IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v57y2006i2d10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601980.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A critique of statistical modelling in management science from a critical realist perspective: its role within multimethodology

Author

Listed:
  • J Mingers

    (University of Kent)

Abstract

Management science was historically dominated by an empiricist philosophy that saw quantitative modelling and statistical analysis as the only legitimate research method. More recently interpretive or constructivist philosophies have also developed employing a range of non-quantitative methods. This has sometimes led to divisive debates. ‘Critical realism’ has been proposed as a philosophy of science that can potentially provide a synthesis in recognizing both the value and limitations of these approaches. This paper explores the critical realist critique of quantitative modelling, as exemplified by multivariate statistics, and argues that its grounds must be re-conceptualized within a multimethodological framework.

Suggested Citation

  • J Mingers, 2006. "A critique of statistical modelling in management science from a critical realist perspective: its role within multimethodology," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(2), pages 202-219, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:57:y:2006:i:2:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601980
    DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601980
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601980
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601980?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deirdre N. McCloskey & Stephen T. Ziliak, 1996. "The Standard Error of Regressions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 97-114, March.
    2. Stephen T. Ziliak & Deirdre N. McCloskey, 2004. "Size Matters: The Standard Error of Regressions in the American Economic Review," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 1(2), pages 331-358, August.
    3. Unknown, 2000. "Book Review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1189-1191, December.
    4. Wanda J. Orlikowski & Jack J. Baroudi, 1991. "Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-28, March.
    5. Steve Fleetwood, 2001. "Causal Laws, Functional Relations and Tendencies," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 201-220.
    6. Rosenberg, Alexander, 1992. "Economics--Mathematical Politics or Science of Diminishing Returns?," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226727233, December.
    7. Goles, Tim & Hirschheim, Rudy, 2000. "The paradigm is dead, the paradigm is dead...long live the paradigm: the legacy of Burrell and Morgan," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 249-268, June.
    8. Sims, Christopher A, 1980. "Macroeconomics and Reality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-48, January.
    9. Arnold Zellner, 1997. "Bayesian Analysis in Econometrics and Statistics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 825.
    10. N/A, 2000. "Book Reviews," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 46(1), pages 76-78, March.
    11. Mills, Terence C. & Pepper, Gordon T., 1999. "Assessing the forecasters: an analysis of the forecasting records of the Treasury, the London Business School and the National Institute," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 247-257, July.
    12. Cooley, Thomas F. & Leroy, Stephen F., 1985. "Atheoretical macroeconometrics: A critique," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 283-308, November.
    13. J Mingers, 2000. "The contribution of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for OR/MS and systems," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(11), pages 1256-1270, November.
    14. Eden, C, 1993. "From the playpen to the bombsite: the changing nature of management science," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 139-154, March.
    15. Makridakis, Spyros & Hibon, Michele, 2000. "The M3-Competition: results, conclusions and implications," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 451-476.
    16. N/A, 2000. "Book Review," Vision, , vol. 4(1_suppl), pages 77-86, January.
    17. Geoff Walsham, 1995. "The Emergence of Interpretivism in IS Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 376-394, December.
    18. Philip J. Dobson, 2001. "The Philosophy of Critical Realism—An Opportunity for Information Systems Research," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 199-210, June.
    19. Hendry, David F., 1995. "Dynamic Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198283164.
    20. John Mingers, 2001. "Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 240-259, September.
    21. Unknown, 2000. "Book Review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1193-1195, December.
    22. Lucas, Robert Jr, 1976. "Econometric policy evaluation: A critique," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 19-46, January.
    23. Mingers, John & Brocklesby, John, 1997. "Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 489-509, October.
    24. W Ulrich, 2003. "Beyond methodology choice: critical systems thinking as critically systemic discourse," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(4), pages 325-342, April.
    25. Unknown, 2000. "Book Review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1191-1193, December.
    26. Andrew Abbott, 1998. "The Causal Devolution," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 27(2), pages 148-181, November.
    27. M C Jackson, 1999. "Towards coherent pluralism in management science," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 50(1), pages 12-22, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Richard Ormerod, 2006. "The OR approach to forecasting: comments on Mingers' paper," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(11), pages 1371-1373, November.
    2. M C Jackson, 2011. "The multi-methodology debate: a response to Harwood," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 811-813, April.
    3. Z Zhu, 2011. "After paradim: why mixing-methodology theorising fails and how to make it work again," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 784-798, April.
    4. Mike C Jackson, 2006. "John Mingers is a critical realist imperialist," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(11), pages 1370-1371, November.
