HARKing can be good for science: why, when, and how c/should we hypothesizing after results are known or proposing research questions after results are known
HARKing can be good for science: why, when, and how c/should we hypothesizing after results are known or proposing research questions after results are known
This provocation challenges the current view that practicing HARKing (Hypothesizing After Results are Known) must be avoided under all circumstances. I explain why and under which circumstances scholars may be allowed, even encouraged, to follow this practice. I use the extant literature and specific cases to show how HARKing can help generate new and worthy knowledge, and why an outright ban on HARKing is wrong for the field of social sciences—and, particularly, for business and management studies. The argument expands the phenomenon to PARKing too (Proposing research questions After Results are Known). The implications for knowledge creation are critical because this practice could hinder research and might defy logic. This provocation is intended as a thought-provoking exercise, hopefully leading to changes in the approach and mindset of scholars. HARKing could offer a major added value to the field as it helps to develop knowledge that, so far, has been blocked by attempts to ban HARKing, and thereby may help open new avenues for knowledge creation.
HARKing, knowledge creation, publication
Baruch, Yehuda
25b89777-def4-4958-afdc-0ceab43efe8a
Baruch, Yehuda
25b89777-def4-4958-afdc-0ceab43efe8a
Baruch, Yehuda
(2023)
HARKing can be good for science: why, when, and how c/should we hypothesizing after results are known or proposing research questions after results are known.
Human Resource Management Journal.
(doi:10.1111/1748-8583.12534).
Abstract
This provocation challenges the current view that practicing HARKing (Hypothesizing After Results are Known) must be avoided under all circumstances. I explain why and under which circumstances scholars may be allowed, even encouraged, to follow this practice. I use the extant literature and specific cases to show how HARKing can help generate new and worthy knowledge, and why an outright ban on HARKing is wrong for the field of social sciences—and, particularly, for business and management studies. The argument expands the phenomenon to PARKing too (Proposing research questions After Results are Known). The implications for knowledge creation are critical because this practice could hinder research and might defy logic. This provocation is intended as a thought-provoking exercise, hopefully leading to changes in the approach and mindset of scholars. HARKing could offer a major added value to the field as it helps to develop knowledge that, so far, has been blocked by attempts to ban HARKing, and thereby may help open new avenues for knowledge creation.
Text
Baruch HARKing HRMJ 2023 doi
- Accepted Manuscript
Text
Human Res Mgmt Journal - 2023 - Baruch - HARKing can be good for science Why when and how c should we Hypothesizing
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 28 September 2023
e-pub ahead of print date: 13 October 2023
Keywords:
HARKing, knowledge creation, publication
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 482721
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/482721
ISSN: 0954-5395
PURE UUID: a61c7111-4d95-4c0f-84d4-3352acc21233
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 12 Oct 2023 16:32
Last modified: 18 Mar 2024 03:25
Export record
Altmetrics
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics
