Search results

This article aims to explain the role of philosophical anchors and research paradigms in business research, and how they can be extrapolated in the transformative era of automation, digitalization, hyperconnectivity, obligations, globalization and sustainability (ADHOGS) in the midst of disruption, volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (DVUCA).

This article entails a general review based on the 3Es of exposure, expertise and experience, delving into the ontological, epistemological, methodological, axiological and rhetorical aspects of the major research paradigms—i.e. positivism, post-positivism, constructivism, interpretivism and pragmatism—and their interplay with the emergent trends shaping business research.

This article underscores the multifaceted nature of business research in the modern day, with an increasing need for blending, or shifting between, research paradigms to address the complex issues arising from automation, digitalization, hyperconnectivity, obligations, globalization and sustainability (ADHOGS). This article also highlights the nuanced interplay between research paradigms and theoretical perspectives, demonstrating the rich, diverse potential of business research inquiries.

While this article provides a broad overview of the interplay between research paradigms and emerging trends, future research could explore each of these interplays in greater detail, conducting empirical studies or utilizing specific case studies.

Researchers and practitioners should be open to adopting, combining or switching between different paradigms according to the demands of their research questions, context and trends shaping the business landscape, thereby underscoring the need for methodological flexibility and reflexivity in business research.

The shift toward embracing digital transformations and integrating sustainability in business research holds significant implications, driving socially responsible and sustainable business practices at the micro-level, and by extension, industrial revolution and sustainable development at the macro-level.

This article offers a holistic and contextualized view of the philosophy of science and research paradigms for business research, bridging the gap between philosophical foundations and contemporary research trends.

Using textual analysis the authors study the relationship between social media sentiments and stock markets during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The study analysis is based on a sample of 1,616,007 tweets over the period January to June 2021 for seven countries. The authors process the tweets via the VADER analyzer thereby producing both positive and negative sentiment measures.

Particularly, the authors prove that higher positivism is associated with a short-term increase in stock prices. On the other side, negativism relates inversely to stock prices with long-term impact, in the case of English-spoken countries. Notably, the study results remain robust to the inclusion of various control variables, including virtual fear and Google vaccine indexes. Finally, the authors prove that positivism is associated with higher returns and lower volatility in the short-run, while negativism is linked with lower returns in the short run.

The study analysis also has significant policy implications for researchers, investors and policymakers. First, researchers can employ our measures to quantify market sentiments and expand their research arsenal to incorporate social media trends, thus providing better explanatory power. Second, during times of severe uncertainty such as in a pandemic period, investors could beneficially take into account our textual measures and empirical results when using asset pricing models or constructing their portfolios. Third, the finding that the stock market is heavily governed by sentimental behaviors, especially during crisis periods, implies that policymakers including central banks, governments and capital market commissions must consider these sentiments before exerting their policies. In this regard, governments can effectively develop policy tools and approaches to manage recovery from the pandemic, which translates to greater long-term economic resilience. Moreover, central banks should accordingly adjust their monetary policy measures in order to stabilize financial markets, and by extension, to stop the pandemic from turning into a renewed financial crisis. For example, asset purchase program is considered the main instrument of this kind of intervention.

The authors confirm that this work is original and has not been published elsewhere, nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. The paper should be of interest to readers in the areas of finance.

The purpose of this short reflection is to allow for an informed use of both phenomenography and phenomenology in information studies and cognate fields.

The paper apprises uses of phenomenography found particularly in accounts of information literacy commonly describing phenomenography as distinct from phenomenology.

Both phenomenography and phenomenology continue to hold much credence in methods applied across scores of academic fields, with information studies being among those in the vanguard. Claims displaying differences of phenomenography from phenomenology are misleading and incomplete descriptions of phenomenology.

The paper presents newer materials on the origins of phenomenography and phenomenology to advocate for tighter relationships between and clearer applications of these methods in information studies and beyond.

This study demonstrates how individual paradigms implicate the questions asked, methods used and results drawn in association with a common object of study in human information behavior (HIB) research – the relationship between uncertainty and decision-making.

The author uses textual case studies to examine uncertainty and decision-making through the framework of four paradigms used in HIB research: positivism, cognitivism, collectivism and constructionism and suggests deconstructionism as a paradigm which raises new questions around this topic.

Positivistic approaches to uncertainty are often systems oriented; cognitive approaches are often user-oriented; collectivist approaches are intersubjective; and constructionist approaches blend a subjective and intersubjective research orientation. Deconstructionism raises new questions around ethics and responsibility in relation to decision-making, and the author therefore situates it as a new paradigmatic approach for this topic in HIB research.

Despite the presence of research aimed at recognizing and defining paradigms in HIB research, a comparative micro-examination of how individual paradigms implicate a specific research topic has yet to be conducted. Each paradigm uniquely shapes the ways in which uncertainty and decision-making are characterized, but the four central ones examined here have thus far left out questions of ethics and responsibility as being core elements of decision-making as tied to uncertainty. Therefore, this paper introduces deconstructionism as a paradigm new to HIB uncertainty research, arguing that it provides an important and novel complication of existent research questions and approaches.

This article examines the effect of China's soft power projection through the Chinese media in Africa on the African audiences' perception of China's national image through a case study of the residents of Nairobi. It adopted Joseph Nye's soft power model and sought to address three fundamental questions : What is the extent and objective of China's media diplomacy in Africa? How has China's media “offensive” in Africa impacted African audiences' imagery of China? What are the implications, if any, of China's media diplomacy on the Kenyan public view of China?

