article · Psychology and Marketing
ABSTRACT Though the role of adopting an appropriate theory in shaping the publishability and impact of research has long been recognized, psychology and marketing researchers lack specific guidance on how to choose a theory to frame their work. Addressing this gap in the literature, this article proposes a set of guidelines for the selection of relevant macro‐foundational theory to guide research projects addressing specific meso‐ or micro‐foundational theoretical entities (e.g., constructs or individual decision‐making) for research impact. Specifically, we develop a set of six guidelines to select an appropriate macro‐foundational theory for research impact, including Interestingness , Matching , Parsimony , Applicability , Conceptual rigor , and Testability (collectively abbreviated as the “IMPACT” guidelines). We next depict the proposed guidelines in an organizing framework that specifies Matching , the theoretical co ‐infusion of the studied micro‐ or meso‐foundational theoretical entity and the chosen macro‐foundational theory, as the central action item for researchers to shape the impact of their work. Researchers are then advised to use the five remaining guidelines to assess the quality of their proposed Matching for research impact. We conclude by discussing pertinent implications that arise from our analyses (e.g., to ensure Interestingness , we recommend researchers to select a macro‐foundational theory that refutes (vs. affirms) prior findings).
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1002/mar.70009
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.