Hypothesis-testing research in international business: progress, pitfalls, and a way forward
成果类型：
Article; Early Access
署名作者：
Cerar, Jelena; Reiche, B. Sebastian; Nell, Phillip C.
署名单位：
Vienna University of Economics & Business; Copenhagen Business School; University of Navarra; IESE Business School
刊物名称：
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS STUDIES
ISSN/ISSBN：
0047-2506
DOI：
10.1057/s41267-026-00859-6
发表日期：
2026
关键词：
Recommendations
EQUIVALENCE
editors
摘要：
Building on Meyer, van Witteloostuijn, and Beugelsdijk's (2017) editorial on best practices for conducting and reporting hypothesis-testing research in IB, we examine the extent to which their guidelines-and related recommendations by Hahn and Ang (2017)-have been adopted in leading IB journals. We analyze all null-hypothesis significance testing-based articles published in the Journal of International Business Studies and the Journal of World Business between 2012 and 2024, using fine-grained inferential trend analyses of methodological and reporting standards alongside state-of-the-art tests for p-hacking and publication bias. Our results indicate meaningful progress in several areas, including greater methodological rigor and transparency. However, adoption remains uneven and has plateaued for several practices. Persistent shortcomings include limited reporting of standard errors, confidence intervals, and effect sizes, incomplete disclosure of robustness analyses and outlier treatment, and the continued predominance of confirmed hypotheses. Moreover, we find no evidence that p-hacking or publication bias have declined over time. Drawing on these results, we outline actionable recommendations for advancing methodological and reporting standards in IB by (1) enhancing transparent reporting, (2) providing convincing evidence, and (3) reporting and probing null and negative results. Overall, our study offers a roadmap for strengthening research credibility in IB. Nous appuyant sur l'& eacute;ditorial de Meyer, van Witteloostuijn et Beugelsdijk (2017) sur les meilleures pratiques pour conduire et rapporter la recherche bas & eacute;e sur des tests d'hypoth & egrave;ses en affaires internationales (International Business - IB), nous examinons dans quelle mesure leurs orientations g & eacute;n & eacute;rales - ainsi que les recommandations connexes de Hahn et Ang (2017) - ont & eacute;t & eacute; adopt & eacute;es dans les principales revues en IB. Nous analysons tous les articles bas & eacute;s sur des tests de signification des hypoth & egrave;ses nulles publi & eacute;s dans les deux revues Journal of International Business Studies et Journal of World Business entre 2012 et 2024, et ce en utilisant des analyses de tendances inf & eacute;rentielles fines des normes m & eacute;thodologiques et de pr & eacute;sentation, ainsi que des tests de pointe pour d & eacute;tecter le p-hacking et le biais de publication. Nos r & eacute;sultats indiquent des progr & egrave;s significatifs dans plusieurs domaines, notamment une plus grande rigueur m & eacute;thodologique et une transparence accrue. Cependant, l'adoption reste in & eacute;gale et s'est stabilis & eacute;e pour plusieurs pratiques. Les lacunes persistantes incluent une communication limit & eacute;e des & eacute;carts-types, des intervalles de confiance et des tailles d'effet, une divulgation incompl & egrave;te des analyses de robustesse et du traitement des valeurs aberrantes, ainsi que la pr & eacute;dominance continue des hypoth & egrave;ses confirm & eacute;es. De plus, nous ne trouvons aucune preuve que le p-hacking ou le biais de publication aient diminu & eacute; au fil du temps. Sur la base de ces r & eacute;sultats, nous proposons des recommandations actionnables pour am & eacute;liorer les normes m & eacute;thodologiques et de pr & eacute;sentation en IB en (1) renfor & ccedil;ant la transparence de la r & eacute;daction, (2) fournissant des preuves convaincantes, et (3) rapportant et explorant les r & eacute;sultats nuls et n & eacute;gatifs. Dans l'ensemble, notre recherche offre une feuille de route susceptible de renforcer la cr & eacute;dibilit & eacute; de la recherche en IB. Bas & aacute;ndonos en el trabajo editorial de Meyer, van Witteloostuijn y Beugelsdijk (2017) sobre las mejores pr & aacute;cticas para llevar a cabo y reportar investigaciones de pruebas de hip & oacute;tesis en negocios internacionales (IB, por sus siglas en ingl & eacute;s), examinamos hasta qu & eacute; punto sus directrices (y las recomendaciones relacionadas de Hahn y Ang (2017)) han sido adoptadas en las principales revistas de Negocios Internacionales. Analizamos todos los art & iacute;culos basados en pruebas de significancia de hip & oacute;tesis nulas publicados en el Journal of International