1
Course Outline
Haas School of Business
Fall 2007
BA 297B
Research and Theory in Business: Behavioral Science
Professors Staw and Wolfram
Tuesdays, 2-5pm
Course Description:
This course addresses the fundamentals of behavioral research: theory, research design,
methods and criticism. It is designed for doctoral students who wish to undertake research
publishable in scholarly journals. Little or no background in scientific training is assumed.
Statistics will not be emphasized; however, familiarity with elementary statistical concepts
will prove useful.
Course Requirements:
In the seminar, students are required to:
1.
Prepare two small “practice papers” on developing a research question (Mini 1 and
Mini 2).
2.
Identify and elaborate on a question that you wish to study in some depth. After you
have specified your question (Project 1), you will begin work on several different
methodological approaches to testing it. You will be asked to specify the design for
an experiment (Project 2), a study based on archival data (Project 3), and an
ethnographic, survey or case study (Project 4). Finally, you will put these three
methodologically diverse studies together into a larger paper, showing how your
three proposed studies will add new knowledge to the field (Project 5).
3.
Lead discussion on subtopics and issues within the seminar. Each person will be
responsible for presentation of ideas and leading class discussion for a number of
articles and sub-areas. The exact nature of this presentation and dates will be
determined in the seminar.
4.
The course will be conducted as a workshop in which each student’s projects will be
discussed throughout the semester. It is therefore important for members of the
seminar to be active (and constructively critical) participants throughout the term.
2
Course Readings:
Text: Approaches to Social Research (ASR), by R. Singleton and B. Straits. 4th Edition. Oxford
University Press, 2005.
Readings for Wolfram classes: will be made available electronically and emailed to students a week
before class.
Readings for Staw classes: will be distributed in hard copy.
SCHEDULE
Week 1 (8/27/07): Preliminaries
Week 2 (9/4/07): Selecting a Research Topic and Making a Creative Contribution (STAW)
Mini 1 Due
Week 3 (9/11/07): Theory Building (STAW)
Mini 2 Due; Project 1 presentations in class
Week 4 (9/18/07): Defining a Research Question (WOLFRAM)
Project 1 write-up due
Week 5 (9/25/07): Trade-offs in Research Design (STAW)
Week 6 (10/2/07): Laboratory Experiments and Judgment Tasks (STAW)
Week 7 (10/9/07): Field Experiments: Planned and Natural (STAW)
Project 2 presentations in class
Week 8 (10/16/07): Introduction to Archival Research & Identification Issues (WOLFRAM)
Project 2 write-up due
Week 9 (10/23/07): Methodologies for Addressing Sample Selection (WOLFRAM)
Week 10 (10/30/07): Comparing Reduced Form Approaches to Structural or Theory-Driven
Approaches (WOLFRAM)
Project 3 presentations in class
3
Week 11 (11/6/07): Economic Experimentation: Field and Laboratory (WOLFRAM)
Project 3 write-up due
Week 12 (11/13/07): Survey and Ethnographic Research (STAW)
Week 13: Thanksgiving break
Week 14 (11/27/05): Case Studies (STAW)
Project 4 presentations in class
Week 15 (12/4/05): Publishing and Career Issues (WOLFRAM & STAW)
Project 4 write-up due
FINAL PROJECT: Project 5 write-up due on 12/14/07
4
RESEARCH PROJECTS
Mini 1: Locating Theoretical Outcroppings, due Week 2, 1-2 pages.
Use a newspaper article (from the past three weeks) to come up with a new behavioral theory or an
alteration/refinement of an existing theory. Don’t worry about sounding foolish or outlandish.
This is an opportunity to be creative. Describe the facts from the newspaper article and show how
they can be used to infer a more general relationship operating at the societal, organizational or
individual level. Alternatively, explain how the article suggests a way to refine an existing theory.
For example, does the article imply that the theory is especially applicable to particular contexts or
is somehow limited to particular individuals, organizations, or industries? Should such a theory be
refined in a way that it includes different variables or an altered relationship among its variables?
No matter whether you choose to build new theory or refine an existing theory, make sure to
identify the unit of analysis as well as the independent and dependent variables. Also, be sure to
specify the mechanism or causal process underlying the relationship between independent and
dependent variables (that is, why such a relationship occurs). State at least a couple of hypotheses
that could be tested with future research.
Mini 2: Drawing Theoretical Inferences, due Week 3, 2-3 pages.
Use the Vandiver article, “Why should my conscience bother me?” as source material for building
a theory of illegal (or unethical) behavior. List at least five hypotheses that you can infer from the
Vandiver description of events at Goodrich. Then, take at least 2 or 3 of these hypotheses and try
to integrate them into a larger theoretical framework or model of illegal behavior.
5
Project No. 1: Constructing Your Theory, presentation during Week 3,
write-up due Week 4, 4-6 pages.
