Abstract
Why would anyone want to (or have to) motivate a study with hypotheses that emerged from the analyses of data and then claim support for the hypotheses? What damage is done? Is this practice unethical, and if so, where does responsibility lie? And, what can we do about this practice, if anything? Addressing these questions requires an ongoing discussion among members of any disciplinary field. To foster such a discussion in the management field, I offer some observations based on the article titled “The Hypothesis That Never Was: Uncovering the Deceptive Use of Post Hoc Hypotheses.”
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 450-454 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Journal of Management Inquiry |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Oct 27 2015 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- General Business, Management and Accounting
- Strategy and Management
- Management of Technology and Innovation