the interplay of philosophy of science jan 11 2018 interplay of philosophy of... · economic...
TRANSCRIPT
1
TheInterplayofPhilosophyofScience,Statistics,andStorytelling
DavidM.BojeJanuary11,2018;revisedJan14,2018
Accepted20Jan2018toAdebowaleAkande<[email protected]>fortheNovaInternationalHandbookofPsychology–editedbyDr.AdebowaleAkande(IRC-SurveyResearch,SouthernAfrica),Dr.BolanleAdetoun(ECOWAS/Cornell
University,Ithaca,USA)andDr.ModupeAdewuyi(EmoryUniversity,Atlanta,/Lenoir-RyneUniversity,USA)
AbstractThereisaCopernicanRevolutionhappeninginstatistics.Itissomethingthataffectstheinterplayofscience,statistics,andthekindsofstorytellingtheydo.ProfessorDavidTrafimowistakingontheveneratednullhypothesisandthep-valuemethodoftestingsignificance.Hehasgonesofar,asajournaleditortobanthenullhypothesisfromconsideration.Authorsusingp-valueargumentsareaskedtoreviseandresubmittheirwork.SuchasstirhasbeencreatedthattheCanadianStatisticalAssociationandnowtheAmericanStatisticalAssociationhaveconvenedspecialmeetingstocomeoutwithproclamations.EveniftheysupportprofessorTrafimow,itwillbemanyyears,manychangesinstatisticsbooks,andmeanretrainingstatisticsteachers.Itwillmeanadifferentunderstandingofphilosophyofscience,statisticalaccounts,andenrollmyownfield,storytelling.ThechapterincludesaseriesofYouTubevideointerviewswithProfessorTrafimow.Introduction Whyisstorytellingrelevanttophilosophyofscienceandtostatistics?For
me,storytellingismorethanwrittenorspokennarrativeandcounternarratives.
Thethemeofthechapterishownewchangesinscienceandstatisticreasoning
(droppingnullhypothesis,alternativestop-valuetests)willchangethewaysof
storytellinginacademicwriting.Thepurposeofthechapteristogivesome
historicalreviewofthenewestCopernicanRevolutioninstatisticalargumentation,
andtoshowhowstorytellingcancontributetonewwaysofstorytellingstatistics
andphilosophyofscience.
WhatisPhilosophyofScience?
Thereismorethanonephilosophyofscience.Themostknownisphilosophy
ofscienceconcernedwithmethods,theoryfoundations,andimplicationsof
‘empiricalscience’.ThomasKuhn’s(1962/1970)evolutionsofnormalsciences
wherescientistselaborateon,ordetractfromsomecentral,moreorless,within
2
acceptedtheory.Aswewillexploreinalatersection,Kuhnviewedmodelbuilding
asfundamentaltonormalscienceevolution(Barnes,2008).InKuhnianparadigm
(whichhassometwentymeanings)revolutionaryscience,anomaliesrefutethe
acceptedtheoryofnormalscience,breakingitdown,untilthereisaparadigmshift
overturningitsacceptedtheory.Whitehead(1933:1968:143)putitthisway:
“Theemphasisofscienceisuponobservationofparticularoccurrences,anduponinductivegeneralizations,issuinginwideclassificationsofthingsaccordingtotheirmodesoffunctioning,inotherwordsaccordingtothelawsofnaturewhichtheyillustrations.”
Kuhn,bycontrasttoWhitehead,questionedthis“notionthatscientific
knowledgewastheresultofaslowandsteadyprocessofincremental
accumulation”(Prasad,2005:6).SincethenLatour(1987)andmanyothersare
questionsifthe”scientificmethodstrictlyfollowsthelogicalprinciplesofdeduction,
induction,andfalsification”(IBID).Rather,itisa“random,andcreativeelementin
science,aswellaskthekeyroleofconstructsandinterpretiveframesincomingup
withscientificcategories”(Prasad,2005:6).Theimplicationisthatpositivismisno
longeradheringtorigidscientificmethodprotocol.
BurrellandMorgan(1979)theorizedphilosophyofsciencein4-paradigm
clusters,eachamixofquitedifferentparadigms.Iwanttocontrastitwithan
alternativeconceptionofphilosophyofsciencebyDeetz(1996).Iwillsuggestthat
bothhavemademulti-paradigmsintoa4-paradigmgrid.
3
Figure1:ContrastandComparisonofBurrell&Morgan4-griddualismswithnewgrid-dualismsproposedbyDeetz(drawingbyBoje,2018combinesBurrell&
Morgantablespp.22,27,29,30,&121)
Puttingthe4-gridmodelssidebyside(andincludingallthe(sub)paradigms
ofeachone,allowssomeinterestingcontrasts.Deetz(1996:191)concludesthat
BurrellandMorgan’s(1979)four-paradigminpastdecadeshasgained“almost
hegemoniccapacitytodefinethealternativesinorganizationalanalysis.”The
BurrellandMorgan(1979:22)dualistic-dimensionsofcontrastaresubjectivist—
objectivistandthe‘sociologyofradicalchange’—‘Thesociologyofregulation’.I
added‘solipsism’becauseitisincludedinBurrellandMorgan(1979:29figure)on
their‘subjective’sideofthedualism.Solipsismholdsthattheselfcanknownothing
butitsownmodificationsandthattheselfistheonlyexistentthing.Following
Habermas(CriticalTheory),theycharacterizesolipsismas“occupyingthemost
subjectivistregionofthesubjective”(IBID.229).
Deetz’scriticismisthatthe4-paradigmgridreproducedtheworldasview
frommainstream“sociologicalfunctionalist”definitional-authorityofitsparticular
versionof“philosophyofscience”traditionofseparateobjectsofstudy,butequalin
alooseyetreifiedclassificationcategoriesthatobscuredimportantconceptual
differencesinresearchorientations,andledtopoorlyformedconflictsand
4
discussions(Deetz,1996:191-192).Forexample,theFrankfurtschoolof‘Critical
Theory’critiqueofhumanism,founditselfcategoriesinthegridasamong‘radical
humanists’and“lostinsomeholeinparadigmaticspace”(Deetz,1996:192).
Anotherresultofthe4-paradigmgridisfunctionalistsociologywasprotectedfrom
necessarycritiqueandcouldnormalizeitsparadigm(ofhiddenvalues
explanations),andhavecontroloveranyemergingparadigms(tofitintothe
functional4-paradigmgrid).ThenDeetzraisedamoreimportantconcernthatthe
4-paradigmgriddimensionsofcontrastismissingotherdimensionsofgenuine
differenceinresearchprograms.Forexample,thecontestsformeaningindiscourse
theoryandhowlanguageconstitutesobjectsintheworld(Deetz,1996:192).
The4-paradigmgrid[paradigmclustering]ledtodebatesoverparadigm
compatibilityandincommensurability(Willmott,1993)andappropriateuseofthe
paradigms(Hassard,1991,1995).
Thebasicdualismproblemwiththedimensionsofthe4-paradigmgrid
remainsandcontinuestonormalizeexistingandemergingtheoriesandmethods
intofunctionalist-conceivedparadigmdualisms.Thesubjective-objectivedimension
isadualismasoldas“Westerntheoreticalwriting”,amountsto“floggingadead
horse”,butservestocreateandsustainhierarchiesofresearchprogramsprivileging
codifiedquantitativestudiesasobjectiveandmarginalizesqualitativeorinterprets
studiesassubjective.(Deetz,1996:193).Thishierarchygetsreproducedin
universitiesinpromotionandtenureprocessesandinjournalreviewprocessesin
academies.Deetz’spointisthesubjective-objectivedualityis“sociallycontrived”
[languagegame]in“positivism”-valuesratherthan“naturalfact”(deetz,1996:193).
So-called“interpretivists”are“oftenlabeledas‘subjective’yettheirmethodis
oftentimesabetterclaimtoobjectivitybecauseitallowsalternativelanguagegames
andthepossibilityofalternativeconstructingarisingfromexistingcommunities
denyingbothresearchcommunityconceptionsandpreferredmethodsasprivileged
anduniversal”(Deetz,1996:194).
Wecanallagreethatthesubjective-objectivedualismhassustained“rather
misleadingconflictsandequallymisleadingpresumedrelationsbetweensocial-
calledqualitativeandquantitativeresearch”(Deetz,1996:194).Theassociationof
5
‘subjective’with‘qualitative-multiplicity’and‘objective’with‘empiricalscience’as
wellaswith‘numeric-multiplicity’marginalizes“rigorousinterpretivework”that
doesnotmeetthedefinitionof“purelyimpressionisticmusing”(IBID.194).
Thereisanotherimportantissue,triangulation.Thesubjective-objective
dualityservesto“retainthedreamoftriangulationsasifdifferentresearch
programssimplyprovidedadditiveinsightsintothesamephenomenon”while
hidingtherealconflict(IBID.194).Thereasontriangulationisanoversimplification
ofmulti-paradigmreachistheeachmodeofanalysisis“producingandelaborating
differentphenomenafordifferentreasons”IBID.194).
