Table 4. The explanatory level... | Emerald Publishing

Table 4.

The explanatory level

Categories	Tasks	Indicative questions for explanation
Explanandum	Identify and confirm an anomaly	What are intriguing leads of possible anomalies in a literature domain that trigger the demand for a theoretical explanation? Which of these leads is the most relevant for current debates and can be confirmed among the authors and with peers?
Explanans	Generate and evaluate hunches to explain the anomaly	What are possible hunches to explain the identified and confirmed anomaly? What theoretical lenses and empirical material inform the possible explanations? Which of the generated hunches is the most plausible?
Framing	Position the explanatory argument in a current debate	To which debate in the domain does the explanatory argument (considering both the choice of explanandum and explanans) relate? Does the study provide a new perspective by challenging existing assumptions? Does it address a gap that is important to fill?
Design	Iterate and sharpen the research design	How can the research objective, research questions, theoretical lenses and empirical material be sharpened whilst the explanatory argument emerges and the descriptive and analytical work is carried out?
Presentation	Select key elements to present the explanandum and explanans	What must be shown and told to the reader to demonstrate the identified explanandum and explanans? Which elements from the descriptive and analytical work have been excluded from the presentation in the write-up, and why?
Contribution	Highlight the new theoretical explanations and/or perspectives	Are the findings clearly formulated and their value explained? Is the contribution original, clear and focused? What is the wider scope of the study’s relevance, and what implications for research and practice can be formulated?

Categories	Tasks	Indicative questions for explanation
Explanandum	Identify and confirm an anomaly	What are intriguing leads of possible anomalies in a literature domain that trigger the demand for a theoretical explanation? Which of these leads is the most relevant for current debates and can be confirmed among the authors and with peers?
Explanans	Generate and evaluate hunches to explain the anomaly	What are possible hunches to explain the identified and confirmed anomaly? What theoretical lenses and empirical material inform the possible explanations? Which of the generated hunches is the most plausible?
Framing	Position the explanatory argument in a current debate	To which debate in the domain does the explanatory argument (considering both the choice of explanandum and explanans) relate? Does the study provide a new perspective by challenging existing assumptions? Does it address a gap that is important to fill?
Design	Iterate and sharpen the research design	How can the research objective, research questions, theoretical lenses and empirical material be sharpened whilst the explanatory argument emerges and the descriptive and analytical work is carried out?
Presentation	Select key elements to present the explanandum and explanans	What must be shown and told to the reader to demonstrate the identified explanandum and explanans? Which elements from the descriptive and analytical work have been excluded from the presentation in the write-up, and why?
Contribution	Highlight the new theoretical explanations and/or perspectives	Are the findings clearly formulated and their value explained? Is the contribution original, clear and focused? What is the wider scope of the study’s relevance, and what implications for research and practice can be formulated?