Sie sind auf Seite 1von 1



In this article of AMJ, author focus on theory section of article in which they tell us that how to
make our hypothesis strong by explain three terms. First one is Build relationship between
hypothesis and related research. Second is defining your selected variables and inform audience
about why you select these articles. Third one is creating a sense of coherence among the
variables. AMJ demand the theory section in which author used the narratives which create their
study strong. In this section authors can use explanatory logics to strengthen their study.
Background knowledge is very important in theory section because by this authors tell us that
what was the prior research and what they contribute now with the help of explanatory logics. In
this section authors use citations but too much citations will weak their study and questionable.
The most important point is that, authors should maintain a balance between prior research and
what you proposed. Authors should build a logical relationship between their independent and
dependent variable and tell the audience about their relationship with the help of empirical
evidence. Authors use too many theories in their study, AMJ suggest that, authors should explain
about why they use specific theory in their study. Sometimes there is miss match between study
and suggestive theories which lead the audience toward confusion. AMJ suggest that use
combination of theories which mostly related to each other. But the best practice is to use single
theory in research study and apply that one theory in your study. AMJ also suggest that, authors
should tell the audience about their selected variables. Why they select specific set of variables
and what is the relation between those variables. When conceptual frame work is strong then
there is no need of figure and boxes. But tell the audience about the connections of arrows, tell
the audience on what basis we draw those arrows and authors should also discuss about the
possible mediators and give explanation about mediators. There are some possible mistakes in
which, first one is lack of Specificity in which authors divert their focus and explain others
things or other studies. Second, is Fragmented theorizing in which authors not focus on
hierarchy, they should focus on step wise process but they use multiple theories at the same time
to defend or explain their variables. Third is stating the obvious, in which authors not pay
attention on all parts of the paper but they discuss one side of paper too much and not discuss
other side of paper properly so the miss match creates the bad impression.