Thelargerquestionishowtofreenumeric-multiplicityandempiricalscience
fromthepretensesoftheBurrellandMorganfunctionalistontology.
“Manyhumanquestionsadmitofnumericalanswers,andtheseanswersshouldbegoodones.Butwhencodification,counting,andstatisticalreductionareseparatedfromthefullprocessofconstitutingobjects,determiningproblemsandinfluencingcommunities,whenonlyonesliceoftheresearchprocessisclaimedasscience,researchlosesrelevanceandcriticalpartsoftheprocessarenotinvestigated”(Deetz,1996:195).
Concerningtheseconddualism(‘sociologyofradicalchange’—‘sociologyof
regulation),Deetziscriticalofthe‘sociologyofradicalchange’—‘sociologyof
regulation’dualismbecauseit“tendedinmustusagestoassumethepresenceofa
coherentdominantgroupororders,andtheprimaryconflictinitiatingchangewas
classconflict”(Deetz,1996:197).Thisdualismmarginalizesdominantdiscourses
thatareoftendisorganizedanddisjunctmicro-processes(e.g.“technology,
consumerism,careerism,environmentaldestruction,andexclusiveconcernwith
economicgrowth”)whileprivilegingagroupversusgroupconflict(IBID.197).
Deetz’ssolutionistoreplacethe4-paradigmgriddimensionswithtwo
alternativedualismdimensions.Subjective—objectiveisreplacedby
local/emergent—eliteaprioridualism.The‘sociologyofradicalchange’—‘sociology
ofregulation’dualismisreplacedbydissensus-consensusdualism.Andseveralnew
paradigmsareincludedinthe4-paradigmgridclusters.
6
Insum,Deetziswritingwithinthelinguisticturn,makingtheclaimthat
objective-subjectiveisnotonlyadualismthatissociallyconstructedlanguagegame,
itisalsoarhetoricalmoveinstallingsubjectivist-objectivistdualityinorderto
justifyfunctionalistandneo-positivisticphilosophyofscienceofbothpositivistic-
“subjectivehumanists”and“hardcoreabstractedempiricists”researchprograms
andmarginalizingallcompetingprograms.Analternativewaytoframeobjective-
subjectiveistheinsider-outsidersplittodemonstratethepoliticalmotivationsof
thedifference.
Deetz,however,inmyview,hasnotsolvedthreekeyphilosophyofscience
problems.First,hissolutiontotheproblemofdualisticdimensionsistoreplace
themwithtwootherdualisticdimensions.
Second,hisnewdualisticdimensionsareaperiodizing‘grid’approachof
premodern,modern,latemodern,andpostmodernparadigmclusters.AsIhave
writtenaboutbefore,theepochsuccessionapproachishighlyproblematicnarrative
ofhistory.Mostpostmodernistshaveabandonedit,sincemodernismwasnot
succeededbyapostmodernepoch.Thesolutioninhasbeentofocusonpostmodern
theoryratherthanpostmodernepochshifts.AsLatour(2012)putsit,‘wehave
neverbeenmodern.’AsCajetepointsoutso-calledpre-modern[traditional]hasits
ownphilosophyof‘NativeScience’,onethatprivilegesstorytellingasits
methodologyofchoice.
Third,inmulti-paradigmwork,thefocusneedstobethein-between.Pondy
andI(1980”83)weredevelopingamulti-paradigmapproachtosolvetheproblem
ofhowtomanageinquiryfoundedonamultiplicityofparadigms.Weworkedwith
Ritzer’s(1973)threeparadigmsoperatingwithinsociology:socialfactist,social
behaviorist,andsocialdefinitionist.Insteadofdualisticdimensions,wetookaVenn
diagramapproach,sowecouldfocusonthein-betweentranslationworkneededto
accomplishmultiple-paradigminquiry.LikeDeetz,wedidnotabidetheusual
approachtotriangulation.
7
Figure2:PondyandBoje’sMulti-paradigmapproachtoTranslationand
Transpection(T&T)buildingonRitzer(bold)paradigmclusters
Wechosemulti-paradigminquiryasourfrontierprogramfororganization
theoriesshowninthefigureabove.Insteadof‘triangulation’attemptsatintegration,
wewantedtodevelopastrategyofcross-paradigmatic[dialectical]communication,
includingthesubject’sowninsiderperspective.WefocusedonMaruyama’s(1974)
‘translationandtranspectionprocess(T&T)andhismulti-causalparadigmwithits
deviation-counteractinganddeviation-amplifyingprocessloops.Insteadof
monopolarization(oneparadigmatictheory,method,andviewpoint)of
organizationtheory,wechosede-monopolarization:“makingeachpartyawarethat
othersusedifferentparadigmsanddifferentlogics”(Pondy&Boje,1980:97).De-
monopolarizationisthefirstphaseoftranslationandtranspectionThesecond
phase‘transpection’iswhereonepartybracketstheirownparadigmandisableto
8
thinkinintheother’sparadigm.Inthethirdphase,translation,onepartywho
understandsisabletocommunicatetheirpointofviewintheconceptsand
languagefamiliartotheotherparty.Thesephasesincludetranspectingfromone’s
ownparadigm,intotheotherparadigms,andthenbacktotheirown.Ifyouhave
evertriedtranslationprograms,fromyourlanguage,toanotherlanguage,andback
again,youcanattesttojusthowdifficulttranslationandtranspectionis.
Inthenextsections,Iwanttodefinestatistics,andempiricalscience,and
thendevelopanalternativeapproachtotriangulationthatincorporatestranslation
andtranspection.
WhatisStatistics?
Statisticsisabranchofmathematicsdealingwiththecollection,analysis,
presentation,organization,andinterpretationoftrendsandvariabilitiesinmasses
ofnumerical-data.Statisticshasnofactual(observationalorexperiential)content.
Andlawsoraxiomsaboutmathematicsarenotaboutreality.“Asfarasthelawsof
mathematicsrefertorealitytheyarenotcertain;andasfarastheyarecertainthey
donotrefertoreality”(Einstein,1953:189).WhatIcall‘numeric-multiplicity’hasa
brokenconnectiontoqualitative-multiplicity(Boje,inpress).Numeric-multiplicity
propositionshaveanalyticlogicalgrounds,butarenotgroundedinsensemaking
empiricsorinexistentialexperience.Empiricalsciencesetsupconditionsfor
empiricaldisconfirmationofbothkindsofmultiplicity.Numeric-multiplicityis
axiomatizeddeductivelogicalreasoninganditinvolvesproofsthatuseinductive
reasoning.
Descriptivestatisticssumupdatasetattributessuchasthemean,median,
andstandarddeviation.Statisticalinferencefromnumeric-multiplicityisbasedon
statementsofstatisticalsignificanceaboutpatternsinthedataset.Statisticsisabout
theprobabilityofobservingaparticularresult.Numeric-Multiplicityisapowerful
methodusedwidelythroughoutthescientificprocess.
Anotherreasontriangulationisunrealisticisthatnumbersarenotsosimple.
Gephart(1988)forexamplepioneeredthefieldofethnostatisticsinthreenotions:
(1)whatdonumbersmean?(2)Arethestatisticalprogramsusedinempirical
scienceconformingtotheassumptionsandlimitsthatmathematicianswould
9
subscribeto?(3)Whatarethestorytelling(rhetorical)interpretationsbeingusedto
convincereaderstoacceptthesignificanceofthestudy?
Qualimetricsattemptstobridgequantitativeandqualitativeinanalternating
seriesofdeduction,induction,deduction,abductioninquiries,atrilecticalofthree
kindsofknowledgestructuration(1)qualitativefieldnotesandobservations,(2)
quantitativedataaboutfrequenciesofdysfunctionsand(3)financialconsequences
ofthehiddencostsanddysfunctionsnotcurrentlyshowninregularaccounting
reports(Savall&Zardet,2008:206).IwanttostressthatbothEthnostatisticsand
Qualimetricsarefocusedongettingatthegroundedmeaninginqualitative-
multiplicity,ratherthanthekindsofsimplifyingtext-analysissoftwareplatforms
thatareproliferating(wewillreviewthoseinasectionbelow).
Let’sexplorethemeaningofnumbers?Withtheadventofrelativitytheory,
thepost-Euclidiangeometry,andquantumphysics,‘numbers’requiremore
complexinterpretation.Wholeintegernumberswereeasierthanwhatwehave
today.Realnumbersforexample,representquantitiesalonganimaginaryline,such
as-11,-4,-3,+12,+99etc.aswellas,fractions,andirrationalnumbersinalgebra,
likethesquarerootoftwo.Thesquarerootofanegativenumber,suchas-77isan
imaginarynumber.Anirrationalnumberisdefinedasany‘real’numbermultiplied
byanimaginaryunit,suchasX2=-1.Thereareeventranscendentalnumbersthat
arenolongeralgebraic,suchastherootofanonzeropolynomialequation,orthe
transcendentalnumbersπande.Clearly,Einsteinisright,andanycertainty
ascribedtonumeric-multiplicitydoesnotreferto‘reality’ineitherthesensemaking
empiricalworldorinHeidegger’s(1962)ontologicalBeing-in-the-word.