This article used a mixed-methods research design, which deployed elements of positivism and interpretivism. It used a deductive approach and deployed the survey strategy, which entailed the collection of data from Nairobi city residents. The secondary data were collected from relevant academic literature sources. The primary data were analyzed empirically using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), while the secondary data were analyzed using discourse analysis.

China's soft power projection through the Chinese media in Africa is aimed at addressing the “misinformation” about China. China seeks its share of representation among the African public to correct negative perceptions of China. Kenyans had a generally positive attitude toward China. South Africa and Angola have “Fairly” positive perceptions of the Chinese media. However, this study did not reveal whether the perception was due to the influence of Chinese media. These findings implied that the African public's positive imagery of China cannot be fully attributed to Chinese media's influence.

This study is groundbreaking in that it is one of the few studies that have focused on China's public diplomacy in Africa and assessed the impact of Chinese media on the African public’s perception of China.

The purpose of this study is to introduce the concept of workplace camaraderie and to investigate the mechanism through which workplace camaraderie influences incivility at the workplace. The study is explained by taking the sequential mediation of personal biases leading to cronyism and favoritism. Social identity theory is used as the underpinning theory to explain the framework adopted.

Positivism research philosophy followed by the deductive approach is followed to meet the objectives of the current study. In total, 171 employees working in public sector organizations were taken as the respondents to the study. A purposive sampling technique was used to collect the data through self-administrated questionnaires. Path model is used through Mplus to generate the results and test hypotheses.

The results suggested that workplace camaraderie significantly affects incivility at a workplace with the sequential mediation of personal biases leading to cronyism and favoritism.

Although several researchers have studied the link between camaraderie and other employees’ related attitudinal and behavioral outcomes, few have explored the roles of personal biases, cronyism and favoritism in the relationship to incivility. This study thus posits a novel sequential mediation mechanism, based on the social identity theory, through which camaraderie is translated into civil behavior. Moreover, this study adds value by investigating this model in the public sector, where camaraderie can come up with important consequences.

Business simulation games (BSGs) are gaining popularity in higher education as tools for entrepreneurial education. However, there are challenges in using BSGs for large classes of students in historically disadvantaged institutions (HDIs). The challenges include limited resources and digital literacy skills.

The living standards measure (LSM) indicates socioeconomic status by measuring the degree of urbanisation, access to services and possession of assets, such as mobile phones. This research investigated the impact of students' living standards on their intention to use BSGs, as there is limited research.

This study used positivism and added LSM to the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model. Quantitative data from 224 third-year information system students at an HDI were collected through an online survey. Structured Equation Modelling was used to analyse the data.

Results indicated that performance expectancy and social influence significantly influenced the intention to use BSGs. However, the relationship between effort expectancy and behavioural intention facilitating conditions was not significant. The introduction of LSM as a moderator for the relationships between all variables and behavioural intention also proved to be insignificant.

The result was unexpected, as we posited that a lower LSM would affect students' intention to use BSGs. This was not proven in this study and could be related to students accessing campus resources. However, during times when access to campus is restricted, such as protest action, the result may change for students with lower LSM.

Common literature review methods such as systematic review and narrative review are poorly suited to the investigation of complex management phenomena. Systematic reviews are highly driven by protocol and procedure, and are oft-criticized as reductive and poorly equipped to examine the interaction between phenomena and context, nonlinear processes, and empirical outcomes that are less predictable. Narrative reviews, on the other hand, are pluralistic and iterative and thus better suited to descriptions of the complex and unpredictable; however, they tend to lack methodological transparency, trustworthiness, and pragmatism in application. The “realist synthesis” approach to literature review can be seen as the middle-ground between these two common methods, offering both methodological rigor alongside flexibility and nuance. Realist synthesis takes an explanatory frame, with a focus on unearthing the theorized causal mechanisms at play beneath a phenomenon of interest.

This essay takes issue with the incommensurability thesis, which assumes that meaningful research work across different paradigms cannot occur. Could it be that the thesis understates the case for meaningful relationships to develop across paradigms? Is it possible that researchers can authentically and rewardingly collaborate across paradigms and create joint studies published in established journals?

Based on the observation that interparadigmatic research exists, the authors investigate two questions. How is interparadigmatic research expressed in the accounting research literature? How can we comprehend the process that underlies the development and publication of interparadigmatic research, focusing on cohabitation involving the positivist and interpretive paradigms of research?

To deal with the first question, the authors focus on two interparadigmatic articles: Greenwood et al. (2002) and Paugam et al. (2021). The authors find each article showcases a dominant paradigm – whereas the role of the other paradigm is represented as secondary; that is, complementing and enriching the dominant paradigm. To address the second question, the authors rely especially on their involvement as coauthors of three interparadigmatic studies, published between 2019 and 2022 in FT50 journals. The authors’ analysis brings to the fore a range of facilitators that fit their experiences, such as the development of cross-paradigmatic agreement within the authorship to cope with the complexity surrounding the object of study, the crafting of methodological compromises (e.g. regarding the number of documents to analyze) and the strategizing that the authorship enacted in dealing with journal gatekeepers.

From the authors’ experiences, they develop a model, which provides a tentative template to make sense of the process by which interparadigmatic research takes place. The model highlights the role of what the authors call “epistemic mediation” in producing interparadigmatic studies.