Publications Database

Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!

The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:

  • Faculty Member’s Name;
  • Area of Expertise;
  • Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
  • Journal Name; and
  • Date Range.

At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.

If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

 

Search Results

Kardes, F., Fischer, E., Spiller,S., Labroo, A. Bublitz, M., Peracchio, L. and Huber, J. (2022). "Commentaries on “An Intervention-based Abductive Approach to Generating Testable Theory", Journal of Consumer Psychology, 32(1), 194-207.

View Paper

Keywords
Abstract This paper assembles five comments on Janiszewski and van Osselaer's (this issue) article that promotes abductive research as a way to generate new psychological theory. The review process began by asking those making comments to be part of collaborative communication between themselves and Janiszewski and van Osselaer. The five comments arising from that process provide well-honed insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the abductive research. The first commentary, by Frank Kardes, offers convincing evidence showing that the techniques of abductive thinking are similar to other explorative techniques currently being successfully used in deductive research. Eileen Fischer sees abductive thinking as integral to inductive and qualitative thinking as it facilitates the generation of new constructs and remaps established ones. Stephen Spiller explores the implication of starting from interesting and paradoxical data rather than from established theory. The research challenge then requires a focus on strategic sampling of methods, responses, and critical constructs that confirm or limit a provisional theory. Aparna Labroo articulates the benefits of abductive thinking to help resolve complex practical problems, but warns against the proliferation of multiple findings that may be difficult to validate. Finally, Bublitz and Peracchio celebrate the value of abductive research to help resolve social issues and enable the fruitful merger of publishable research with personal social action.

G. Kistruck and Slade Shantz, A (2021). "Research on Grand Challenges: Adopting an Abductive Experimentation Methodology", Organization Studies.

Open Access Download

Keywords
Abstract There has been a growing interest among management scholars in conducting research on grand challenges. Despite recognizing that studying such highly complex and uncertain phenomena likely requires more unconventional approaches, there has been very little methodological guidance provided to interested scholars. Drawing upon our own grand challenge projects undertaken over the past decade, we put forward a methodological approach we term ‘abductive experimentation’. Such an approach is an action-oriented process of inquiry that cycles between generating ‘doubt’ and generating ‘belief’. More specifically, abductive experimentation iterates between induction, abduction, and deduction to both generate and reconcile ‘surprising’ findings and causal mechanisms. While we submit abductive experimentation as a methodological approach particularly well suited to the study of grand challenges, we believe that the process depicted also provides a general roadmap for scholars seeking to dismantle the artificial dualism between theory and practice.

Dolbec, P., Fischer, E. and Canniford, R. (2021). "Something Old, Something New: Enabled Theory Building in Qualitative Marketing Research", Marketing Theory, 21(4).

View Paper

Keywords
Abstract “Enabled theorizing” is a common practice in marketing scholarship. Nevertheless, this practice has recently been criticized for constraining the creation of novel theory. To advance this conversation, we conduct a grounded analysis of papers that feature enabled theorizing with the aim of describing and analyzing how enabled theorizing is practiced. Our analysis suggests that enabled theorizing marries data with analytical tools and ontological perspectives in ways that advance ongoing conversations in marketing theory and practice, as well as informing policy and methods. Based on interviews with marketing and consumer research scholars who practice enabled theorizing, we explain how researchers use enabling theories to shape research projects, how researchers select enabling lenses, and how they negotiate the review process. We discuss the implications of our analyses for theory-building in our field, and we question the notion of originality in relation to theory more generally.

Belk, R. and Sobh, R. (2019). "No Assemblage Required – On Pursuing Original Consumer Culture Theory", Marketing Theory, 19(4), 489-507.

Open Access Download

Keywords
Abstract Our title plays with the promise on certain consumer goods packages of “no assembly required,” but in fact we call upon the reader to assemble new theories rather than rely on existing ones like assemblage theory. We argue that consumer culture theory (CCT), also known as interpretive consumer research, has thus far not fulfilled its potential as a theory-generating discipline. Our reluctance to attempt creative theorizing is institutionalized by calls for theory-enabled research rather than truly emergent theory. This retreat has recently been strengthened by the rise of Big Data and correlational approaches that eschew theory altogether. In order to change this situation, we recommend a three-stage approach: (1) original phenomena-driven inquiry, (2) combining grounded theory and abductive reasoning, and (3) generating and comparatively analyzing alternative theoretical explanations. We briefly conceptualize the first two stages and illustrate the third using an example of consumer brand masking and bluffing in Africa. We demonstrate the use of two criteria for comparative theoretical analysis: (a) fit with the data and (b) potential usefulness in other contexts. We also argue that sometimes multiple theories are needed. CCT researchers are uniquely positioned to pursue original theory, and in this article, we offer some ideas as to how this can be done.