Empiricalscienceandstatisticalmethodshavebecomesointertwinedthat
scientificdisciplineshavetheoryownstatisticaltechniques(biostatistics,
econometrics,geo-statistics,etc.).
WhatisStorytelling?Sciencetellsastatisticalstory.Statisticstellsstories
withnumbersinwhatIterm‘numeric-multiplicity’.Storytellingas‘qualitative-
multiplicity’tellsthereadertherelevanceandsignificanceofempiricalscienceand
statisticstothecurrentsituationoftheworldpeoplelivein.Qualitative-multiplicity
10
researchisaboutrelations,process,contextualinterpretations,andsituatedness
ratherthanabstractorpurelogiccategories.
Prasad(2005:6)regardspostpositivistresearchasmoreartisticand
craftsman-likethanscientific.Qualitative-multiplicityresearchfocuseson“narrative
genressuchashistory,literature,andphilosophy”(IBID.).Italsofocusesonliving
storywebsofrelationship,andondeeperantecedent‘antenarrative’processes
(Boje,2001,2008,2011).
Storytellingincludesthestruggleofaqualitative-multiplicityofnarratives(&
counternarratives),livingstorieswebsofrelationship,andantenarrativeprocess.
Livingstoriesareneveralone,neverjusttheone,becauseeachparticipatesinan
entirewebworkoflivingstories.Alivingstoryhasaplace,atime,andit’smaterial
matteringinrelationtootherplaces,othertimes,andacommunityofotherstelling
itdifferently,oratleastunravelingsomethinganyonelivingstoryistellingandnot
telling.Narrativehasareputationoftryingtoretrospectivelyerase,reduce,
supplantlivingstorywebs,andjustboilitalldowntosomesinglemonologicalview
(Bakhtin,1981),whereas[living]storyisalwayspolyphonic,requiringmorethan
one,andthenanother,andmorebesides(Derrida,1980).Thereismoreto
storytellingthanjustthenarrativeandcounternarrativedialectic,andthe
multiplicityoflivingstorywebworking.Therearepre-narrativeandpre-story
processes,whichIcall‘antenarratives’(Boje,2001,2008,2014).Antemeans
‘before’andhasthesecondmeaningofa‘bet.’Antenarrativeis‘before’-narrative(&
story)coheres,andit’sa‘bet’ofprospectivesensemakingaboutthefuturethatis
arriving,andhowitwillchangebothpresentandpast.Suchantenarrativeprocesses
arecaredforinactsofforecaring.
WhatIwanttodonextislookattherelationbetweennumeric-multiplicityof
statistics,qualitative-multiplicityofstorytelling,andempiricalscience.
11
Figure3:ThebrokenTriadofNumeric-MultiplicityofStatistics,Qualitative-MultiplicityofStorytelling,andEmpiricalScience(DrawingbyD.Boje,2018,
usedbypermission)
Ratherthantriangulation,Iproposeamodelofthebrokentriad(indicated
bycheckerboardbreaksinthetriangleimage).Forexample,numeric-multiplicity
statistics,perse,hasnofactual(empirical)contenttoreachdirectlytoempirical
science.Empiricalsciencethereforedemandsempiricalevidencetovalidate
statisticalaxioms.Thiscancomefromexperimentationinempiricalscience
groundedinpositivismorpost-positivism,orfromstorytelling(qualitative-
multiplicity)groundedinontology.
Eachcornerofthetriadhasimportantdifferencesmakingtriangulation
impossible.Spaceandtimeareconceiveddifferentlyinthetwomultiplicitiesandin
empiricalscience.Numeric-multiplicitydevelopsaxioms(implicitdefinitions)about
athree-dimensionalspaceinEuclidiangeometryandspaceswhereplanesintersect
inRiemanngeometry(Einstein,1953:190).Thetruthofnumeric-multiplicity
axiomsandtheoriesislogicallypriortoanyexperimentalorobservational
validatingevidence.Lorentzstrangeloops,Gödel's(1931)incompleteness
theorems,andfractalgeometryviolatemanyoftheEuclidianaxioms,suchasline
beingshortestdistancebetweentwopoints(Hofstadter,1979).Numerical-
12
multiplicity,whendoingaxiomatizeddeductivemathematicproofsrestsuponthe
allegedself-evidentialcharacteroftheaxioms(Hempel,1953:151).
Reichenbach(1953:100-101)worksoutaninductiveapproachtomeaning
verificationthatworksforquantummechanics.“Ihaveshownthattheusual
languageofscienceincludestheconventionthatunobservablesfollowthesame
physicallawsasobservable;inparticular,thattheysatisfytheprincipleofcausality,
whichforobservablesisanempiricallaw.”
Whathecalls“extensionrules“extendtherangeoflawsfromobservablesto
unobservables”(Reichenbach,1953:100)whichinquantummechanicsincludes
wave/particleduality.Forexample,inquantumphysicspositionandmomentum
cannotbothbepredictedsimultaneouslyfrominitialconditionsofdoubleslit
experiment.“Quantumphysicsdoesnotadmitofanormalsystem”(Reichenbach,
1953:100).Sotheextensionrulehastobeused.ThisisconsistentwithNielsBohr’s
principleofcomplementaritythatbothawaveandaparticledescriptionofthe
observationalapparatusarenecessary.WernerHeisenberg’s(1928)principleof
indeterminacy,bycontrast,reliedoncalculatingalgebraicmatricesofnon-
communicativeHilbertspacevectors.
Mypointhereisthatinstatistics,aswellasin‘empiricalscience’thereare
transcendentconceptsandvariablesthatarenotgroundedinobservationor
experience.Thereareunobservables,irrationalandtranscendentnumbers.Kneale
(1953)contributestocross-paradigmcommunication,totranslationand
transpection.Hediscussesthemakingoftranscendenthypothesesinempirical
scienceandinstatistics.Itmaybepossible,insomeinstancestotranslatenumeric-
multiplicitylawsintoqualitative-multiplicity,althoughtheconverseisntoalways
thecase.Wecancountthenumberofstoriesgatheredindifferentplacesandtimes
andsortoutthemes.However,oncewestarttodevelopaverages,means,and
standarddeviationsofthosethemes,wearebeingreductionistic.Bycontrast,
empiricalscienceobjectareoftenjustemptyspace,since,forexampleinmolecular
andquantumphysics,wearetheorizingunobservables,andevenplacesbetween
entities.Inquantumphysicswehavenoclearobservationdirectlyofwavesand
wave-motionsatthesubatomiclevel.Itcannotbeestablishedby‘directinduction.’
13
ItisdeducedformPlanck’sconstant,Heisenberg’smatrixcalculations,orBohr’s
principleofcomplementarity.Thepointisthatthetriangulationsofnumeric-
multiplicity,qualitative-multiplicitystorytelling,andempiricalscienceofbehavioral
orsociologicalphenomenahasmanygapsbetweentheparadigms,andmore
important,eachhiasitsownversionoftranscendenthypotheses.“Transcendent
hypothesesofthekindwehavebeenconsideringwerefirstintroducedintophysics
bytheGreekatomists”Kneale,1953:358).Theyhypothesizedatthelevelof
unobservables,andhadnoexperimentalmeanstoverifytheirideas.Norisit
“ordinaryinductionfromfactsfrominexperiencebecausenoothermethodis
admissibleinnaturalscience”(IBID.358).KnealemakesthepointthatNewton
distrustedtranscendenthypotheses,yetusedtheminhisspeculationsaboutgravity
andlawsofmotion.Incurrentapproachestomodelbuildingtranscendenceresides
inthehypotheses,thevariablesandinthearrowsbetweenthem.Existential
hypothesesarebeingusedinempiricalscience,statistics,andinthequalitative-
multicitystorytelling.Andthecross-paradigmtranscendencehaslittletodo(except
inleivingstoryethnography)withthesubject’sowntranscendentviews.Living
stories,forexamplehavenoindependentmeaning,andhavecounterpartsinthe
livingstorywebofrelationships.Thenoveltyofaneworevenanoldtheoryin
empiricalscience,statistics,orstorytelling(narrative&metanarrativework),has
littletodowithdirectinductionofthelaypersonsownterminology.
Inmyfieldofstorytelling,thereisattentiontohistoricalhypotheses,to
epochbyepochtheoriesofhistoricalchanges,suchasDeetz’s(1996)modelof
paradigms(premodern,modern,latemodern,&postmodern).Historiansdevelop
inductivehypothesesthatreconstructpastevents,creatinganarrativeofhistory.
ArcheologistsdeveloptheirhistoryofStonehenge,whichtheysubmittomethodsof
historicalcriticism(Kneale,1953:363).
