10/31/ · In essence, a concept paper is an embodiment of your ideas on a particular topic or item of interest. The concept paper saves time because your thesis or review panel may say that your idea is not worth pursuing. One expects that the concept paper should consist only of 1 or 2 pages A concept paper enables in putting thoughts and ideas into paper for consideration for research. It is from the concept paper that one develops the research proposal which can either be business or guidelines on how to write conceptual paper in accounting research preamble scientific research is often divided into two classes: conceptual research and5/5(11)
Write a Concept Paper: 3 Proven Steps that Work
As a powerful means of theory building, conceptual articles are increasingly called for in marketing academia. However, researchers struggle to design and write non-empirical articles because of the lack of commonly accepted templates to guide their development, writing a conceptual paper. The aim of this paper is to highlight methodological considerations for conceptual papers: it is argued that such papers must be grounded in a clear research design, and that the choice of theories and their role in the analysis must be explicated and justified.
The paper discusses four potential templates for conceptual papers — Theory Synthesis, Theory Adaptation, Typology, and Model — and their respective aims, approach for using theories, and contribution potential. Supported by illustrative examples, these templates codify some of the tacit knowledge that underpins the design of non-empirical papers and will be of use to anyone undertaking, supervising, or reviewing conceptual research, writing a conceptual paper.
Indeed, many of the most impactful marketing papers of recent decades are conceptual as this type of research enables theory building unrestricted by the demands of empirical generalization e, writing a conceptual paper.
Authors crafting conceptual papers can find valuable advice on problematizing Alvesson and Sandbergtheorizing and theory building Corley and Gioia ; Cornelissen ; Shepherd and Suddabyand the types of conceptual contribution that warrant publication Corley and Gioia ; MacInnis As a result, reviewers often face conceptual papers that offer little more than a descriptive literature review or interesting but disjointed ideas.
In writing a conceptual paper papers, the recipe typically is the research design that provides the paper structure and logic, writing a conceptual paper, guiding the process of developing new knowledge and offering conventions for reporting the key elements of the research Flickwriting a conceptual paper, p.
The research design explains how the ingredients of the study were selected, acquired, and analyzed to effectively address the research problem, and reviewers can evaluate the robustness of this process by reference to established conventions in the existing literature. As conceptual papers generally do not fit the mold of empirical research, writing a conceptual paper and reviewers lack any such recipe book, making the critical issue of analytical writing a conceptual paper more challenging.
This paper addresses issues of methodology and research design for conceptual papers. This paper discusses four templates—Theory Synthesis, Theory Adaptation, Typology, and Model—and explicates their aims, their approach to theory use, and their contribution potential. The paper does not focus on theory building itself but supports it, as analytical rigor is a prerequisite for high quality theorizing. Nor is the focus on literature reviews or meta-analyses; while these are important non-empirical forms of research, there are well articulated existing guidelines for such articles see for example Webster and Watson ; Palmatier et al.
The ultimate goal of this paper is to direct scholarly attention to the importance of a systematic approach to developing a conceptual paper. Experienced editors and reviewers have noted that researchers sometimes underestimate how difficult it is to write a rigorous conceptual paper and consider this an easy route to publishing—an essay devoid of deeper scholarship Hirschheim writing a conceptual paper In reality, developing a cogent argument and building a supporting theoretical explanation requires tacit knowledge and skills that doctoral programs seldom teach Yadav ; King and Lepak The paper is organized as follows.
The next section outlines key methodological requirements for conceptual studies. Four common types of research design are then identified and discussed with supporting examples, writing a conceptual paper. The article ends with conclusions and recommendations for marketing scholars undertaking, supervising, or reviewing conceptual research. In short, the research design is a plan for collecting and analyzing evidence that helps to answer the question posed Raginp.
Like any design, the research design should improve usability ; a good research design is the optimal tool for addressing the research problem, and it communicates the logic of the study in a transparent way.
In principle, any piece of research should be designed to deliver trustworthy answers to the question posed in a credible and justified manner. An empirical research design typically involves decisions about the underlying theoretical framing of the study as well as issues of data collection and analysis e. Miller and Salkind Imagine, for example, writing a conceptual paper, an empirical paper where the authors did not argue for their sampling criteria or choice of informants, or failed to define the measures used or to show how the results were derived from the data.
It can be argued that conceptual papers entail similar considerations Table 1as the omission of equivalent elements would create similar confusion.
