Search results

In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, an area could only report its first positive cases if the infection had spread into the area and if the infection was subsequently detected. A standard probit model does not correctly account for these two distinct latent processes but assumes there is a single underlying process for an observed outcome. A similar issue confounds research on other binary outcomes such as corporate wrongdoing, acquisitions, hiring, and new venture establishments. The bivariate probit model enables empirical analysis of two distinct latent binary processes that jointly produce a single observed binary outcome. One common challenge of applying the bivariate probit model is that it may not converge, especially with smaller sample sizes. We use Monte Carlo simulations to give guidance on the sample characteristics needed to accurately estimate a bivariate probit model. We then demonstrate the use of the bivariate probit to model infection and detection as two distinct processes behind county-level COVID-19 reports in the United States. Finally, we discuss several organizational outcomes that strategy scholars might analyze using the bivariate probit model in future research.

In this chapter, we explicate two related techniques that help quantify the sensitivity of a given causal inference to potential omitted variables and/or other sources of unexplained heterogeneity. In particular, we describe the Impact Threshold of a Confounding Variable (ITCV) and the Robustness of Inference to Replacement (RIR). The ITCV describes the minimum correlation necessary between an omitted variable and the focal parameters of a study to have created a spurious or invalid statistical inference. The RIR is a technique that quantifies the percentage of observations with nonzero effects in a sample that would need to be replaced with zero effects in order to overturn a given causal inference at any desired threshold. The RIR also measures the percentage of a given parameter estimate that would need to be biased in order to overturn an inference. Each of these procedures is critical to help establish causal inference, perhaps especially for research urgently studying the COVID-19 pandemic when scholars are not afforded the luxury of extended time periods to determine precise magnitudes of relationships between variables. Over the course of this chapter, we define each technique, illustrate how they are applied in the context of seminal strategic management research, offer guidelines for interpreting corresponding results, and delineate further considerations.

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in management research is still nascent and has primarily focused on content analyses of text data. Some method scholars have begun to discuss the potential benefits of far broader applications; however, these discussions have not led yet to a wave of corresponding AI applications by management researchers. This chapter explores the feasibility and the potential value of using AI for a very specific methodological task: the reliable and efficient capturing of higher-level psychological constructs in management research. It introduces the capturing of basic emotions and emotional authenticity of entrepreneurs based on their macro- and microfacial expressions during pitch presentations as an illustrative example of related AI opportunities and challenges. Thus, this chapter provides both motivation and guidance to management scholars for future applications of AI to advance management research.

This work describes and demonstrates a novel measurement system refered to as videometrics. Videometrics uses third-party ratings of video samples to assess individuals’ characteristics with psychometrically validated instruments of the measures of interest. Videometrics is argued to help ensure valid measurement in difficult to access subject pools, offering substantial promise for future research. This work explains the methodology and demonstrates the applicability and validity of videometrics in multiple studies in the context of a difficult to access subject pool – chief executive officers (CEOs). Finally, the applicability of the method to samples for which lack of access to individuals of interest has limited empirical investigation is discussed.

A growing body of research outlines how to best facilitate and ensure methodological rigor when using dictionary-based computerized text analyses (DBCTA) in organizational research. However, these best practices are currently scattered across several methodological and empirical manuscripts, making it difficult for scholars new to the technique to implement DBCTA in their own research. To better equip researchers looking to leverage this technique, this methodological report consolidates current best practices for applying DBCTA into a single, practical guide. In doing so, we provide direction regarding how to make key design decisions and identify valuable resources to help researchers from the beginning of the research process through final publication. Consequently, we advance DBCTA methods research by providing a one-stop reference for novices and experts alike concerning current best practices and available resources.

COVID-19 has generated unprecedented circumstances with a tremendous impact on the global community. The academic community has also been affected by the current pandemic, with strategy and management researchers now required to adapt elements of their research process from study design through to data collection and analysis. This chapter makes a contribution to the research methods literature by documenting the process of adapting research in light of rapidly changing circumstances, using vignettes of doctoral students from around the world. In sharing their experience of shifting from the initially proposed methodologies to their modified or completely new methodologies, they demonstrate the critical importance of adaptability in research. In doing so, this chapter draws on core literature of adaptation and conducting research in times of crises, aiming to provide key learnings, methodological tips and a “story of hope” for scholars who may be faced with similar challenges in the future.