Knealedevelopsatheoryandmethodofconsilienceinduction,whichhas
somethingtocontributetomulti-paradigminquiry.Itisaboutwhathappenswhena
lawortheoryfromoneparadigmisappliedtodifferentparadigmsystem.
“Itoftenhappensthatwemakeatentativegeneralizationinsomefieldofstudywithoutreposingmuchconfidenceintheresultofour
14
inductionbutdiscoverlaterthatwhatwehaveconjecturedisentailedbysomewell-establishedlawsandimmediatelyregardourgeneralizationsitselfestablishedbeyondreasonabledoubt”(Kneale,1953:365).
Thiscanhappenwithtranscendenthypothesesofonparadigmtheorizingto
someotherparadigmsystem.Inorganizationtheory,formanydecadesmechanistic
principlesfromengineeringwereappliedtore-engineersocialsystem,andarestill
beingused,despiteobjectionsthathumansarenotmachines.Despiterepeated
refutation,mechanisticprinciplesarestillinwideuseinmanagementand
organization.Kneale’ssuggestionforsuchacross-paradigmhegemonicsituationis
tofocusonthenumberofsupposedlaws(L1,L2,andLn),whichareshowntobe
consequencesofatranscendenthypothesis.”eachofthesesupposedlawshasits
ownevidence,onsistingofanumberofinstancesformwhichitwasoriginally
establishedbyprimaryinduction”(IBID.365).Theconnectivetranscendent
hypothesisbetweentwoormoreparadigmscannotbemoreprobablethaneachof
theindividuallaws(L1,L2,andLn).However,itcanbethecase,inthelong
accumulationofevidence,thatsincetheoverallhypothesesentailsthesevariedlaws
fromdifferentparadigms,andcommunicatesthem,itcanhavegreaterprobability
thaneachindividuallawanditsrangeofevidence.“Thisistheconsilienceof
inductionswhichfittogetherintoatheory…”(IBID.366).
Methodsoftriangulationthataresupposedly‘solving’multi-paradigm
communicationsobstaclesbycollapsingmeaningdowntothelowestcommon
languageterms,seemstome,tobewhollyunsatisfactory.Whatismorefruitfulis
translationandtranspectioncommunicativeprocessesthatincludeexplorationsof
transcendenthypothesesofeachparadigmandthesubjectsthemselves.
InthenextsectionIwanttoexplorehowmodelbuildinghastenholdin
empiricalscience,aswellasinstorytelling,inwaysthatputsstatisticstousesthat
areproblematicformulti-paradigminquiry.
HistoricalandTheoryBackground
Thereareimportanthistoricalchangeshappening,asNumeric-Multiplicity
15
combineswithso-called‘EmpiricalScience’aswaystodoquickandeasytext
analysisofQualitative-Multiplicity.AccordingtoBarnes(2008)quantitative
modelingofqualitativephenomenabecamepopularafterWWIIwithmassive
investmentsbytheMilitary-Industrial-Complex(MIC),whichhasmorphedintothe
currentMilitary–Industrial–AcademicComplex(MIAC).MIACenfoldeddiverse
performances,ideas,inanimatematerialobjects,people,andentireacademic
disciplinesintoalargercomposite,oneproductofwhichwasanewregime,
‘mathematicalmodeling’(includingsimulation)fortheproductionofknowledge
aboutglobalwarfare,armsrace,ballistics,andsoon.Post-WWII,theMIAChas
incorporateInternetcapabilitiesintoitmodeling,acrossdiversefieldssuchas
economics,geography,andbiology.TheNumeric-Multiplicitymodelbuilding,used
EmpiricalSciencedatasets,andeventually,developedlanguagesemanticanalysis
algorithmsusingdictionariestomodeltexts(spoken,written)Qualitative-
Multiplicitytogetat‘supposed’storiesdatahadtotell.Modelsbecameagential,
agentsparticipatinginallthreeaspectsofthebrokenTriadic(Figure1).Inother
words,modelsmigratedfrompurelymathematicalalgorithmsintobothEmpirical
Science(Kuhn’s1962/1970)normalscience,andaretakingoverstorytelling
analysisQualitative-Multiplicity.
Thiscanbeverifiedintheproliferationoftextualanalysissoftware
companies.Ihavemappedoutsomeofthetextanalysissoftwareplatformsclaiming
todothis.
16
Figure4:BigDataModelingchangestothebrokenTriadofNumeric-
MultiplicityofStatistics,Qualitative-MultiplicityofStorytelling,andEmpiricalScience(DrawingbyD.Boje,2018,usedbypermission)
Withover100textanalysiscompaniescompetingforsharesinthebigdata
market,thereare‘standardswars’ascompaniesstruggleforpreeminenceoftheir
standardoverallothers.Ihavelistedsomeoftheseintheabovefigure,andsorted
themaccordingtotheirlocationinthe‘brokenTriad.’Ethnographwasdeveloped
byanthropologists(Boje,2001)todolocationandretrievaloftextualstatementsin
largerdatasets.MathematicalmodelingapproachessuchasNvivoallowtextdatato
beputintovisualmodels.Itispartofatrendinquantitativedataanalysis(QDA)
approaches.WoodsideandSuresh(2016)‘Storytelling-CaseArchetypeDecoding
andAssignmentManual’(SCADAM)sayitgivesitsusers“acleardefinitionofastory
andapplicationoftheDOF[degreeoffreedomtest]instrumentationimmediately
afterthestorylisteningcreatesanearlysenseoftheperformancemetricsofstory
captureandallocationoftime”(59,bracketedadditionsmine).SASTextAnalytics
advertisesitselfasacomprehensiveTextAnalyticssoftwaresuitethatuses
“advancedstatisticalmodeling,naturallanguageprocessingandadvancedlinguistic
17
technologiestodiscoverpatternsandtrendsfromanytextinanyformat.”1
SmartlogicSemaphoresolutionsaysitprovides“ontology/taxonomymodelingand
informationvisualization”.TheSmartlogicsolutioncontentintelligenceplatform
includescommercialtextanalytics,naturallanguageprocessing,rule-based
classificationofmetadata(IBID.).Leximancer’ssloganis“textin,insightout”and
says,“Textismorethanacollectionofwords.Texttellsastory.”2“Leximanceradds,
“Nohumanbiasinanalysis.”(IBID.SomeoftheQDAapproachesareallaboutstory.
TasteAnalytics,forexample,saysitprovidespredictivemodelingtofindthestories
thatthedataistryingtotellbyusingartificialintelligence,includingarobust
analyticsengineandrobuststatisticalNLPalgorithmsthatcaningestanytypeof
unstructureddataandquicklyidentifytrends,patterns,andoutlyingthemes(IBID.).
OnemoreexampleoftheencroachmentofNumeric-Multiplicityalgorithmsand
text-analysisempiricaldatasoftwareontostorytellingofQualitative-Multiplicity.
SmartMunk’ssoftware,called‘Story.ly’,claimstoreducecomplexityinrichdatasets
byautomaticallyextractingmeaningfromanykindoftext(customerservice
feedback,onlineforums,interviewsviaphone,onlineforms,andsoon).3Italso
promisesprocessofproductdevelopmentoptimizationbyseeinginsightsinthe
storyinsmartonlinereports.
Oneoftheassumptionsof‘Bigdata’(akatextanalytics)isthatitcanconvert
unstructuredtextdataintomeaningfuldataforstatisticalanalysisusingentity
modelingandmachinelearningtechnique.Kimble&Milolidakis(2015)debunk
severalmythsaboutbigdata,whichIwillbrieflysummarize:
Myth1:Bigdatagetsatmeaning.Infact,Bigdatausesmathematical
modelswheretheempiricaldata(text,speech,etc.)aredecontextualized,takenout
ofitsmeaning-situation,tofitintotheavailablemodelalgorithms.
Myth2:Bigdataisobjective.Infact,FacebookandTwitter(&othersocial
1PredictiiveAnalyticsSoftwareAccessedJan192018athttps://www.predictiveanalyticstoday.com/top-software-for-text-analysis-text-mining-text-analytics/2LeximancerSoftware.AccessedJan192018athttps://info.leximancer.com/3SmartMunkSoftware,Story.lyaccessedJan192018athttp://www.smartmunk.com/wp/
18
media)donotrepresent‘allpeople’andsomeusershavemultipleaccountsusedby
multiplepeopleandsomebotspretendtobepeople.
Myth3:Bigdataisfreeforanyonetouse.Infact,usingsocialmediadata
withoutpermissionraisesethicalconcerns.Usersarenotawareoftheusestheir
postsarebeingputtoindifferentcontexts,theprofitsgenerated,andsoonNorisit
free.Forexample,Facebookusersareanunpaidworkforce.Thevalueofthedata
posedisassessedtobe$81perperson.
