IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

In Defense of Bumbling

  • Joseph W. Alba
Registered author(s):

    Throughout its history, consumer research has expressed nonuniform levels of affinity for alternative scientific styles. Fondness for the theory-oriented hypothetico-deductive approach has been understandably high, as there is much to recommend it. However, no approach is without shortcomings, and alternative approaches may offer unique avenues to knowledge development. The observations contained in this article are meant to illustrate some disadvantages of a monolithic view and, in so doing, foster tolerance of a research style that has been less favorably received.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Oxford University Press in its journal Journal of Consumer Research.

    Volume (Year): 38 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 6 ()
    Pages: 981 - 987

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:doi:10.1086/661230
    Contact details of provider:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:doi:10.1086/661230. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.