Participatory Budgeting: Case Study of Possible Causes of Failures

Participatory budgeting is perhaps the most widespread and popular form of democratic innovation (DI). It is often identified as an appropriate tool to deepen the democracy at the local level. The text shows that this is not always the case, as some elected officials may use it as a innovation “façade” or its design suffers from various forms of imperfections leading to its failure to be implemented. The authors focus on the practice of participatory budgeting and its failures in the Czech Republic. Through the empirical testing of causal mechanism, the article reveals the main causes of that failure, in the case of its implementation in Prague 7 borough. The mechanism presented is based on the theory-testing minimal process-tracing design in which part of the findings of the previous research have been tested. It also attempts to support empirically only the significant steps of the mechanism between cause and outcome. In particular, the three scope conditions are tested: political support, sufficient funding for participatory budgeting and the existence of a source of know-how. Authors conclude that in the selected case, there was a domino effect of failure, with successive failures in all observed conditions, which ultimately led to a complete brake of causal mechanism and failure of participatory budgeting tool.

The Effect of Networking, Online Sales, Offline Sales, and Training on the Trust of Cooperative Members

This study aims to analyze the effect of networking, online sales, offline sales, and training on the trust of members of the Karya Utama Sejati cooperative. This research is important because optimal member trust can be influenced by Networking, online sales, offline sales, and training at Koperasi Karya Utama Sejati. The sample in this study were all members of the Karya Utama Sejati cooperative, totaling 58 people. The research design used is quantitative research with a descriptive approach with an emphasis on theory testing through measurement of research variables through distributing research questionnaires. The analysis technique in this study is to use multiple linear regression analysis with the help of SPSS 20.0 software. The results showed that the networking variables had an effect on member trust, online sales had an effect on member trust, offline sales had an effect on member trust and training had an effect on the trust of members of the Karya Utama Sejati Cooperative and there was a simultaneous influence on networking, online sales, offline sales and training on trust members of the Karya Utama Sejati cooperative. The advice that can be given to the Karya Utama Sejati cooperative is to improve networking, online sales, offline sales, and training to maximize the trust of cooperative members and achieve the vision and mission of the cooperative.

Theory Testing and Process Evidence in Accounting Experiments

This paper discusses the role of process evidence in accounting research. We define process evidence broadly as data providing insight into how and why cause-effect relationships occur, and we provide a framework to guide the provision and evaluation of process evidence in accounting studies. Our definition allows for an expanded understanding of techniques for gathering process evidence. The framework highlights the importance of the study’s goals and theory in choosing how to provide process evidence as well as how much process evidence to provide. The paper also outlines the strengths and limitations of three approaches to providing process evidence: mediation, moderation, and multiple-study based designs. We provide recommendations for best practices for each approach to minimize threats to validity and maximize the value of process evidence.

An exploratory design science study on theory testing using crowdsourcing

<p>Theory in Information Systems (IS) is very important to the development of the field. Theory building, and theory testing seeks to accumulate knowledge about the relationships between people and technology. Testing theory can be difficult to accomplish, especially when it involves humans, a diversity of methods and sources, multiple experiments, large data sets, and careful tuning of conditions and instruments. Crowdsourcing is a strategy supporting the distribution of activities to crowd workers, which suggests that it may be used to support theory testing. This exploratory study seeks to analyse the adoption of crowdsourcing in theory testing, and to develop guidance for researchers to instantiate the strategy in their research projects. The study adopts the design science research paradigm to explore incorporating the crowdsourcing strategy in theory testing, and to evaluate its viability and utility. According to the principles of design science research, the study is structured around the construction of several interconnected IS artefacts: 1) a conceptual framework articulating the main principles of theory testing; 2) a pattern model of theory testing, which codifies existing research approaches to theory testing; and 3) a decision tool, which codifies guidelines for researchers making decisions on which research activities to crowdsource. In order to build the conceptual framework and pattern model, the study conducts a systematic review of theory testing in the IS domain. Both the conceptual framework and pattern model are then operationalized in the decision tool. The utility of the various artefacts is then assessed with the participation of research practitioners. This study is relevant because it synthesizes knowledge about theory testing, builds innovative artefacts supporting the adoption of crowdsourcing in theory testing, helps academic researchers understanding the theory testing process, and enables them to adopt crowdsourcing for theory testing.</p>

