Articles in which predictions are g

Articles in which predictions are grounded in
past conceptual arguments offer a moderate level of
theory testing. Here authors attempt to explain why
a given relationship or process should exist by describing
the logic supplied by scholars in past research.
However, those conceptual arguments have
not been developed or refined enough to constitute
true theory, nor do they paint a comprehensive
picture of the phenomenon of interest. Nevertheless,
describing some of the causal logic behind a
given prediction supplies a critical ingredient that
references to past findings do not (Sutton & Staw,
1995). A reader is able to understand the justification
for a prediction while connecting that justification
to the existing literature.