e=mc² | Theme 2: Theory

     

This week’s theme is “Theory” and in this post I will explain how I understood it from the suggested article readings and also a brief analysis considering the strength of the use theories models in a research paper of my choice. 

In my opinion the easiest way to understand “theory” was thinking of remarkable ones from previous studies. In my case I ended up relating it to some mass communication theories that I learned while doing my bachelor’s in social communication. 

Although I must confess that the first one that pop up in my mind was Einstein theory of relativity. I am far away from understanding Einstein but for some reason it popped up. 




From the article What is Not Theory I could came up with this brief explanation:

A theory need to be based in true statements about a specific theme. It is a blend of findings and logical reasoning to justify hypotheses but not a discussion of current results, findings. References, data, variables, diagrams and hypothesis are used to prove that a theory is true. Although isolated they cannot be presented as a theory. Good theory is about the connections.

After reading the article I was surprised by how hard it is to actually produce a consistent and coherent theory. In fact, as said in the article, what we usually read in the papers and journals are not really theories, they seem to be more of results of researches, that don’t really present a new finding. I realized that when following the task of the week to look for a paper that would present a good theory. Maybe in the scientific area this might be easier, or maybe I was too attached to the article concept. 

I was also very confused if there are different types of papers, with different objectives. Because to me the more logical for a paper that  presents a theory would be to first present a proposition, like something the author of the paper believe to be true instead of questions or hypothesis which was the most common patter I saw. Then with references, data, variables, diagrams and hypothesis prove if the theory really works.  

I must confess that I tried for more than two hours to look for a research paper that would present the characteristics implied as an excellent theory. I had to really try to look for a new concept that could have been proven to be true somehow. I ended up finding the concept of digital natives, and a very interesting paper about it, but unfortunately I did not find the journal’s impact factor what made me doubt its reliability. 

Then my choice was the paper Ad Lib: When customers create the ad published in 2008 by the journal California Management Review (impact factor of 2.014) and has been cited 24 times.

From what I could identify from the article The nature of Theory  the paper is based on the IV model: explanation and prediction. The reason is because it presents what is the concept of Ad Lib, how, when, where and also why it happens. The arguments for answering the questions they attempt to solve are based on case studies that is a characteristic of causal explanations, also contained in the IV model. Moreover the authors present some advices deal with this situation that has appeared and that by their arguments will increase over the years. Stating what it will be is also a IV model attribute. 

One weak point though is that the research method they have chosen to use (case analysis) might not be statistically taken in consideration and the theory for explaining and predicting uses statistical and qualitative data to test the propositions. In my opinion looking to the interrelationships among the Theory types (figure 1) the analysis one is a base to any other. The explanation and prediction is a sum of both if seen as separated. In my opinion the authors used the most complete model.


Some concepts to keep in mind: 
1 References are not theory because no logic is presented to explain the reasons that led to the author’s predictions.

2 Empirical evidence plays an important role in confirming, revising or discrediting existing theory and guiding the development of new theory. Provide useful support for a theory.
   
   Data describe which empirical patterns were observed. Theory explains why empirical patterns were observed or expected to be observed.

3 Lists of variables must be explained by the theory showing why they are connected.

4 Diagrams can be a useful support in building theory, making it more understandable.

5 Hypotheses serve as fundamental bridges between data and theory. Hypotheses are what is expected to occur not why.


Later it will be time to check if all the assumptions made here were in the right direction.

"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new." 

Albert Einstein