This assignment asks you to define a research problem, outline a theoretical explanation for the
phenomenon at the heart of the research problem, and develop several testable hypotheses.
Subsequent assignments will ask you to design several different types of research investigations of
this problem. You therefore should try to develop the theoretical underpinnings of your research
problem sufficiently so that it can guide future research design decisions and the development of
additional hypotheses.
The following format may be useful:
I. Research question: This typically takes the form, “Why is it that...?”
a. Identify the dependent variable(s) -- define them.
b. Identify the unit of analysis -- define it.
c. Describe how you think the dependent variable varies or changes -- i.e., describe the
phenomenon under investigation.
II. Theory
a. Provide a general argument that represents what you think is going on. This should be the
rationale for the theory.
b. Present a hypothesis, or set of hypotheses, that are bivariate correlational statements and
(usually) have a cause-and-effect logic (i.e., “if X, then Y”).
c. Summarize your rationale as best you can with a set of more abstract propositions from
which the hypotheses can be deduced.
III. Thwarting the skeptic.
State an alternative explanation and provide a very brief rationale for the superiority of yours
over these alternatives. Also, consider additional tests you could do to demonstrate that your
theory is a better explanation than competing ones.
6
Project No. 2: Experimental Design, presentation during class on Weeks 6-7, write-up due Week 8,
4-6 pages.
Congratulations! You have been awarded a grant to test your theory. The funding agency now
wants an experimental design (conducted either in the lab or field). They expect you to be true to the
problem, hypotheses, and rationales submitted in your original proposal. You must justify any
2changes in the problem or the theory. Unrequested changes may jeopardize your funding and/or
cause you professional embarrassment.
Suggested topics to include in your presentation and paper:
1. Definition of the unit of analysis and each of the variables involved in the design.
2. Describe the design in experimental jargon (pretest-postest control group design, Solomon 4group, etc.) Why did you select it?
3. Discuss internal validity issues that may arouse criticism.
4. Describe your experiment in operational terms; that is:
a. Who will be the subjects for the experiment?
b. What will be the context or situation surrounding the experiment?
c. How will the experimental task be designed?
d. How will the experimental treatment(s) be administered? How many variables and what
levels for each will be manipulated?
5. How will you measure the dependent variables in the experiment?
6. Will there be any control variables, and how will you measure them?
7. How will you determine if your hypotheses are supported? What are the possible outcomes?
8. What are the design’s weaknesses?
7
Project No. 3: Archival or Survey Research, presentation in class Week 10, write-up due Week 11,
4-6 pages.
The review process at your original granting agency is backlogged and you are running out of funds.
Fortunately, another agency is interested in your problem, but they cannot duplicate previously
proposed research. Their Director of Research calls and requests a new design using an alternative
method. He suggests that you choose a design based on archival data. He wants to see a preliminary
research design that includes the following elements:
1. Description and justification of proposed research methods.
2. Discussion of the sampling problems present in such studies.
3. Discussion of how you will gain access to the data.
4. Discussion of how will you analyze your data. What patterns would you expect to see in the
summary statistics?
5. Discussion of how you will know if your hypotheses are supported. How would you convince
a skeptic?
6. Discussion of expected final report and the presentation of results.
Project No. 4: Ethnographic, Survey or Case Study Research, presentation in class Week 14, writeup due Week 15, 4-6 pages.
As your grant award officer was having lunch with a colleague from another large agency, your
research project was discussed. As it happens, this second funding agency is seriously interested in an
ethnographic, survey or case study (quantitative or qualitative) on the issues covered by your research.
In fact, they would like to see a preliminary research design that includes the following elements:
1. Description and justification of proposed research methods.
2. Discussion of the sampling problems (in time and space) that are present in such studies.
3. Discussion of problems of validity, particularly selective information.
4. Discussion of how you will gain access to the “data”; how will you record it?
5. Discussion of how you will know if your hypotheses are supported. How would you convince
a skeptic?
6. Discussion of expected final report and the form it will take.
8
Project No. 5: Integration and Justification of Proposed Research Projects due 12/14/07.
The good news is that all three of your projects were funded. The bad news is that the Office of
Management & Budget (OMB) noticed that you have three grants from three different agencies, all
of which concern the same research problem. They are concerned about duplication and duplicity,
and have impounded your awards until you can justify the three projects. The auditor assigned to
your case is a sophisticated social scientist and has requested a discussion of the relationships
among the three projects. He wants you to compare and contrast the three research designs in terms
of the answers that they will provide. He wants to know which design will arouse the most interest
in the field and why. Finally, he is concerned that the designs lead to cumulative knowledge. He
would like to see a sequence of design decisions based on the outcomes of each prior investigation.
He realizes that this request may lead to design modifications, but warns that your budget will be
adjusted accordingly.
Put the question and the three proposed studies into a single paper. Show how these three studies
can effectively test the theory you have outlined and how, together, they will add new knowledge to
the field.