Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 366

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Populations, Natural Selection, and Applied Organizational Science

McKelvey, Bill, Aldrich, Howard·1983·Administrative Science Quarterly
DOI 10.2307/2392389
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

? 1983 by Cornell University 0001-8392/83/2801-01 01 /$00 75 This paper proposes that organizational science could be applied more widely if the field were more concerned with the conditions under which research findings are valid. Papers in the field generalize about organizations as if they were all alike, or refrain from generalizing at all, as if they were all unique. The population perspective presented de-emphasizes the all-alike and all-unique approaches, placing emphasis instead on research methods that improve the description and classification of organizational forms, define more homogeneous groupings, and specify the limited conditions under which predictions may be expected to hold true. The principles of the population perspective are reviewed, and an outline is presented for developing a classification of organizational forms. Suggestions are then made on how to use the perspective to increase and improve the application of organizational research.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2392389

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 366

Metadata

Authors
McKelvey, B., & Aldrich, H.
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1983-03
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
101
ISSN
0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/2392389
OpenAlex
W2026636135
Cited by
366
References
40
FWCI
19.23
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

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.