Strategic Management Journal 1984
The comparative effectiveness of dialectical inquiry and Devil's advocacy: The impact of task biases on previous research findings
Abstract
Considerable debate has recently emerged concerning the comparative effectiveness of two methods of inquiry recommended for use in strategic decision making: dialectical inquiry (DI) and devil's advocacy (DA). Much of the comparative research surrounding this debate has made use of the Multiple Cue Probability Learning Paradigm (MCPLP). The equivocal nature of previous research findings using this paradigm and others, along with results from the present research indicating potential order of presentation effects, raises serious questions concerning previous operationalizations of these two methods.
- DOI
- 10.1002/smj.4250050404
- Sources
- openalex