Business Studies y el Journal of World Business entre 2012 y 2024, utilizando an & aacute;lisis detallados de tendencias inferenciales sobre est & aacute;ndares metodol & oacute;gicos y de reporte, junto con pruebas de & uacute;ltima generaci & oacute;n para detectar p-hacking y sesgo de publicaci & oacute;n. Nuestros resultados indican avances significativos en varias & aacute;reas, incluyendo un mayor rigor metodol & oacute;gico y transparencia. Sin embargo, la adopci & oacute;n sigue siendo desigual y se ha estancado en varias pr & aacute;cticas. Las deficiencias persistentes incluyen la limitada presentaci & oacute;n de errores est & aacute;ndar, intervalos de confianza y tama & ntilde;os del efecto, la divulgaci & oacute;n incompleta de an & aacute;lisis de robustez y tratamiento de valores at & iacute;picos, y la continua predominancia de hip & oacute;tesis confirmadas. Adem & aacute;s, no encontramos evidencia de que el p-hacking o el sesgo de publicaci & oacute;n hayan disminuido con el tiempo. A partir de estos resultados, delineamos recomendaciones pr & aacute;cticas para avanzar en los est & aacute;ndares metodol & oacute;gicos y de reporte en Negocios Internacionales mediante (1) la mejora de la transparencia en los reportes, (2) la provisi & oacute;n de evidencia convincente y (3) la presentaci & oacute;n y an & aacute;lisis de resultados nulos y negativos. En general, nuestro estudio ofrece una hoja de ruta para fortalecer la credibilidad de la investigaci & oacute;n en negocios internacionales. Com base no editorial de Meyer, van Witteloostuijn e Beugelsdijk (2017) sobre melhores pr & aacute;ticas para conduzir e relatar pesquisas de teste de hip & oacute;teses em Neg & oacute;cios Internacionais (IB), examinamos at & eacute; que ponto suas diretrizes - e as recomenda & ccedil;& otilde;es relacionadas de Hahn e Ang (2017) - foram adotadas nos principais peri & oacute;dicos de IB. Analisamos todos os artigos baseados em testes de signific & acirc;ncia de hip & oacute;teses nulas publicados no Journal of International Business Studies e no Journal of World Business entre 2012 e 2024, utilizando an & aacute;lises detalhadas de tend & ecirc;ncias inferenciais sobre padr & otilde;es metodol & oacute;gicos e de relato, juntamente com testes de ponta para detec & ccedil;& atilde;o de p-hacking e de vi & eacute;s de publica & ccedil;& atilde;o. Nossos resultados indicam um progresso significativo em v & aacute;rias & aacute;reas, incluindo maior rigor metodol & oacute;gico e transpar & ecirc;ncia. No entanto, a ado & ccedil;& atilde;o permanece desigual e estagnou em rela & ccedil;& atilde;o a v & aacute;rias pr & aacute;ticas. Defici & ecirc;ncias persistentes incluem a divulga & ccedil;& atilde;o limitada de erros padr & atilde;o, intervalos de confian & ccedil;a e tamanhos de efeito, a apresenta & ccedil;& atilde;o incompleta de an & aacute;lises de robustez e do tratamento de valores at & iacute;picos, al & eacute;m da predomin & acirc;ncia cont & iacute;nua de hip & oacute;teses confirmadas. Al & eacute;m disso, n & atilde;o encontramos evid & ecirc;ncias de que o p-hacking ou o vi & eacute;s de publica & ccedil;& atilde;o tenha diminu & iacute;do ao longo do tempo. A partir desses resultados, delineamos recomenda & ccedil;& otilde;es pr & aacute;ticas para o avan & ccedil;o de padr & otilde;es metodol & oacute;gicos e de relato em IB, por meio de (1) maior transpar & ecirc;ncia nos relat & oacute;rios, (2) fornecimento de evid & ecirc;ncias convincentes e (3) relato e investiga & ccedil;& atilde;o de resultados nulos e negativos. De forma geral, nosso estudo oferece um roteiro para fortalecer a credibilidade da pesquisa em neg & oacute;cios internacionais. (sic)Meyer,van Witteloostuijn(sic)Beugelsdijk(2017)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(IB)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)--(sic)(sic)Hahn(sic)Ang(2017)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)--(sic)(sic)(sic)IB(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)2012(sic)(sic)2024(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)<<(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)>>(Journal of International Business Studies)(sic)<<(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)>>(Journal of World Business)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)p(sic)(sic)(sic)(p-hacking)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)p(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)IB(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic):(1)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (2)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(3)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)IB(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).