Myth4:Bigdatamakesmanagersmorerationalanddeterminate.Big
datapromisestoturnindeterminatesituationsintodeterminedsituationsusingIT-
intensivepractices.Managerscanthenbehavemorerationally,bemorecalculable,
andforecastabletotheirsuperiorsortosystemsoftware.
Next,wewilllookatthestorytellingaccountsgiveninstatisticalstudiesto
convincereadersofthesignificanceofthestudy.
StatisticalStoryTheUnitedNationsEconomicCommonforEurope(2005)
putoutabookon‘MakingDataMeaningful:Aguidetowritingstoriesabout
numbers.’(Geneva:UnitedNations).A“statisticalstory”reveals“statisticsarenot
justnumbers”(3).
“Astatisticalstoryisonethatdoesn’tjustrecitedatainwords.Ittellsastory
aboutthedata.Astatisticalstoryconveysamessagethattellsreaderswhat
happened,whodidit,whenandwhereithappened,andhopefully,whyandhowit
happened”(3).
TheUnitedNationsEconomicCommonforEurope(UNECE)(UNECE,2005:
6)givesadviceonhowtowriteastatisticalstory:“Firstandforemost,youneeda
storytotell.Youshouldthinkintermsofissuesorthemes,ratherthanadescription
ofdata.Thatmeansthatyouneedtofindmeaninginthestatistics.”
Second,istousedthejournalist’s‘invertedpyramid’puttingyouroneortwo
mainconclusionsuptopaboutthedata’sgeneralmessage,followedbysecondary
pointsincreasingorderofimportancethroughoutthestory(6).“Itshouldcontain
fewnumbers”(6).Avoidjargon.
Third,applygoodwritingtechniques:keepparagraphsshort,withthree
aboutthreesentences.Thethemesentenceshouldcontainnonumbers.“Large
19
numbersaredifficulttograsp.Usethewordsmillions,billionsortrillions.Insteadof
3,657,218,write‘about3.7million’”(7).Usecompellingheadingsandsubheadings,
andembeddedquotes,andgraphsareaplus.Graphstellastory.
Storytellingisaboutbothqualitative-multiplicityandnumericmultiplicity
(Boje,inpress).Storytellingisamethodofinductive,deductive,orabductive
reasoning.Inductivestorytellingargueswhatistrueisbasedonindividualcase
examples.Deductivestorytellersargueswhatisatrueconclusionstepsfrom
premises.InductionstorytellingisthePeirceannotionofaintuitiveflashofinsight.
Storytellingplaysafundamentalroleincommunicatingscienceandstatistics
throughdatastories.Storytellingwithnumbers,graphs,tablescanclarify
underlyingconceptualframeworks,descriptiveandinferentialthoughts
(Pfannkuch,etal.,2005:1).
Effectivedatastorytellingmorethanjustthestructureofstories(IBID.3).
Numerical-multiplicitystorytellershavetocommunicatenuancesofmeeting,
substitutenatural-languageforjargon,andgetbeneaththetipoftheicebergtothe
patternsofthedata-story,its’spread’and‘shape’(IBID.3).
InNewZealand,theMinistryofEducation(2007)rolledoutanewstatistics
curriculum,thatrequiredteacherstoincreasenotonlytheirskillsindataanalysis
butalsoincommunicativecapability(Pfannkuchetal.,2005:3).Thisoldcurriculum
splitoutdata-description,coveredinearlyyearsofschooling,fromdata-inference
(e.g.fromsampletopopulation),coveredinlateryears.Thererecommendation:
“Whenwearejustbeginningtolearnhowtoreasoncomparativelywehavetokeep
theprincipleofstatisticalinference,thelinkbetweensampleandpopulation,tothe
forefront”(Pfannkuchetal.,2005:12).
Storytellingmimicsthewayourbrainsstoreinformation(descriptive,
inferential,&contextual).Storytellingisnotjustdescriptiveandinferential,itcan
alsocontributetocontextualunderstanding.Episodicdescriptivestorytelling(I
noticeissensory:whatoneisseeing,hearing,tasting,smelling,&touching).
Inferentialstorytellingisaboutcomparisonusinginductive,deductive,orabductive
reasoning(Iwonderifmorecaseswillholdthetrend,orfromthesepremisesIdraw
20
aparticularconclusion).Contextualstorytellingfillsintheblankswithconfirmatory
experiencemissingfromthestorytelling(Iknowfromexperiencewhattoexpect
willhappen,orwhyitturnedoutthisway).Inindigenousstorytellingdetailsand
sequencesareoftenleftoutofalivingstory,sinceitispartoftraining,tobeableto
fillintheblanksandproblemsolve,interselytoldstories(Boje,1991).Western
narrativetrendstoleavelittletothecontextualwonderment.“Contextual
knowledgeplaysanimportantroleinthedata-dialogue”inthestorytelling
reasoningfromdata-stories(Pfannkuchetal.,2005:14).
“Datastorytellingistheprocessoftranslatingdataanalysesintolayman's
termsinordertoinfluenceabusinessdecisionoraction”(Kumar,2014,online).
Dataanalyticsemphasizetheimportanceofnarrativetomakesenseof
complexdata.Datastorytellingisusefulinhelpingaudiencesunderstandthepoint.
Numeric-multiplicitystorytellingmeanstellingstoriesaboutwhatresides
withinquantitativeinformationthatanaudiencecancareaboutandunderstand.Do
storiesliveinyourdata?Storytellingisdoneinmixedmedia,livetalk,dramaturgy,
pictures,diagrams,animatedgraphic,podcast,radio,YouTube,webpage,printed
bookorreport,andsoon.
TheNewCopernicanRevolutioninStatistics
Along-standingacceptedinferentialprocedureisbeingproblematizedand
declaredinvalid.ItistheequivalentofaCopernicanRevolution,becauseknowledge
claimsofpriorandcurrentresearch,arebeingcalledintoquestion.
Thep-Valuetellsaastory.Forpeoplewhounderstandthem,p-valuestella
story.SinceDavidTrafimowischallengingthep-value,wewillneedanotherwayof
tellingstoryofsignificance.“Theroleofastatisticsteacheristoenablestudentsfirst
torecognizethatthereisastory,thentoenablethemtotellthestorythroughthe
toolsofanalysisandcommunication”(Pfannkuch,Regan,Wild&Holton,2005:1).
Thep-value(probabilityvalue)isthelevelofmarginalsignificancewithina
statisticalhypothesistestrepresentingtheprobabilityoftheoccurrenceofagiven
event.P-valueisusedtorejectpointsofthesmallestlevelofsignificanceatwhich
thenullhypothesiswouldberejected.
21
Figure5:TheoryofCauseandEffect(BigXàY)andprogramofobservation
(Littlexày)withTrafimow’sauxiliaryassumptionsetsBig[X-Y]cause-effectgeneraltheory.AndtheisaMeasurementPrinciplewewillcalllittle(x->y)program->observationexperimentsandmetrics
Thereareentangleddoubleloopsbetweenthesocialandtheeconomic
factorsandbetweenthequalityandfunctioningofquantitative(&financial)
economicperformance.Big[X-Y]cause-effectgeneraltheoryandEmpiricalScience
‘MeasurementPrinciple’oflittle(x->y)program->observationexperimentsand
metricsbecomeentangledwitheachotherandwithvariousexploredand
unexploredassumptionsets.Changing‘constructvalidity’awayfromtheusual(p<.
05)&nullhypothesistestingincausalmodeling(e.g.structuralequationmodeling,
clusteranalysis,etc.)changesalltheothervalidities.
Table1:How9TypesofValidityareAffectedinOrganizationalResearchMethodsbyDavidTrafimow'sCopernicanRevolutioninCausalModeling\
• CONSTRUCTVALIDITY:Does(littlex->y)measureadequatelytap(BigX->Y)deductivetheory?TheCopernicanRevolutioninConstructValiditychangesallremainingkindsofvalidity,andgivesscienceanewstorytellingoftheempiricalworld.
22
• FACEVALIDITY(1stWaveGroundedTheory):Doestest/experiment/observation(littlex->y)‘resemble’(inductiveinference)oftherealworld‘actual’phenomenoninitsspacetimemattering?(Thisistheepistemic[inductive]fallacyofassumingtheoryofIdeasubsumestheontologicalwithoutactuallydoingfalsificationofa1anda2auxiliaryassumptionset).
• CONTENTVALIDITY:Does(littlex->y)measureadequatelyaccomplishinquiryinto(BigX->Y)deductivetheory?(Withoutcommittingepistemicfallacy)
• DISCRIMINANTVA:IDITY:Does(littlex->y)measuredivergefrommeasuresofothergroupsthat(BigX->Ytheory)doesnotpredict?
• 2nd&3rdWavesofGroundedTheory(akaNomological)Validity):Doesthepriortheoryandresearchon(BigX->Ytheory)matchtheabductiveinference(littlex->y)program&observations?
• CONVERGENTVALIDITY:Do2ormore(littlex->y)measuresbothpurportingtomeasure(BigX->Y)theoryhavehighempiricalcorrelation?