    5. Kazakov, Rossen & Howick, Susan & Morton, Alec, 2021. "Managing complex adaptive systems: A resource/agent qualitative modelling perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(1), pages 386-400.
    6. Mike Chiasson & Robert Fildes & Mike Pidd, 2006. "Intelligent thinking instead of critical realism?," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(11), pages 1373-1375, November.
    7. Thanos Fragkandreas, 2023. "Case study research on innovation systems: paradox, dialectical analysis and resolution," Working Papers 65, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised 15 May 2023.
    8. S A Harwood, 2011. "Mixing methodologies and paradigmatic commensurability," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 806-809, April.
    9. J Mingers, 2011. "Clarification or confusion: response to Harwood," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 809-811, April.
    10. M. Nassereddine & M. A. Ellakkis & A. Azar & M. D. Nayeri, 2021. "Developing a Multi-methodology for Conflict Resolution: Case of Yemen’s Humanitarian Crisis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 301-320, April.
    11. Tea Golob & Matej Makarovič, 2019. "Reflexivity and Structural Positions: The Effects of Generation, Gender and Education," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-23, August.
    12. Marie-José Avenier & Catherine Thomas, 2015. "Finding one's way around various methodological guidelines for doing rigorous case studies: A comparison of four epistemological frameworks [Se frayer un chemin parmi les différentes recommandation," Post-Print halshs-01491454, HAL.
    13. Mingers, John, 2015. "Helping business schools engage with real problems: The contribution of critical realism and systems thinking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 316-331.
    14. C Mar-Molinero & J Mingers, 2007. "An evaluation of the limitations of, and alternatives to, the Co-Plot methodology," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(7), pages 874-886, July.
    15. Pianezzi, Daniela & Ashraf, Muhammad Junaid, 2022. "Accounting for ignorance: An investigation into corruption, immigration and the state," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    16. Michael Wood, 2013. "Making Statistical Methods More Useful," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(1), pages 21582440134, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John D. Levendis, 2018. "Time Series Econometrics," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, number 978-3-319-98282-3, June.
    2. Hendry, David F. & Mizon, Grayham E., 2001. "Reformulating empirical macro-econometric modelling," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 104, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    3. Zhichang Zhu, 2022. "Paradigm, specialty, pragmatism: Kuhn's legacy to methodological pluralism," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 895-912, September.
    4. Hendry, David F. & Mizon, Grayham E., 2001. "Reformulating empirical macro-econometric modelling," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0104, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    5. J Mingers, 2003. "A classification of the philosophical assumptions of management science methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(6), pages 559-570, June.
    6. Shaw, Duncan & Smith, Chris M. & Scully, Judy, 2019. "From Brexit to Article 50: Applying Critical Realism to the design and analysis of a longitudinal causal mapping study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(2), pages 723-735.
    7. Faust, Jon & Whiteman, Charles H., 1997. "General-to-specific procedures for fitting a data-admissible, theory-inspired, congruent, parsimonious, encompassing, weakly-exogenous, identified, structural model to the DGP: A translation and criti," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 121-161, December.
    8. Kevin Hoover, 2005. "Economic Theory and Causal Inference," Working Papers 257, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    9. J Mingers, 2005. "‘More dangerous than an unanswered question is an unquestioned answer’: a contribution to the Ulrich debate," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(4), pages 468-474, April.
    10. Kenneth F. Wallis & Jan P. A. M. Jacobs, 2005. "Comparing SVARs and SEMs: two models of the UK economy," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(2), pages 209-228.
    11. Kocherlakota, Narayana R., 2019. "Practical policy evaluation," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 29-45.
    12. Bardsen, Gunnar & Eitrheim, Oyvind & Jansen, Eilev S. & Nymoen, Ragnar, 2005. "The Econometrics of Macroeconomic Modelling," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199246502.
    13. Nord, Erik, 2005. "Concerns for the worse off: fair innings versus severity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 257-263, January.
    14. Adrian C. Darnell, 1994. "A Dictionary Of Econometrics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 118.
    15. Kevin D. Hoover & Òscar Jordà, 2001. "Measuring systematic monetary policy," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 83(Jul), pages 113-144.
    16. Jörg Bibow, 2012. "The Euro and its Guardian of Stability: Fiction and Reality of the 10th Anniversary Blast," Chapters, in: Louis-Philippe Rochon & Salewa ‘Yinka Olawoye (ed.), Monetary Policy and Central Banking, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Christopher L. Gilbert & Duo Qin, 2005. "The First Fifty Years of Modern Econometrics," Working Papers 544, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    18. Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2015. "Simple versus complex forecasting: The evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1678-1685.
    19. Francis X. Diebold, 1998. "The Past, Present, and Future of Macroeconomic Forecasting," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 175-192, Spring.
    20. A. Kayode Adesemowo, 2023. "IDADA: towards a multimethod methodological framework for PhD by publication underpinned by critical realism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, December.

    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:pal:jorsoc:v:57:y:2006:i:2:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601980. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    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.