IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02313051.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Self-Reported Limitations and Future Directions in Scholarly Reports : Analysis and Recommendations

Author

Listed:
  • Stéphane Brutus

    (EM - EMLyon Business School)

  • Herman Aguinis
  • Ulrich Wassmer

Abstract

The authors content analyzed self-reported limitations and directions for future research in 1,276 articles published between 1982 and 2007 in the Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, the Journal of Applied Psychology, the Journal of Management, and the Strategic Management Journal. In order of frequency, the majority of self-reported limitations, as well as directions for future research, pertains to threats to internal, external, and construct validity issues, and there is a significant increase in the reporting of these elements over time. Longitudinal analyses revealed that some of these increases varied across management subfields (i.e., business policy and strategy, organizational behavior, organizational theory, and human resource management), indicating unique research contexts within some research domains. Based on the analyses of self-reported limitations and future research directions, the authors offer eight guidelines for authors, reviewers, and editors. These guidelines refer to the need for authors to report limitations and to use a separate section for them and the need for reviewers to list limitations in their evaluations of manuscripts; authors and reviewers should prioritize limitations, and authors should report them in a way that describes their consequences for the interpretation of results. The guidelines for directions for future research focus on positioning them as a starting point for future research endeavors and for the advancement of theoretical issues. The authors also offer recommendations on how to use limitations and future research directions for the training of researchers. It is hoped that the adoption of these proposed guidelines and recommendations will maximize their value so that they can serve as true catalysts for further scientific progress in the field of management.

Suggested Citation

  • Stéphane Brutus & Herman Aguinis & Ulrich Wassmer, 2013. "Self-Reported Limitations and Future Directions in Scholarly Reports : Analysis and Recommendations," Post-Print hal-02313051, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02313051
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Herman Aguinis & Ravi S Ramani & Wayne F Cascio, 2020. "Methodological practices in international business research: An after-action review of challenges and solutions," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 51(9), pages 1593-1608, December.
    2. Jeremy D. Mackey & Jeremy R. Brees & Charn P. McAllister & Michelle L. Zorn & Mark J. Martinko & Paul Harvey, 2018. "Victim and Culprit? The Effects of Entitlement and Felt Accountability on Perceptions of Abusive Supervision and Perpetration of Workplace Bullying," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 153(3), pages 659-673, December.
    3. Mahalaxmi Adhikariparajuli & Abeer Hassan & Benedetta Siboni, 2021. "CSR Implication and Disclosure in Higher Education: Uncovered Points. Results from a Systematic Literature Review and Agenda for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-23, January.
    4. João Barata & Paulo Rupino Cunha & António Dias Figueiredo, 2023. "Self-reporting Limitations in Information Systems Design Science Research," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 65(2), pages 143-160, April.
    5. Jeremy D. Mackey & John D. Bishoff & Shanna R. Daniels & Wayne A. Hochwarter & Gerald R. Ferris, 2019. "Incivility’s Relationship with Workplace Outcomes: Enactment as a Boundary Condition in Two Samples," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 513-528, March.
    6. Lorraine Eden & Bo Bernhard Nielsen, 2020. "Research methods in international business: The challenge of complexity," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 51(9), pages 1609-1620, 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:hal:journl:hal-02313051. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.