• CONCURRENTVALIDITY:Do(littlex->y)testresults,atthesametime,matchresultsofanacceptedmeasureof(BigX->Y)theory?
• PREDICTIVEVALIDITY:Doespast(littlex->y)resultpredictfuturerepetitionsofperformance?
• CRITERIONVALIDITY(combinesconcurrent&predictivevalidities):Doesmeasure(littlex-y)measurerelatetoanoutcome?
Thesmallerthep-value,thelargerthesignificancebecauseittellsthe
investigatorthatthehypothesisunderconsiderationmaynotadequatelyexplain
theobservation”(Wikipedia,P-value).Theusesofp-valuesdatesbackto1770s,
whenfirstcalculatedbyPierre-SimonLaplace.ItwasformallyintroducedbyKarl
Pearsoninchi-squareddistributiontest(Pearson,1914:xxxi-xxxiii,26-28,Table
XII).Thep-valuewaspopularizedbyRonaldFisher(1925)whoproposedthelevel
p=0.05.ProfessorDavidTrafimow(2003,2009,2014)hasdeclaredbothp-value
andnullhypothesistobeinvalid.“Asthestandardnull-hypothesissignificance-
testingproceduredoesjustthat,itislogicallyinvalid”(Trafimow,2003”526).One
reason,in“Bayes’theoremyieldsp(HoF),butinpractice,researchersrarelyknow
thecorrectvaluesfor2ofthevariablesinthetheorem”(IBID.).Intheireditorial,
TrafimowandMarks(2015:1)bannedauthorsfromsubmittingnullhypothesis
significancetestingprocedure(NHSTP),declineitinvalid,andthereforeauthors
wouldnolongerberequiredtoperformthetest.Articlesperformingp-valuetests
wouldnotbeautomaticallydeskrejected,“butpriortopublicationauthorswillhave
23
toremoveallvestigesoftheNHSTP(p-values,t-values,F-values,statementsabout
‘significant’differencesorlacktherefor,andsoon”(p.1).InadditionsNHSTP,since
itfailstoprovidetheprobabilityofthenullhypothesis,confidenceintervalscannot
beusedtoacceptorsectthecaseforsamplesarecapturingpopulationparameters.
Instatisticalhypothesistesting,thep-valueforagivenstatisticalmodel,whenthe
nullhypothesisistrue(p(FHo),thestatisticalsummarybetweenthesamplemean
andcomparedgroupswouldbesameorgreatermagnitudethanactualobserved
results.Thep-valueisusesinstatisticalhypothesistestinginfieldsoforganizational
researchsuchasmanagement,marketing,economics,finance,psychology,and
sociology.
Trafimowchallengestheuseofnullhypothesistestingasareducead
absurdumargumentadaptedtostatistics,itsclaimimprobable.Nullhypothesisisa
dualism,sinceitassumesrejectionofanullhypothesisimpliesasinglecorrect
alternative,whichisquestionablesinceasTrafimowputit,theremaybemany
auxiliaryhypothesestoeliminate.Further,Trafimowbringsintoquestionthenotion
ofstatisticalsignificancethatisnaivelyquantitiesbyconditionalprobabilityPr
(X|H),thelikelihoodtheobservationofcontinuousrandomvariablestobezero,or
Pr(X=x|H)=0.
Whatisbeingwidelycritiquedisacceptingalternativehypothesestothenull
hypothesis,foranyp-valuelessthat.05withoutothersupportingevidence.
Trafimow(2003,2009)takesthisskepticismastepfurther,actuallybanningp-
valueandthenullhypothesis,asanindexicalofthestrengthofevidencefora
theory.
TrafimowandRice(2009:261),havetorespondtochallenges,suchas
supportersofnullhypothesisprocedures,who“…arguethattheprocedureisgood
enoughbecausetheybelievethattheprobabilityofthedataifgiventhenull
hypothesiscorrelateswiththeprobabilityofthenullhypothesisifgiventhedata.”
TrafimowandRicerejectthecorrelationmethodasunimpressiveandfailingtogive
compellingjustificationforcomputingpvaluesindichotomizedprocess,torejector
retainnullhypothesis.
24
Trafimow(2014:15)says,“Quantitativeandqualitativeresearchersuse
differentmethodsandhavedifferentgoals.Atthelevelofmethods,quantitative
researcherscriticisequalitativeresearchersfornotperformingnullhypothesis
significancetests.”However,Trafimowrejectsthenullhypothesisandthep-value
testfindsthisargumentinvalid,becausethequalitativegoalisnottofindcausal
mechanisms,itittodescribepersonalorsubjectiveexperience.
Theinterpretationofp-valuestatistichasindeedtakentheformofaskingwhether
itisvalid,andasGilesDeleuze(1968/1994:176),mightputit,morefictivethan
real.
Thefictivenessofthep-valueistiedtomattersofrepresentationand
interpretationofstaticalproceduresandtechniques.Mystorytellingpointisthat
thep-valuestatistichaslostitsclaimtovalidity,andisbecomingfiction,orworse,
wecandiscussthemetaphysicsofthep-valueandthenullhypothesistestingofa
theory.
DavidTrafimowhasappearedtogivetestimonytostatisticalassociationsin
Canada,Netherlands,andintheUS,sincethesegroupsmistgiveguidanceto
statisticiansonwhattobeaboutthep-valueandnullhypothesiscontroversy,and
issuesomekindofstatementorproclamation,fororagainst.Coulditbethat
Pearson(1914)andFisher(1925)havecommittedsomekindofhistoricalerror.
Byinvokingthe‘problemofp-valuesandnullhypotheses;Trafimowopens
inferentialstatisticstothechallengeofmetaphysics,apathbeingtakenbeyondthe
empiricalstatisticalequationdomainofsignificancetobeingconfidentinthe
validityofaparticularconcept,orentirelytheory.Inotherwords,theimmanenceof
p-valuetotranscenditsstatisticalsolutioninrelationtoclaimingthevalidityofthe
theory,isaninferenceofsynthesis,thefictiveorerroneousknowledgebeing
legitimated,ornot.
Whatisbeingrevealedinthissynthesisisthemovementfromastatistical
resulttoadeclaredknowledgesolutiontoatheoryprobleminfieldsasdiverseas
medicine,psychology,sociology,management,accounting,andfinance.Thenull
hypothesisp-value(NHSTP)crisisofsynthesisisalsoaproblemofdialectics,the
25
antinomybetweenstatisticalprocedureandnominalrepresentationofvalidtheory
claimsbyauthorsofresearcharticles,andeditorialpoliciesofresearchjournals.
Weshouldspeakofadialecticsofp-value(&nullhypothesis),as“anyknowof
circulationofopposingrepresentationswhichwouldmakethemcoincideinthe
identityofaconcept,buttheproblemelementinsofarasthismaybedistinguished
fromtheproperlymathematicalelementofsolutions”(Deleuze,1994:178).
P-valuestatisticisaweaksolutiontotranscendenceofacirculationof
representationsofcalculationstoatheoryconcept(orpropositions,orhypothesis).
TheIdeaconnectionsconstitutedasvalidinrelationtop-valueisdialectical
tothetheoryIdea,itsinferenceof‘real’and‘valid’relationsBeing-in-the-world
(Heidegger,1962).Theidealcontinuitybetweenstatisticaltechniqueandtestable
theory,efficacyisengenderedinaPlatonicdialecticrelationtomathematicsitself.
Thisisaproblem,alreadyand“alwaysdialectical”touphold,ornot,theassociation
betweenp-valuesandhypothesisofagiventheory,ina“dialecticalorder”(Deleuze,
1994:179).Thedialecticalproblemisduplicatedinthesynthesisbetweenthe
mathematicallyorderandtheIdeaorder,andinferencesaboutNature.
Inorganizationalresearchmethods,thereareethnostatisticsimplications(Gephart,
1988,2006).Ethnostatisticsisthestudyofhowpeopleandorganizationsuse
statistics.Theuseofp-valueandnullhypothesistestingbyresearchersusing
statisticsinorganizationalresearchisamatterforethnostatisticalinvestigationof
inferentialsensemaking.“Thesynthesisoftheproblemanditscondition:thep-
valuehaslostitsgroundedness,andcannolonglayclaimtosignificance,or
characteriseproofofobjectivityofresearchmethod,inordertogive“sufficient
reason”verifytheory(Deleuze,1994:180).
Bothmathematicaltheoryandthesocialsciencetheoryhaveaproblemin
beingabletofulfillallthedialecticalrequirementsoftheinferentialcircleofnumber
andexistentialdomaininterrelationalitybetweenstatistics,Idea,andNaturehaving
therequisitecontinuitytobevalidconnection.
ThedialecticalIdeaisasystemofconnectionsacrossdomains(p-value
statisticalelements)andgeneticelementsoftheorderofIdeas,presupposedin
propositionsunderscientificconsidersas“fieldsofsolutioninwhichdialectical
26
Ideasofthetheirorderareincarnated”inotherscientificdomains(Deleuze,1994:
181).
