IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/stratm/v5y1984i4p335-350.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The comparative effectiveness of dialectical inquiry and Devil's advocacy: The impact of task biases on previous research findings

Author

Listed:
  • David M. Schweiger
  • Phyllis A. Finger

Abstract

Considerable debate has recently emerged concerning the comparative effectiveness of two methods of inquiry recommended for use in strategic decision making: dialectical inquiry (DI) and devil's advocacy (DA). Much of the comparative research surrounding this debate has made use of the Multiple Cue Probability Learning Paradigm (MCPLP). The equivocal nature of previous research findings using this paradigm and others, along with results from the present research indicating potential order of presentation effects, raises serious questions concerning previous operationalizations of these two methods.

Suggested Citation

  • David M. Schweiger & Phyllis A. Finger, 1984. "The comparative effectiveness of dialectical inquiry and Devil's advocacy: The impact of task biases on previous research findings," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(4), pages 335-350, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:stratm:v:5:y:1984:i:4:p:335-350
    DOI: 10.1002/smj.4250050404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050404
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/smj.4250050404?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    2. Gerardo A. Okhuysen & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 2002. "Integrating Knowledge in Groups: How Formal Interventions Enable Flexibility," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 370-386, August.

    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:bla:stratm:v:5:y:1984:i:4:p:335-350. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/0143-2095 .

    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.