An exploratory design science study on theory testing using crowdsourcing

<p>Theory in Information Systems (IS) is very important to the development of the field. Theory building, and theory testing seeks to accumulate knowledge about the relationships between people and technology. Testing theory can be difficult to accomplish, especially when it involves humans, a diversity of methods and sources, multiple experiments, large data sets, and careful tuning of conditions and instruments. Crowdsourcing is a strategy supporting the distribution of activities to crowd workers, which suggests that it may be used to support theory testing. This exploratory study seeks to analyse the adoption of crowdsourcing in theory testing, and to develop guidance for researchers to instantiate the strategy in their research projects. The study adopts the design science research paradigm to explore incorporating the crowdsourcing strategy in theory testing, and to evaluate its viability and utility. According to the principles of design science research, the study is structured around the construction of several interconnected IS artefacts: 1) a conceptual framework articulating the main principles of theory testing; 2) a pattern model of theory testing, which codifies existing research approaches to theory testing; and 3) a decision tool, which codifies guidelines for researchers making decisions on which research activities to crowdsource. In order to build the conceptual framework and pattern model, the study conducts a systematic review of theory testing in the IS domain. Both the conceptual framework and pattern model are then operationalized in the decision tool. The utility of the various artefacts is then assessed with the participation of research practitioners. This study is relevant because it synthesizes knowledge about theory testing, builds innovative artefacts supporting the adoption of crowdsourcing in theory testing, helps academic researchers understanding the theory testing process, and enables them to adopt crowdsourcing for theory testing.</p>

Rara and theory testing in typology: The natural evolution of non‐canonical agreement

In typology, rara provide valuable tests for theoretical hypotheses. Here I consider the rarum of PERSON inflection in Kayardild, which has only two surface contrasts but is found across all words in complementized subordinate clauses. I introduce a general schema for reasoning about the diachronic emergence of rara, and reconstruct the evolution of Kayardild subordinate PERSON agreement, from an earlier state in which a main‐clause inverse system was coupled to a system of complementizing CASE agreement. Serendipitously, the same synchronic facts have been analysed twice earlier without the benefit of the full diachronic backstory, and so present a retrospective case study in what diachrony offers for the analysis of rara, structures which by definition are difficult to contextualize using synchronic typology alone. I argue that since rara are so valuable for the testing of typological theories, and since diachrony may offer the only source of convincing explanation for them, it follows that typological science will need to refer to diachrony for the successful development of theory. It cannot rely on synchrony alone .

Invisible Hands and Fine Calipers: A Call to Use Formal Theory as a Toolkit for Theory Construction

In recent years, a growing chorus of researchers has argued that psychological theory is in a state of crisis: Theories are rarely developed in a way that indicates an accumulation of knowledge. Paul Meehl raised this very concern more than 40 years ago. Yet in the ensuing decades, little has improved. We aim to chart a better path forward for psychological theory by revisiting Meehl’s criticisms, his proposed solution, and the reasons his solution failed to meaningfully change the status of psychological theory. We argue that Meehl identified serious shortcomings in our evaluation of psychological theories and that his proposed solution would substantially strengthen theory testing. However, we also argue that Meehl failed to provide researchers with the tools necessary to construct the kinds of rigorous theories his approach required. To advance psychological theory, we must equip researchers with tools that allow them to better generate, evaluate, and develop their theories. We argue that formal theories provide this much-needed set of tools, equipping researchers with tools for thinking, evaluating explanation, enhancing measurement, informing theory development, and promoting the collaborative construction of psychological theories.

Promises and Perils of Experimentation: The Mutual-Internal-Validity Problem

Researchers run experiments to test theories, search for and document phenomena, develop theories, or advise policymakers. When testing theories, experiments must be internally valid but do not have to be externally valid. However, when experiments are used to search for and document phenomena, develop theories, or advise policymakers, external validity matters. Conflating these goals and failing to recognize their tensions with validity concerns can lead to problems with theorizing. Psychological scientists should be aware of the mutual-internal-validity problem, long recognized by experimental economists. When phenomena elicited by experiments are used to develop theories that, in turn, influence the design of theory-testing experiments, experiments and theories can become wedded to each other and lose touch with reality. They capture and explain phenomena within but not beyond the laboratory. We highlight how triangulation can address validity problems by helping experiments and theories make contact with ideas from other disciplines and the real world.