Explanatory models for work and organizational phenomena: Epistemological, theoretical, and methodological issues

Abstract

This paper aims to discuss explanatory models in Work and Organizational Psychology by analyzing their metatheoretical underpinnings. In particular, the paper analyzes the concepts of causes and reasons, both of which perform a central role in the constitution of scientific models. We demonstrate that experimental, correlational, and case study explanatory models use causes and reasons as strategies of knowledge building, and as a means of linking phenomenon, data, and theory. We also discuss the methodological implications of such use of causes and reasons by scientific models. The paper concludes by discussing theoretical and methodological issues involved in the attempts at building complex models in WOP -showing that, in order to be complex, a model needs to include in its formulation stable-dynamic, cause-reason, and contextual distance-proximity analyses, as well as the theory-phenomenon-data triad. Modelos explicativos de fenômenos em POT: Aspectos epistemológicos, teóricos e metodológicosResumo Este artigo tem como objetivo discutir modelos explicativos em Psicologia Organizacional e do Trabalho tendo, como pano de fundo, uma análise das bases metateóricas que os sustentam epistemologicamente. Em particular, analisam-se os conceitos de causas e razões, ambos centrais na composição desses modelos. Demonstramos que os modelos explicativos experimentais, correlacionais e os estudos de caso utilizam-se distintamente de causas e razões em suas estratégias de construção do conhecimento e de articulação entre dados, fenômeno e teoria, e que essa utilização tem implicações no nível metodológico. Finaliza-se problematizando aspectos teórico-metodológicos envolvidos na construção de modelos mais complexos em POT, que levem em conta a análise das dimensões estável-dinâmico, causa-razão e distanciamento-proximidade do contexto, e a tríade teoria-fenômeno-dado. Modelos explicativos de fenómenos en POT: Aspectos epistemológicos, teóricos y metodológicosResumen Este artículo tiene como objetivo discutir modelos explicativos en Psicología Organizacional al y del Trabajo, teniendo como trasfondo un análisis de las bases metateóricas que los sostienen epistemológicamente. En concreto, se analizan los conceptos de causas y razones, ambos centrales en la formación de dichos modelos. Demostramos que tanto los modelos explicativos experimentales, como los correlacionales y los estudios de caso utilizan, indistintamente, causas y razones en sus estrategias de construcción del conocimiento y de articulación de datos, fenómenos y teoría, y que tal utilización tiene implicaciones en el nivel metodológico. Finalmente, se problematizan aspectos teórico-metodológicos implicados en la construcción de modelos más complejos en POT, que tengan en cuenta el análisis de las dimensiones estable-dinámico, causa-razón, y distanciamiento-proximidad del contexto, así como la tríada teoría-fenómeno-dato.

The Saying and the Doing in research on WOP

“…The apparent lack of theoretical reflection in the process of choosing the data collection procedures in the area -with the absolute primacy of research by means of communication) -can represent an obstacle for the improvement of our research. One set of issues we have not discussed here, such as the apprehension of phenomena as processes or as something static for example (see Gondim, Bendassolli, Coelho Jr., & Pereira, 2016), would result in a picture similar to what was drawn in this essay. These reflections are important as they can help us to better understand the phenomena we work with.…”

“…In the same sense, Geertz (1989) considers that the data are by themselves a construction by the researcher of the constructions by other people, therefore referring to something constructed/something modeled. The author does not consider that that makes the data false, but analyzes that they are as if it were a version, among many, of the reality observed, a version that should be cross-checked with other versions elaborated inside the scientific language.…”