Chapter 18 & 19 - Conclusions and The Research Report

Question 1

Drafting Conclusions

Answer 1

• Keep your audience in mind
• Make claims
  – Supported by the data
  – Consider alignment with previous findings,
  inconclusive results, limitations, and
  suggestions for future research
• Discuss implications
  – E.g., for the client organization

Question 2

Data

Answer 2

– From the Latin word dare, which means to give
– Participant responses, numbers, words, etc.
– Context free

Question 3

Information

Answer 3

– Meaningful data
– Purposeful

Question 4

Evidence

Answer 4

– Information used to persuade
– Supporting or contradicting a claim

Question 5

Argumentation

Answer 5

• An argument is a set of statements that
  includes:
  – A conclusion (or claim) - which is the main point
  the argument is trying to establish and
  – Premises (“the evidence”) - which support the
  conclusion
  – A “good” argument has a conclusion that is
  well-supported by the premises
  – Perfect support = conclusion guaranteed by the
  premises = a valid argument

Question 6

A famous example of Argumentation

Answer 6

• All men are mortal (the first premise)
• John is a man (the second premise)
• Therefore, John is mortal (the conclusion)
• The above argument is valid

Question 7

Ampliative Arguments

Answer 7

• In real life, the relationship between the
  premises and the conclusion is usually less
  than perfect
• Not necessarily a bad relationship
• Relative strength varies depending on how
  well the premises support the conclusion
  – Good arguments support conclusions
  – Bad arguments do not support conclusions

Question 8

Toulmin’s Model

Answer 8

• The conclusion (or “the claim”)
  – The starting point
  – Based on probability vs. certainty
• The premise (or evidence)
  – The foundation for the conclusion
• The warrant
  – Bridges the gap from evidence to conclusion
  – Provides the underlying connection between the
  conclusion and evidence, and explains why the
  evidence supports the conclusion

Question 9

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

Alleged certainty

Answer 9

Asserting a conclusion without evidence or
premises through a statement that makes the conclusion appear
certain when in fact it is not. For instance: ‘Everybody knows that
…’ or ‘Scholars everywhere recognize the need to …’

Question 10

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

Appeal to common belief

Answer 10

When the claim that most (or many)
people – in general or a particular group – accept a belief as true is
presented as evidence for the claim. For instance: ‘A lot of people
believe in autocratic leadership. Therefore, autocratic leadership
must be a good thing’.

Question 11

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

Argument by repetition

Answer 11

Repeating a conclusion, research findings
or a premise over and over again in place of better supporting
evidence. For instance: ‘Customer satisfaction is quite low. Indeed,
the clients of organization XYZ are not happy. They are thus
unsatisfied about the organization’.

Question 12

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

Blind authority argument

Answer 12

Asserting that a proposition is true
solely on the authority making the claim (extreme cases also ignore
any counter evidence no matter how strong this evidence is). For
example: ‘Authority X asserts that an ABC-policy is of the utmost
importance. That is why organization Z will benefit from adopting
an ABC-policy’.

Question 13

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

Begging the question (circular reasoning)

Answer 13

A form of reasoning in
which a circle is created; the conclusion is supported by the
premises, which are supported by the conclusion. Like this, no
useful information is being provided. For example: ‘The reason
every organization wants to be agile is because being agile is
extremely popular’.

Question 14

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

Cherry picking

Answer 14

(ignoring inconvenient data, suppressed evidence,
fallacy of incomplete evidence, argument by selective
observation, argument by half-truth, ignoring the counter
evidence, one-sided assessment, one-sidedness): When one
presents only a select evidence in order to convince the audience and other evidence that would go against the conclusion is
withheld.

Question 15

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

Does not follow (non-sequitur)

Answer 15

The conclusion does not follow
logically from the evidence or premises. For example: ‘If all planets
revolve around the sun and the earth revolves around the sun, then
the earth is a planet’. This conclusion is incorrect on the basis of
the rules of logic.

Question 16

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

False cause

Answer 16

This argument equates sequence with causality.
Because event A was followed by event B, the first caused the
second. For instance: ‘After Bill became CEO, the company
enjoyed unprecedented growth and success. That is why Bill is a
great CEO’.

Question 17

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

Hasty generalization

Answer 17

A conclusion based on a small sample size,
rather than looking at statistics that are much more in line with the
typical or average situation. For instance: ‘Organization ABC has
never invested in any marketing activity whatsoever. This
organization is more than a hundred years old and still flourishing.
Therefore, engaging in marketing activities really can’t be that
important’.

Question 18

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

Regression to the mean

Answer 18

Ascribing a cause where none exists in
situations where natural fluctuations exist while failing to account
for these natural fluctuations. For example, ‘Naomi’s parents are
very tall, that is why Naomi will be at least as tall as her parents or
even taller’. The thing is that children of tall parents are usually
smaller than their parents (and children of small parents are
usually taller than their parents). In this fallacy, one ignores the
idea that in a consecutive series of measurements, the statistical
probability of a phenomenon will tend to the average.

Question 19

INCORRECT OR FLAWED FORMS OF REASONING

Sunk-cost fallacy

Answer 19

Costs already made (effort, money or time) are
used as an argument to decide to continue with a project or
process. For instance: ‘We have to finish the project because we
have already invested millions in it’.

Question 20

Managerial implications

Answer 20

Good data, good arguments, good conclusions

The interplay between data, arguments, conclusions, and decision-making is intricate and significant. A manager’s ability to navigate this interplay is crucial for making informed, effective decisions based on research reports.

Question 21

Conclusion

Answer 21

The researcher’s informed judgement about (how) the
organizational problem (can best be solved).

Question 22

Evidence

Answer 22

information used to convince someone of a certain point of view.

Question 23

Argument

Answer 23

A set of statements that includes a conclusion (or a claim) and
premises (‘the evidence’) which support the conclusion.

Question 24

Deductive reasoning

Answer 24

In deductive reasoning if the premises are true, then the
conclusion must be true. Deductive arguments are either valid or
invalid.

Question 25

Inductive or ampliative reasoning

Answer 25

In inductive or ampliative reasoning the premises support (but do
not guarantee) the conclusion.