The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Case for Inductive Theory Building†
Abstract
This article argues that theory building in the social sciences, management and psychology included, should be inductive. It begins by critiquing contemporary philosophy of science, for example, Popper's falsifiability theory, his stress on deduction, and the hypothetico—deductive method. Next, the author presents some history on the concept of induction in philosophy and of inductive theory building in the hard sciences (e.g., Aristotle, Bacon, Newton). This is followed by three examples of successful theory building by induction in psychology and management (Beck's theory, Bandura's social—cognitive theory, goal setting theory). The article concludes with some suggested guidelines for successful theory building through induction and some new policies that journal editors might encourage.
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
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy · doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 · Cited by 46,835
Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.57.9.705 · Cited by 7,766 · cited 1×
“It was only after 25 years of research and some 400 studies by ourselves and others that Latham and I felt ready to actually develop a theory (Locke & Latham, 1990; for an update and summary, see Locke & Latham, 2002).”
BackgroundSelf-citation
Cited by
Best-practice recommendations for defining, identifying, and handling outliers
Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Joo, H. (2013) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428112470848 · Cited by 1,341
Thau, S., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0020540 · Cited by 367
An Ounce of Prevention Is Worth a Pound of Cure: Improving Research Quality Before Data Collection
Aguinis, H., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2014) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091231 · Cited by 304
Walumbwa, F. O., Hartnell, C. A., & Misati, E. (2017) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.11.013 · Cited by 179
Writing Nonempirical Articles for Journal of Management: General Thoughts and Suggestions
Cropanzano, R. (2009) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206309344118 · Cited by 176
Metadata
- Authors
- Locke, E. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Management
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2007-12
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 867-890
- ISSN
- 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-1211
- OpenAlex
- W2116119723
- Cited by
- 384
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 16.21
- 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: The Case for Inductive Theory Building†. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0149206307307636
- The paper
- Locke, E. A. (2007). The Case for Inductive Theory Building†. Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307307636
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.