Therefore,p-valueposesa[statistical]dialecticalproblemofthefirstorder
tostatisticalsolutionsinrelationstodialecticalIdeaswhichitincarnates.
Figure6:TriadicMultiplicitiesandAntenarrativeConnectionsof
Mathematico-BiologicalSystemsofdifferT/Ciation(©D.M.Boje2017).
Deleuze(1994:221)theorizesadialecticalhalfofdifferenTiation(actionor
processofdifferentiating)andtheFrench"ladifférentiation"aestheticspatio-
temporalactualization,differenTiation,whichhecombinesas'differT/Ciation':"The
entireideaiscaughtupinthemathematico-biologicalsystemofdifferent/ciation.I
27
haveaddedmytheoryofantenarrativeprocessofpre-qualitativeandpre-
quantitativedramatizationsintothediffCiationanddiffenTiationofapotentization
spiral,'differT/Ciation.'
Forecaringiswherethephilosophyofsciencecomesintoplay.Itakean
ontologicalstandpoint,howfore-caringissomethingworkedoutinspace,intime,in
thematteringoftheworld(Boje,2014),whatBaradiannewmaterialistscall
spacetimemattering(theirinseparability)intheintra-actionofmaterialitywith
discourse.Suchanapproachtostorytellingisaboutchangestakingplacein
philosophyofscience.Itisfirstofall,achangefromNewtonianmechanisticscience
toquantumphysics.Second,itisachangefrominthewayweunderstandvalidity.
Third,itisachangecolleaguesandIcallthefourthwaveofGroundedTheory(GT).
DavidTrafimowisforecaring,actinginadvance,tobringaboutarevolution
instatistics,onethathasimplicationsforchangingphilosophyofscience.
Statisticalstorytellingadvice(IadapteditfromCairo,2014;Kumar,2014;
Few,2009;Pfannkuchetal.,2010).Cairo(2014)saysforgooddatastorytelling,it
shouldbe:truthful,functional,beautiful,insightful,andenlightening.Storytellingis
themostpowerfulwaytoputnumericideasintotheworldtoday.
1. KISS.Tellitsimplyintermsfamiliartotheaudience.Bringattentiontothe
message,nottothenumbers.Tellthedata-storyinawaypeoplecan
understand.Tellthemessagefirst,thenputtogetherrelatedsupportdata.
Befunctional,constraining(notdictating)form.Youdon’ttellanumeric
storytoagroupofstatisticiansasyoudotoanEnglishdepartment.Strip
downthestatisticalstorytelling,justenoughspecificdetailsfortheaudience
togetthemessage.Toomuchdetail,andtheaudiencegetsdistracted.Make
thestoryaction,whatactionyouintendfromtheaudience.Ifyoumust
presentcomplexity,builditpiecebypiece.Whatarenextsteps?Storytelling
makescomplexityaccessible.Itcanalsobeaboutcausation.
2. Seamlessintegrationofwordsandimages.Usevisualdisplayformmore
generalaudiences.Visuallydisplaynumeric-multiplicity,andthenspeak
28
aboutit.Inotherwordsdon’tdisplayanimageonthescenewhileyouare
talkingaboutit.Innumeric-multiplicitythedatastorycanbevisualizedin
multipleways.Thestorygetsintothebrainmoreeffectivelyonchannelata
time.Kumar(2014,online)putsitthisway“Datastorytellingfeelsmore
quantitative;Iimagineneedingtocollect,clean,manipulate,andanalyzethe
databeforecraftingthestory.Storytellingwithdata,however,feelsmore
fluid,withthestoryandthedatacomingtogetherconcurrently.”
3. Tellinsightstheaudiencedoesn’talreadyknow.Tellitinanewwaythatthe
audiencedoesnotexpect.Becounterintuitiveandenlighteninginthe
visualizationofthedata.
4. Truestorytellingsticks.Theaudiencecaresabouttruestories.Truestories
mustsomehowengageemotions,sopeoplecare.Visualization(infographics)
shouldbetruthful.Keepitevidence-based.Mostvisualslieorpresenthalf-
truths.
5. Contextmatters.Quantitativestoriesismorethanthrowingnumbersat
people.Tellwherethenumberscomefromandhowtheywereadjusted.The
meaningincomparingnumbers(trends,patterns,exceptions),comparing
thesenumberstoothernumbers.Tellitinavisuallybeautifulway,butkeep
inmindthepurpose.Inindigenouslivingstory,manythingsareglossedand
terselytold,orthingsjustleftoutbecausethepurposeofelder’stellingitis
sotheyoungonesgetaneducationincontextualreasoning.
6. Begrounded.AlfredNorthWhiteheadusesthetermconcrecence,being
concrete.Hegelwasaboutthespiritmovingfromtheabstracttothe
concrete.Peoplearegroundedintheworldoftheirexperience.Hadthestory
ofEnronbeentoldinconcrete,ratherthanabstractterms,perhapsmore
employeeswouldhaveblownthewhistle,andfewerpeoplelosttheir
retirementincomes.Connectthedata-storyinconcreteandpersonalways
thatinvolvetheaudience.
Conclusions
29
Hereisnotonebutmanyphilosophiesofscience.Anthesearechanging.
Modelsareincorporatingmoreandmoreheterogeneousconceptsandvariables
fromseveralparadigms.Itisthereforenecessarytoattendtocross-paradigm
communication.Ihavesuggestedthatgreaterattentiontotranscendenthypotheses
bepartofthatcommunication.Further,timeandspacefortranslationbetween
paradigmparticipantsshouldhappen.Andthisneedstoincludesubject
participants.
ApproachestoparadigmclusteringsuchasthoseofBurrellandMorgan
(1970),Deetz(1996),andmyownwork(Pondy&Boje,1980)needtobemore
attentivetounderstandingsubtledifferencesbetweenparadigmsincludedin
clusters.Staticclusterssetuphegemonicdualitiesamongclusters.
Finally,storytelling,empiricalscience,andstatisticsareintertwining
paradigmsinnewways.Someofthesenewwaysallowforcross-paradigminquiry.
Othersareusingmodelswithproblematiccombinationsofparadigmconceptions.
Hereiswheretranslationandtranspectionisespeciallyuseful.Tobeableto
communicateone’sownparadigmintothelanguageandconceptsofother
paradigm,andbackagain,intoone’sownparadigm,isdifficultbutcanadvacecross-
paradigmcommunication.
Fromethnostatistics,werealizethatstatisticshasitsstoriesandits
storytellers.Empiricalsciencehasitsstorytellingaboutthenumbersbeingused,the
waynumbersaremanipulatedinstatisticalpackages,andhowtointerpretthe
scienceandstatisticsgenerated.Wehavelookedatwaysscientistsandempirical
scientistsdodata-storytellinginwaysthatcommunicatestowideraudience.
30
ReferencesBarnes,T.J.(2008).Geography’sunderworld:themilitary–industrialcomplex,
mathematicalmodelingandthequantitativerevolution.Geoforum,39(1),3-16.http://blogs.ubc.ca/trevorbarnes/files/2015/01/PAPER_Geography_underworld.pdf
Boje, D. M. (2001). Narrative Methods for Organization and Communication Research. London: Sage.
Boje,D.M.(2008).StorytellingOrganizations.London:Sage.Boje,D.M.(2011).StorytellingandtheFutureofOrganizations:An
AntenarrativeHandbook.London/NY:Routledge.Boje,D.M.(inpress).OrganizationalResearchMethos:StorytellinginAction.
London/NY:Routledge.Burrell,G.,&Morgan,G.(1979).SociologicalParadigmsandOrganizational
Analysis:ElementsoftheSociologyofCorporateLife.London:Heinemann.Cairo,Alberto.(2014).KeynoteaddresstoTapestryconferenceAnnapolis,MD,on
Feb.26.Accessed14Jan2018athttp://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/210101449?access_key=key-27wybzofgd360ow0rmf0&allow_share=true&escape=false&view_mode=scroll
Cajete, Gregory. (2000). Native science: Natural laws of interdependence. Clear Light Pub.
Deetz,Stanley.(1996)Crossroads—DescribingDifferencesinApproachestoOrganizationScience:RethinkingBurrellandMorganandTheirLegacy.OrganizationScience,vol.7(2):191-207.https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.2.191
Deleuze.Gilles.(1990).LogicofSense.NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.French1969(LesEditionsdeMinuit).
Deleuze,Gilles.(1994).DifferenceandRepetition.TranslatedbyPaulPatton.NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.1968French(PressUniverssitairesdeFrance).
Einstein,Albert.(1953).Geometryandexperience.Pp.189-194inHerbertFeiglandMayBrodbeck(Eds.)ReadingsinthePhilosophyofScience.NY:Appleton-Century-Crofts,Inc.ReprintedfromAlbertEinstein:‘sidelightsofrelativity,pp.17-45,NY:E.P.Dutton&Co.,Inc.