In other words, a well-designed conceptual paper must explicitly justify and explicate decisions about key elements of the study. Empirical and conceptual papers ultimately share a common goal: to create new knowledge by building on carefully selected sources of information combined according to a set of norms, writing a conceptual paper.
In the case of conceptual papers, arguments are not derived from data in the traditional sense but involve the assimilation and combination of evidence in the form of previously developed concepts and theories Hirschheim In that sense, conceptual papers are not without empirical insights but rather build on theories and concepts that are developed and tested through empirical research. In an empirical study, the researcher determines what data are needed to address the research questions and specifies sampling criteria and research instruments accordingly.
In similar fashion, a conceptual paper should explain how and why the theories and concepts on which it is grounded were selected. In simple terms, there are two possible points of departure. The first option is to start from a focal phenomenon that is observable but not adequately addressed in the existing research. The authors may inductively identify differing conceptualizations of that phenomenon, and then argue that the aspect of interest is best addressed in terms of particular concepts or theories.
That is, the choice of concepts is based on their fit to the focal phenomenon and their complementary value in conceptualizing it. One key issue here is how the researcher conceptualizes the empirical phenomenon; in selecting particular concepts and theories, the researcher is de facto making an argument about the conceptual ingredients of the empirical phenomenon in writing a conceptual paper. A second and perhaps more common approach is to start from a focal theory by arguing that a particular concept, theory, or research domain is internally incoherent or incomplete in some important respect and then introducing other theories to bridge the observed gaps.
In this case, the choice of theories or concepts is based on their ability to address the observed shortcoming in the existing literature, writing a conceptual paper, i. their supplementary value. This simplified account raises a critical underlying question: what is the value that each selected concept, literature stream, or theory brings to the study, and why are they selected in preference to something else?
Conceptual papers typically draw on multiple concepts, literature streams, and theories that play differing roles. It is difficult to imagine writing a conceptual paper published empirical paper where the reader could not distinguish empirical data from the literature review.
In this regard, Lukka and Vinnari drew a useful distinction between domain theory and method theory. For example, Brodie et al. The distinction is relative rather than absolute; whether a particular theory is domain or method theory depends on its role in the study in question Lukka and Vinnari Indeed, a single study can accommodate multiple domain and method theories. Typically, the role of the method theory is to provide some new insight into the domain theory—for example, to expand, organize, or offer a new or alternative explanation of concepts and relationships.
This means that contribution usually centers on the domain theory, not the method theory Lukka and Vinnari For example, marketing scholars often use established theories such as resource-based theory, institutional theory, or practice theory as method theories, but any suitable framework even from other disciplines can play this role.
Footnote 1. Conceptual papers typically focus on proposing new relationships among constructs; the purpose is thus to develop logical and complete arguments about these associations rather than testing them empirically Gilson and Goldberg The issue of how to develop logical arguments is hence pivotal.
As well as arguing that concepts are linked, authors must provide a theoretical explanation for that link. As that explanation demonstrates the logic of connections between concepts, it is critical for theory building King and Lepak In attempting to analyze what constitutes a good argument, Hirschheim adopted a framework first advanced by the British philosopher Toulminaccording to which an argument has three necessary components: claims, grounds, and warrants.
Claims refer to the explicit statement or thesis that the reader is being asked to accept as true—the outcome of the research. Grounds are the evidence writing a conceptual paper reasoning used to support the claim and to persuade the reader.
In a conceptual paper, this evidence is drawn from previous studies rather than from primary data. Finally, warrants are the underlying assumptions or presuppositions that link grounds to claims. Warrants are often beliefs implicitly accepted within the given research domain—for example the assumption that organizations strive to satisfy their customers.
In a robust piece of research, claims should be substantiated by sufficient grounds, writing a conceptual paper, and should be of sufficient significance to make a worthwhile contribution to knowledge Hirschheim In practice, the chain of evidence in a conceptual paper is made visible to the reader by explicating the key steps in the argument.
How is the studied phenomenon conceptualized? Are the premises and axioms used to ground the arguments sufficiently explicit to enable another researcher to arrive at similar analytical conclusions? Conceptual clarity, parsimony, simplicity, and logical coherence are important qualities of any academic study but are arguably all the more critical when developing arguments without empirical data.
While there is no single best way to structure a conceptual paper, what successful papers have in common is a careful matching of form and structure to theoretical purpose of the paper Fulmer The structure should therefore reflect both the aims of the research and the role of the various lenses deployed to achieve writing a conceptual paper aims—in other words, the structure highlights what the authors seek to explain.
