reflections on Choosing the Appropriate Level of Abstraction in Social Science Research," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(3), pages 381-389, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:maorev:v:10:y:2014:i:03:p:381-389_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1740877600004319/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joseph L. C. Cheng & E. Geoffrey Love, 2022. "Designing chief innovation officer positions: a strategic contingency framework," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(4), pages 115-128, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:maorev:v:10:y:2014:i:03:p:381-389_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/mor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.