@@researchwithfawad Doctor Sir You are one of the Genius and great Scholar i have seen in my life, keep it up, you are doing an unbelievable effort, our sincere prayers are with you, inshahallah God will succeed you in your unmatchable effort, inshahallah
Nice sharing. Thank you so much, Prof Fawad. Meanwhile, I just come up with another question and want to listen to your ideas (other net-friends are welcome to discuss). My question is: What is the difference between "extending the literature with a new theory" and "extending the theory that is commonly used in this area" in terms of the values of theoretical contribution, to a journal reviewer? Generally speaking, they are, of course, wonderful good jobs. Yet, when it comes to the detail, in what situation, do you think one contribution is better than the other? To the best of my knowledge, I think applying a new theory or theorizing a new theory is better when one factor's effect is equivocal or controversial due to the boundary. However, it causes much more cost (for instance, in field experiments), and more importantly, the risk of publication. Therefore, a more interesting question follows: what should we attentively consider when we want to add a new theory? Thank you so much!
"extending the literature with a new theory" This in my limited knowledge refers to creating a whole new theory, and wont be an easy job as it takes years to do such work " in what situation, do you think one contribution is better than the other?" In simple terms for me, a contribution to existing research is better, if you are testing relationships that have not been test before, and not simply testing direct relationships, but also indirect as well. Also moderators. Further icing on the cake could be methodological/analytical contributions as well.
Hi Prof Fawad, thank you so much for your sharing! I have a question and your answer will be appreciated! The question is about identifying the moderator and/or mediator for the theory. May I know if it is a good way to take the elements of theory as moderators or mediators in a particular relationship? For example, I try to use the social identity theory to explain why a kind of work orientation program is beneficial to team coherence through social categorization, social identification, and social comparison (which are the elements of social identity theory). Given that, I can know which elements are more prominent and even overarching to influence the relationship between work orientation and team coherence. However, I did not see many papers doing so (probably I do not read sufficiently enough). Thank you so much for your kind attention! Wish your channel getting better and better!
Dear Lawrance Why not, it is a very good way, as far as i can see. It gives you a solid theoretical background whereby you are proposing new relationships based on concepts that emerge from a theory. Hope it helps.
Indeed, the best video and explanation, I have ever witnessed on this most critical topic. Much valuable and much helpful for all research students. Thankyou so much Sir for making this video. May ALLAH give the best to you in both worlds. Aameen. Stay bleesed.