A clear structure also contributes to conceptual clarity by making the hierarchy of concepts and their elements intuitively available to the reader, eliminating any noise that might distort the underlying message. As Hirschheim noted, a clear structure ensures a place for everything—omitting nothing of importance—and puts everything in its place, avoiding redundancies.
In marked contrast to empirical research, there is no widely shared understanding of basic types of research design in respect to conceptual papers, with the exception of literature reviews and meta-analyses. To address this issue, the present study considers four such types: Theory Synthesis, Theory Adaptation, Typologyand Model see Table 2. These types serve to clarify differences of methodological approach—that is, how the argument is structured and developed—rather than the types of conceptual contributions that are the main consideration of MacInnis The four types discussed here derive from an analysis of goal setting, writing a conceptual paper, structuring, and logic of argumentation in multiple articles writing a conceptual paper in high quality journals, writing a conceptual paper.
It should be said that the list is not exhaustive, and other researchers would no doubt have formulated differing perspectives.
It should also be noted that the goals of a conceptual article can be as varied as in any other form of academic research. Table 2 identifies some possible or likely goals for each suggested type; these are not mutually exclusive and are often combined. A theory synthesis paper seeks to achieve conceptual integration across multiple theories or literature streams.
Such papers offer a new or enhanced view of a concept or phenomenon by linking previously unconnected or incompatible pieces in a novel way. Papers of this type contribute by summarizing and integrating extant knowledge of a concept or phenomenon.
According to MacInnissummarizing helps researchers see the forest for the trees by encapsulating, digesting, writing a conceptual paper reducing what is known to a manageable whole. Integration enables researchers to see a concept or phenomenon in a new way by transforming previous findings and theory into a novel higher-order perspective that links phenomena previously considered distinct MacInnis For example, writing a conceptual paper, a synthesis paper might chart a new or unstructured phenomenon that has previously been addressed in piecemeal fashion across diverse domains or disciplines.
Such papers may also explore the conceptual underpinnings of an emerging theory or explain conflicting research findings by providing a more parsimonious explanation that pulls disparate elements into a more coherent whole, writing a conceptual paper.
This kind of systematization is especially helpful when research on a given topic is fragmented across different literatures, helping to identify and underscore commonalities that build coherence Cropanzano In more mature fields, synthesis can help to identify gaps in the extant research, which is often the goal of systematic literature reviews. However, gap spotting is seldom a sufficient source of contribution as the main aim of a conceptual paper should be to enhance existing theoretical understanding on the studied phenomenon or concept.
Although there is sometimes a fine line between theory synthesis and literature review, there remains a clear distinction between the two. While a well-crafted literature review takes stock of the field and can provide valuable insights into its development, scope, or future prospects, it remains within the existing conceptual or theoretical boundaries, describing extant knowledge rather than looking beyond it.
In the case of a conceptual paper, writing a conceptual paper, the literature review is a necessary tool but not the writing a conceptual paper objective, writing a conceptual paper. Moreover, in a theory synthesis paper, writing a conceptual paper, the role of the literature review is to unravel the components of a concept or phenomenon and it must sometimes reduce or exclude incommensurable elements.
For example, a literature review that seeks to integrate multiple research perspectives may instead merely summarize in separate chapters what each has to say about the concept. Typically, different research perspectives employ differing terms and structure, or categorize conceptual elements in distinct ways.
Integration and synthesis requires that the researcher explicates and unravels the conceptual underpinnings and building blocks that different perspectives use to conceptualize a phenomenon, and the looks for common ground on which to build a new and enhanced conceptualization. A theory synthesis paper may seek to increase understanding of a relatively narrow concept or empirical phenomenon.
For example, Lemon and Verhoef summarized the conceptual background and extant conceptualizations of customer journeys to produce a new integrative view.
Lecture 03: Structure and Contents of a Conceptual Research Paper
, time: 40:02Designing conceptual articles: four approaches | SpringerLink
A conceptual paper often raises a point and then expands the thought with opinion or debating arguments. One such example could be which came first, the chicken or the egg. The writer then delivers ideas, theories, explanations or further questions. Determine the topic for the conceptual paper and begin by raising a point or question on that topic A concept paper enables in putting thoughts and ideas into paper for consideration for research. It is from the concept paper that one develops the research proposal which can either be business or guidelines on how to write conceptual paper in accounting research preamble scientific research is often divided into two classes: conceptual research and5/5(11)
No comments:
Post a Comment