The Use and Misuse of Organizational Research Methods ‘Best Practice’ Articles

• Published in: Organizational research methods Vol. 26; no. 3; pp. 387 - 408
• Main Authors: Kreamer, Liana M., Albritton, Betsy H., Tonidandel, Scott, Rogelberg, Steven G.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.07.2023; SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
• Subjects: Best practice; Citation analysis; Research management; Research methodology; research methods impact; best practices; organizational sciences; guidelines; qualitative and quantitative methodology; organizational research methods; recommendations
• DOI: 10.1177/10944281211060706
• ISSN: 1094-4281

This study explores how researchers in the organizational sciences use and/or cite methodological ‘best practice’ (BP) articles. Namely, are scholars adhering fully to the prescribed practices they cite, or are they cherry picking from recommended practices without disclosing? Or worse yet, are scholars inaccurately following the methodological best practices they cite? To answer these questions, we selected three seminal and highly cited best practice articles published in Organizational Research Methods (ORM) within the past ten years. These articles offer clear and specific methodological recommendations for researchers as they make decisions regarding the design, measurement, and interpretation of empirical studies. We then gathered all articles that have cited these best practice pieces. Using comprehensive coding forms, we evaluated how authors are using and citing best practice articles (e.g., if they are appropriately following the recommended practices). Our results revealed substantial variation in how authors cited best practice articles, with 17.4% appropriately citing, 47.7% citing with minor inaccuracies, and 34.5% inappropriately citing BP articles. These findings shed light on the use (and misuse) of methodological recommendations, offering insight into how we can better improve our digestion and implementation of best practices as we design and test research and theory. Key implications and recommendations for editors, reviewers, and authors are discussed.