Perspective—Discovery Within Validation Logic: Deliberately Surfacing, Complementing, and Substituting Abductive Reasoning in Hypothetico-Deductive Inquiry

We propose a more explicit role for abductive reasoning, or the development of initial explanation, in hypothetico-deductive (H-D) inquiry. We begin by describing the roots of abduction in pragmatism and its role in exploration and discovery. Recognizing that pragmatism treats abductive reasoning as inevitable, we argue that it can also be a deliberate form of reasoning in scientific inquiry, articulating the unique place it can have in hypothetico-deductive theorizing. We explain the opportunities from surfacing abductive reasoning in H-D where it already exists; from explicitly acknowledging abductive reasoning as a complement in building logical chains in H-D; and from using abductive reasoning as a substitute for H-D logic when a body of knowledge exhibits inconsistent, contradictory, or discrepant results. We elaborate strategies for data search and selection, data production and compilation, and analytical corroboration. Our overall argument is that the deliberate use of abductive reasoning in hypothetico-deductive projects has distinct advantages stemming from an explicitly tight connection between data and theory. We end by explaining the benefits of actively recognizing the role of abductive reasoning in organizational and management theorizing.