The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
From inductive to iterative grounded theory: Zipping the gap between process theory and process data
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Barley, S. R. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392767 · Cited by 2,315
The Escalation of Commitment To a Course of Action
Staw, B. M. (1981) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1981.4285694 · Cited by 1,693
Cited by
Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data
Langley, A. (1999) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2553248 · Cited by 7,008
Belfrage, C., & Hauf, F. (2017) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840616663239 · Cited by 259
Value innovation in business markets: Breaking the industry recipe
Matthyssens, P., Vandenbempt, K., & Berghman, L. (2006) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2005.05.013 · Cited by 213
Metadata
- Authors
- Orton, J. D.
- Venue
- Scandinavian Journal of Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1997-12
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 419-438
- ISSN
- 0956-5221 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2002436000
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 12.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: From inductive to iterative grounded theory: Zipping the gap between process theory and process data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0956-5221(97)00027-4
- The paper
- Orton, J. D. (1997). From inductive to iterative grounded theory: Zipping the gap between process theory and process data. Scandinavian Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0956-5221(97)00027-4
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
