IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v2y1978i2p235-260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychological Assumptions, Experimentation, and Real World Problems

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Mitroff

    (University of Pittsburgh)

  • Thomas V. Bonoma

    (University of Pittsburgh)

Abstract

Recent developments in the history, philosophy, psychology, and sociology of science raise serious challenges to our traditional notions about the decisive power of experiments in the development of scientific knowledge. These developments suggest that the power of an experiment is only as strong as the clarity af the basic assumptions which underlie it. Such assumptions not only underlie laboratory experimentation but social evaluation research as well. A dialectical methodology is proposedfor assessing the influence of key assumptions in both settings. Among other conclusions, analysis of the role and influence of key assumptions suggests an additional source of experimental error, termed the error of the third kind, or E III. E III is defined and discussed as the probability af conducting the "wrong" experiment when one should have conducted the "right" experiment.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Mitroff & Thomas V. Bonoma, 1978. "Psychological Assumptions, Experimentation, and Real World Problems," Evaluation Review, , vol. 2(2), pages 235-260, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:2:y:1978:i:2:p:235-260
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X7800200204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X7800200204
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X7800200204?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ian I. Mitroff & John Nelson & Richard O. Mason, 1974. "On Management Myth-Information Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 371-382, December.
    2. Richard O. Mason, 1969. "A Dialectical Approach to Strategic Planning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(8), pages 403-414, April.
    3. Sagasti, Francisco R & Mitroff, Ian I, 1973. "Operations research from the viewpoint of general systems theory," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 1(6), pages 695-709, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Anselm Schneider, 2015. "Reflexivity in Sustainability Accounting and Management: Transcending the Economic Focus of Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 525-536, March.
    2. Ambrož Milan & Praprotnik Martina, 2008. "Organisational Effectiveness and Customer Satisfaction," Organizacija, Sciendo, vol. 41(5), pages 161-173, September.
    3. Kasanen, Eero & Wallenius, Hannele & Wallenius, Jyrki & Zionts, Stanley, 2000. "A study of high-level managerial decision processes, with implications for MCDM research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 496-510, February.
    4. Richard P. Nielsen & Christi Lockwood, 2018. "Varieties of Transformational Solutions to Institutional Ethics Logic Conflicts," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 45-55, April.
    5. Dekkers, Rob, 2018. "Group technology: Amalgamation with design of organisational structures," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 262-277.
    6. 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.
    7. Mike Metcalfe, 2013. "A Pragmatic System of Decision Criteria," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 56-64, January.
    8. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    9. Giovanni. Gavetti & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2004. "50th Anniversay Article: The Strategy Field from the Perspective of Management Science: Divergent Strands and Possible Integration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1309-1318, October.
    10. Mingers, John, 2011. "Soft OR comes of age--but not everywhere!," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 729-741, December.
    11. Marleen Kerkhof, 2006. "Making a difference: On the constraints of consensus building and the relevance of deliberation in stakeholder dialogues," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 39(3), pages 279-299, September.
    12. Henderson, John C. & Rockart, John F. & Sifonis, John G., 1984. "A planning methodology for integrating management support systems," Working papers no. 116. Working paper (S, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    13. Settanni, Ettore & Thenent, Nils Elias & Newnes, Linda B. & Parry, Glenn & Goh, Yee Mey, 2017. "Mapping a product-service-system delivering defence avionics availability," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 21-32.
    14. Eefje Cuppen, 2012. "Diversity and constructive conflict in stakeholder dialogue: considerations for design and methods," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(1), pages 23-46, March.
    15. Heffron, Raphael J., 2013. "The application of contrast explanation to energy policy research: UK nuclear energy policy 2002–2012," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 602-616.
    16. Ng, K. Yee & Van Dyne, Linn, 2001. "Individualism-Collectivism as a Boundary Condition for Effectiveness of Minority Influence in Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 198-225, March.
    17. David C. Lane & Özge Pala & Yaman Barlas & David C. Lane, 2015. "Validity is a Matter of Confidence—But Not Just in System Dynamics," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 450-458, July.
    18. Rajiv D. Banker & Robert J. Kauffman, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: The Evolution of Research on Information Systems: A Fiftieth-Year Survey of the Literature in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(3), pages 281-298, March.
    19. Kris De Jaegher, 2022. "Threat of Sabotage as a Driver of Collective Action," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(647), pages 2339-2365.
    20. Bergadaa, Michelle, 1999. "Strategic Decisions and Implementation: Prodin(TM), a Prospective Dialectic Interpersonal Method," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 211-220, June.

    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:sae:evarev:v:2:y:1978:i:2:p:235-260. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.