Improving the credibility of case study research in international business studies and beyond: a simple fix for a serious problem
分析了2011至2021年间四大国际商务期刊的171篇案例研究论文，发现82.5%存在因时态误用导致的过度概括问题，并提出通过正确使用时态来提升案例研究可信度。
Purpose The field of international business (IB) formally welcomes and frequently calls for case study research, but the proportion of case study papers appearing in IB journals remains very small. This paper aims to support efforts to redress this imbalance by addressing an overlooked yet critical issue: the (mis)use of tenses when theorizing from case study findings. The authors reveal a pervasive use of the present tense and argue that this leads to decontextualization and, in turn, over-generalization. The paper also suggests ways in which this problem may be avoided in the future, thereby improving the credibility and status of case-based research and helping to de-marginalise it within IB. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative content analysis was applied to all (2,627) papers published between 2011 and 2021 in four leading IB journals. In total, 171 case study papers were identified over these 11 years, and a deeper content analysis was then performed to measure the extent of decontextualization/over-generalization implied by the inappropriate use of the present tense in the discussion and theorisation of research findings. Findings This study found that, out of 171 case study papers identified, 141 (82.5%) provided at least two instances of over-generalization as implied by the misuse of the present tense. However, some of these papers were found to feature statements that could be claimed to mitigate such inappropriate generalization. These mitigating factors included the repeated use of adverbial phrases denoting context and the use of a “propositional style” that clearly distinguished contextual findings from speculative, decontextualized generalizations. Nevertheless, 71 of the 171 (41.5%) papers still demonstrated inappropriate generalization, even after allowing for mitigating factors. Originality/value This study reveals a problematic writing practice and one which has arguably significantly contributed to the “decontextualization” problem critiqued in IB and management studies more broadly. The study also offers further insights into how decontextualization might be avoided, arguing that this problem would be significantly reduced if tenses were used appropriately in discussing and theorizing case study findings. Additionally, the study highlights the continued marginalization of qualitative research methods in IB and reinforces calls to address it.