Few,Stephen.(2009).Statisticalnarrative:TellingcompellingstorieswithnumbersPerceptualEdgeVisualBusinessIntelligenceNewsletterJuly/AugustAccessedonline14Jan2918athttps://www.perceptualedge.com/articles/visual_business_intelligence/statistical_narrative.pdf
Fisher,Ronald.(1925).pp.78–79,98,ChapterIV.TestsofGoodnessofFit,IndependenceandHomogeneity;withTableofχ2,TableIII.Tableofχ2.
Gephart,R.P.(1988).Ethnostatistics.CA:Sage.GephartJr,R.P.(2006).Ethnostatisticsandorganizationalresearchmethodologies:
Anintroduction.OrganizationalResearchMethods,9(4),417-431.
31
Gödel,Kurt.(1931)."ÜberformalunentscheidbareSätzederPrincipiaMathematicaundverwandterSysteme,I",MonatsheftefürMathematikundPhysik,v.38n.1,pp.173–198.
Hassard,John.(1991).Multipleparadigmsandorganizationalanalysis:Acasestudy.OrganizationStudies,12(2),275-299.
Hassard,John.(1995).Sociologyandorganizationtheory:Positivism,paradigmsandpostmodernity.MASS.:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Heidegger, Martin. (1927/1962). Being and Time. Translated by John Macquarrie & Edward Robinson. NY: Harper Row. 1927 in German publication, 1962 English translation.
Heisenberg, W. (1928). Zur theorie des ferromagnetismus. Zeitschrift für Physik, 49(9-10), 619-636.
Hempel,CarlG.(1953).Onthenatureofmathematicaltruth.Pp.148-162inHerbertFeiglandMayBrodbeck(Eds.)ReadingsinthePhilosophyofScience.NY:Appleton-Century-Crofts,Inc.Originallypublished1945inTheAmericanMathematicalMonthly,vol.52.
Hofstadter,DouglasR.(1979).Gödel,Escher,Bach:AnEternalGoldenBraid.NY”VintageBooks(ADivisionofRandomHouse).
Kimble,C.,&Milolidakis,G.(2015).Bigdataandbusinessintelligence:Debunkingthemyths.GlobalBusinessandOrganizationalExcellence,35(1),23-34.Availableonlineathttps://arxiv.org/pdf/1511.03085.pdf
Kneale,William.(1953).Inductin,explaination,andtranscendenthypotheses.Pp.353-367inHerbertFeiglandMayBrodbeck(Eds.)ReadingsinthePhilosophyofScience.NY:Appleton-Century-Crofts,Inc.ReprintedfromAlbertEinstein:‘sidelightsofrelativity,pp.17-45,NY:E.P.Dutton&Co.,Inc.
Kuhn,Thomas.S.(1962/1970).TheStructureofScientificRevolutions,2ndenl.ed.UniversityofChicagoPress.
Kumar,Priya.(2014).Datastorytelling:Adefinition.Accessedonline14Jan2018athttps://priyakumar.wordpress.com/2014/03/19/data-storytelling-a-definition/
Latour,B.(1987).Scienceinaction:Howtofollowscientistsandengineersthroughsociety.Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress.
Latour,B.(2012).WehaveneverbeenModern.Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress.
Maruyama,Magorah.(1974).Paradigmsandcommunication.TechnologicalForecastingandSocialChange.Vol.6:3-32.
Minahen,CharlesD.(1992).Vortex/t:ThePoeticsofTurbulence.UniversityPark,PA:ThePennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress.
MinistryofEducation(2007).TheNewZealandCurriculum.Wellington,NewZealand:LearningMediaLimited.
Pfannkuch,Maxine;Regan,Matt;Wild,Chris;Horton,NicholasJ.(2010).TellingDataStories:EssentialDialoguesforComparativeReasoning.JournalofStatisticsEducation,Vo.18(1):1-38.https://ww2.amstat.org/publications/jse/v18n1/pfannkuch.pdf
32
Pondy,L.R.;Boje,D.M.(1980.)”BringingMindBackIn:ParadigmDevelopmentasaFrontierProbleminOrganizationalTheory.”Pp.83-101,inWilliamsEvan(ed.)FrontiersinOrganizationandManagement.NY:PraegerPublishers.
Prasad,Pushkala.(2005).CraftingQualitativeResearch.WorkinginthePostpostivistTradition.Armonk/NY/London:M.E.Sharpe.
Reichenbach,Hans(1953).Theverifiabilitytheoryofmeaning.Pp.93-102inHerbertFeiglandMayBrodbeck(Eds.)ReadingsinthePhilosophyofScience.NY:Appleton-Century-Crofts,Inc.ReprintedfromAlbertEinstein:‘sidelightsofrelativity,pp.17-45,NY:E.P.Dutton&Co.,Inc.
Ritzer, George. (1975). Sociology: A multiple paradigm science.” The American Sociologist. Vol. 10: 156-67.
Savall, H., & Zardet, V. (Eds.). (2011). The Qualimetrics Approach: Observing the complex object. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Press.
Trafimow,David.(2003).Hypothesistestingandtheoryevaluationattheboundaries:surprisinginsightsfromBayes'stheorem.PsychologicalReview,110(3),526.https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Trafimow/publication/10641210_Hypothesis_Testing_and_Theory_Evaluation_at_the_Boundaries_Surprising_Insights_from_Bayes%27s_Theorem/links/0c960535c04070840c000000/Hypothesis-Testing-and-Theory-Evaluation-at-the-Boundaries-Surprising-Insights-from-Bayess-Theorem.pdf
Trafimow,D.,&Rice,S.(2009).Atestofthenullhypothesissignificancetestingprocedurecorrelationargument.TheJournalofGeneralPsychology,136(3),261-270.https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Trafimow/publication/26712874_A_Test_of_the_Null_Hypothesis_Significance_Testing_Procedure_Correlation_Argument/links/00b7d535c0427575e1000000.pdf
Trafimow,David.(2014).Consideringquantitativeandqualitativeissuestogether.QualitativeResearchinPsychology,11(1),15-24.
Trafimow,David.(inreview).AnAPrioriSolutiontotheReplicationCrisis.Trafimow,David;Marks,Michael.(2015).Editorial.BasicandAppliedSocial
PsychologyVolume37,2015-Issue1:1-2.Whitehead,AlfredNorth.(1933/1967).AdventuresofIdeas.NY/London:Free
Press(MacMillanCompany).Willmott,H.(1993).Breakingtheparadigmmentality.OrganizationStudies,14(5),
681-719.Woodside,ArchG.;Good,SureshC.(2016).Storytelling-CaseArchetypeDecoding
andAssignmentManual(SCADAM).Bingley,UK:EmeraldGroupPublishing.
AppendixA:VideosforfurtherstudyNote:Studyguidesareavailableathttp://davidboje.com/655Part1of6,BojeinterviewsDavidTrafimow'sonhisbanonPvaluesignificancetesting:(13minutes)Part1of6partseriesBojeandcolleagues
33
interviewDavidTrafimowabouthisCOPERNICANREVOLUTIONofhowstatisticalvalidityisdone,movingawayfromp-value.05significancetestsandnullhypothesestoanewfrontierofconstructvalidity.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsp_hSIsacQ&t=5s Part2of6CopernicanRevolutioncausalmodelling,BojeinterviewsTrafimowalternativetop-valuetest.(33minutes)DavidM.BojeinterviewsDavidTrafimowonhisbetteralternativetotheabsurd.05p-valuetestforsignificancethathehasbannedinhisownjournal.Thenewtestiscalledaprioritestandcanbeusedtoestimatebeforehandsizeofsampleneeded.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZJyRmdCFw8
Part3of6,Trafimowtalksaboutthelagbetweenknowingpvaluenouseandchangingtheteachingandpublishinghabits.(37minutes).Organizationalstatisticstaughttogradstudentsinerrantp-valueway,thoughabetterwayofconstructvalidityishereandnow(seePart2).https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbQ6D0kpp38m Part4of6BojeasksTrafimowsomeDeleuzianQuestions:(32minutes)IshepullingthecurtainbackontheWizardofOz,exposingthephantasmofp-value?StudyguidesonCopernicanRevolutionofthesechangestoconstructvalidityhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a71oa0H6HvI Part5of6,BojeinterviewsTrafimowonRevolutionofScienceMethodandBojeconcludeswithDeleuze(19minutes)projecttoreversethenegativedialecticofPlatoandHegelwithMultiplicity,spiralsandrhizomes.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVBtKdUUWFk
Part6BojeconcludestheseriesonDavidTrafimow'sCopernicanRevolutionofpvalewithhowitaffects9kindsofvalidityThisisbecauseconstructvalidityaffectstheother8kindsofvalidity.StudyguidesonCopernicanRevolutionofthesechangestoconstructvalidityhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vV0nDGY38Q&t=103s