When Mindsets Collide: Switching Analytical Mindsets to Advance Organization Science

Analytic techniques have associated mindsets that can determine the way scholars conceptualize their objects of study. I propose that switching these “analytical mindsets” can lead to new theoretical insights. Using two examples, I show how switching analytical mindsets allows for divergent, creative thinking that can help researchers generate new theoretical foci. I conclude by discussing the importance of attending to methodology when engaging in the process of theory construction.

[1]  B. Muthén.  BEYOND SEM: GENERAL LATENT VARIABLE MODELING , 2002 .

[2]  K. Bollen.  Latent variables in psychology and the social sciences. , 2002, Annual review of psychology.

[3]  D. Whetten.  What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution , 1989 .

[4]  Karin A. Orvis,et al.  A meta-analytic investigation of conscientiousness in the prediction of job performance: examining the intercorrelations and the incremental validity of narrow traits. , 2006, The Journal of applied psychology.

[5]  Dean Keith Simonton,et al.  Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: the integration of product, person, and process perspectives. , 2003, Psychological bulletin.

[6]  H. Simon,et al.  Studies of Scientific Discovery: Complementary Approaches and Convergent Findings , 1999 .

[7]  D. Simonton.  Creativity as Blind Variation and Selective Retention : Is the Creative Process Darwinian ? , 2022 .

[8]  Barry M. Staw,et al.  What Theory is Not , 1995 .

[9]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[10]  R. Mayer.  Thinking, Problem Solving, Cognition , 1983 .

[11]  D. Bartholomew.  Latent Variable Models And Factor Analysis , 1987 .

[12]  W. Sharpe,et al.  Mean-Variance Analysis in Portfolio Choice and Capital Markets , 1987 .

[13]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  A Hierarchical Model for Studying School Effects , 1986 .

[14]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Discovery in Cognitive Psychology: New Tools Inspire New Theories , 1992, Science in Context.

[15]  M. Kendall,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery. , 1959 .

[16]  K. Popper,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery , 1960 .

[17]  Patrick J Curran,et al.  Have Multilevel Models Been Structural Equation Models All Along? , 2003, Multivariate behavioral research.

[18]  S. Kozlowski,et al.  Multilevel Theory, Research, a n d M e t h o d s i n Organizations Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions , 2022 .

[19]  Jay Magidson,et al.  Advances in factor analysis and structural equation models , 1979 .

[20]  Robert M. Guion,et al.  Assessment, Measurement, and Prediction for Personnel Decisions , 1997 .

[21]  B. Lawrence.  LEVELS OF ANALYSIS AND THE QUALITATIVE STUDY OF QUANTITATIVE DATA , 2005 .

[22]  M J Rovine,et al.  A Structural Modeling Approach to a Multilevel Random Coefficients Model , 2000, Multivariate behavioral research.

[23]  John B. Kidd,et al.  Models of Discovery , 1978 .

[24]  M. Lorenzen.  Creativity in context : Content, cost, chance and collection in the organization of the film industry , 2009 .

[25]  R. Gephart.  Ethnostatistics: Qualitative Foundations for Quantitative Research , 1988 .

[26]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Does Scientific Discovery Have a Logic , 1973 .

[27]  Randall S. Peterson,et al.  The Group Dynamics Q-Sort in Organizational Research: A New Method for Studying Familiar Problems , 1999 .

[28]  Sophia Rabe-Hesketh,et al.  Generalized latent variable models: multilevel, longitudinal, and structural equation models , 2004 .

[29]  M. Hogg,et al.  Book Review: Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes , 1991 .

[30]  S. Kozlowski,et al.  Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions , 2000 .

[31]  George A. Marcoulides,et al.  Can There Be Infinitely Many Models Equivalent to a Given Covariance Structure Model? , 2001 .

[32]  Raymond Hubbard,et al.  The Historical Growth of Statistical Significance Testing in Psychology--and Its Future Prospects. , 2000 .

[33]  Steven M. Smith,et al.  The creative cognition approach. , 1995 .

[34]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[35]  Kenneth A. Bollen,et al.  Structural Equations with Latent Variables , 1989 .

[36]  B. Muthén,et al.  Integrating person-centered and variable-centered analyses: growth mixture modeling with latent trajectory classes. , 2000, Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research.

[37]  Paul F. Lazarsfeld,et al.  Latent Structure Analysis. , 1969 .

[38]  D. Jackson,et al.  PERSONALITY MEASURES AS PREDICTORS OF JOB PERFORMANCE: A META‐ANALYTIC REVIEW , 2006 .

[39]  L. J. Williams,et al.  Recent Advances in Causal Modeling Methods for Organizational and Management Research , 2003 .

[40]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  What Have Psychologists (And Others) Discovered About the Process of Scientific Discovery? , 2001 .

[41]  J. Vermunt,et al.  Latent class cluster analysis , 2002 .

[42]  C. Martindale.  Creativity and connectionism. , 1995 .

[43]  S. West,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. , 1994 .

[44]  J. Pfeffer,et al.  Who gets power — and how they hold on to it: A strategic-contingency model of power , 1977 .

[45]  Richard S. Mansfield,et al.  The Psychology of Creativity and Discovery: Scientists and Their Work , 1981 .

[46]  K. Duncker,et al.  On problem-solving , 1945 .

[47]  J. Schooler,et al.  The ineffability of insight. , 1995 .

[48]  Longitudinal Analysis with Regressions among Random Effects: A Latent Variable Modeling Approach. , 2007 .

[49]  D. Campbell.  Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. , 1960, Psychological review.

[50]  H. Simon,et al.  Scientific Discovery and the Psychology of Problem Solving , 1977 .

[51]  L. A. Goodman.  Exploratory latent structure analysis using both identifiable and unidentifiable models , 1974 .

[52]  K. Weick.  What Theory Is Not, Theorizing Is , 1995 .

[53]  David A. Hofmann.  An Overview of the Logic and Rationale of Hierarchical Linear Models , 1997 .

[54]  Christine DiStefano,et al.  Investigating Subtypes of Child Development , 2006 .

[55]  G. Gigerenzer.  From Tools to Theories: A Heuristic of Discovery in Cognitive Psychology. , 1991 .

[56]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Schematic Bases of Belief Change , 1984 .

[57]  W. Gibson.  Three multivariate models: Factor analysis, latent structure analysis, and latent profile analysis , 1959 .

[58]  K. Weick.  Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems , 1976, Gestión y Estrategia.

[59]  Thomas K. Srull,et al.  Person memory: Some tests of associative storage and retrieval models , 1981 .

[60]  Daniel J. Bauer.  Estimating Multilevel Linear Models as Structural Equation Models , 2003 .

[61]  F. Galton.  Regression Towards Mediocrity in Hereditary Stature. , 1886 .

[62]  J. K. Murnighan,et al.  Demographic Diversity and Faultlines: The Compositional DYnamics of Organizational Groups , 1998 .

[63]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META-ANALYSIS , 1991 .

[64]  Matthew F. S. Rushworth,et al.  Components of Switching Intentional Set , 2002, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[65]  L. A. Goodman.  Applied Latent Class Analysis: Latent Class Analysis: The Empirical Study of Latent Types, Latent Variables, and Latent Structures , 2002 .

[66]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[67]  K. Weick.  Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination , 1989 .