Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Use of Eristics by Polish Managers Cover
Open Access
|Nov 2024

References

  1. Aberdein, A. (2016). The Vices of Argument. Topoi, 35(2), 413–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-015-9346-z.
  2. Alan, H., & Baykal, Ü. (2021). Personality traits of nurse managers and evaluation of their traits by their subordinates. Florence Nightingale Journal of Nursing, 29(3), 379–388. https://doi.org/10.5152/FNJN.2021.20112.
  3. Arruñada, B. (2010). Protestants and Catholics: Similar Work Ethic, Different Social Ethic. The Economic Journal, 120(547), 890–918. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2009.02325.x.
  4. Beheshtifar, M., Motahari, J., & Moghadam, M. N. (2012). Relation between Managers’ Traits with their Assessment of the Successful Criterion in Iran. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 2(9), 207–221.
  5. Biržietienė, S., & Gabrėnaitė, E. (2014). Eristic argumentation in advertising: the case of Lithuanian ads. Respectus Philologicus, 26(31), 190–202.
  6. Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods. Don Mills, Ontario: Oxford University Press.
  7. BudzyńskaDaca, A. (2013). Eristic and dispute-applications and interpretations. Forum Artis Rhetoricae, 2(25), 7–20.
  8. Budzyńska, K., & Reed, C. (2023). Argumentum Ad Alia: argument structure of arguing about what others have said. Synthese, 201(3), 91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04058-w.
  9. Bunner, J., Prem, R., & Korunka, C. (2020). How do safety engineers improve their job performance? The roles of influence tactics, expert power, and management support. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 42(2), 381–397. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-04-2018-0120.
  10. Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Managers’ upward influence tactic strategies: The role of manager personality and supervisor leadership style. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(2), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.183.
  11. Collins, S. K. (2014). Machiavellianism in health care explored: differences in aspiring managers and patient care professionals. The Health Care Manager, 33(4), 324–327. https://doi.org/10.1097/HCM.0000000000000023.
  12. Creswell, J. W. (2017). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. London: SAGE Publications.
  13. Cummings, L. (2015). Argument from Authority. In Cummings, L. (Ed.), Reasoning and Public Health: New Ways of Coping with Uncertainty (67–92). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15013-0_4.
  14. Dahling, J. J., Whitaker, B. G., & Levy, P. E. (2009). The development and validation of a new Machiavellianism scale. Journal of Management, 35(2), 219–257, https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308318618.
  15. De Moura, R. L., Carneiro, T. C. J., de Lemos Dias, T., & Oliveira, B. S. (2019). Personality traits of project managers: Differences in knowledge, experience, and business sector. Revista de Administração da Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, 12(4), 767–784. https://doi.org/10.5902/1983465922096.
  16. Drucker, P. (2018). The effective executive. London: Routledge.
  17. DuBois, M., Hanlon, J., Koch, J., Nyatuga, B., & Kerr, N. (2015). Leadership styles of effective project managers: Techniques and traits to lead high performance teams. Journal of Economic Development, Management, IT, Finance, and Marketing, 7(1), 30–46.
  18. Dufour, M. (2014). ISSA Proceedings 2014: Dialectic and eristic. Rozenberg Quarterly. The Magazine. https://rozenbergquarterly.com/issa-proceedings-2014-dialectic-and-eristic. Access: 22.07.2024.
  19. Em, S. (2023). A review of different ideas concerning the characteristics of a good leader and shaping new ideas of an effective 21st century leader. Journal of General Education and Humanities, 2(1), 13–34. https://doi.org/10.58421/gehu.v2i1.53.
  20. Fisher, E., & Gonzalez, Y. S. (2013). The Art of Influencing and Persuasion: How Managers Can Put ‘Square Pegs’ into’ Round Holes’. Journal of Management Research, 5(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.5296/jmr.v5i4.3971.
  21. Gielnik, M. M., Frese, M., Kahara-Kawuki, A., Wasswa Katono, I., Kyejjusa, S., Ngoma, M., ..., & Dlugosch, T. J. (2015). Action and action-regulation in entrepreneurship: Evaluating a student training for promoting entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 14(1), 69–94. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2012.0107.
  22. Hackbarth, D. (2008). Managerial traits and capital structure decisions. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 43(4), 843–881.
  23. Godden, D. (2008). On common knowledge and ad populum: Acceptance as grounds for acceptability. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 41(2), 101–129. https://doi.org/10.1353/par.0.0000.
  24. Hawthorne, J., & Stanley, J. (2008). Knowledge and Action, The Journal of Philosophy, 105(10), 571–590.
  25. Helms, M. M. (2021). Encyclopedia of Management. Detroit, New York: Thomson. Herman, T., & Oswald, S. (2021). Everybody Knows that There Is Something Odd About Ad Populum Arguments. In Boogaart, R., Jansen, H., & van Leeuwen, M. (Eds). The Language of Argumentation. Argumentation Library, vol. 36 (305–323). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52907-9_16.
  26. Hinton, M. D. (2018). On arguments from ignorance. Informal Logic, 38(2), 184–212. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v38i2.4697.
  27. Ignatowski, G., Sułkowski, Ł., & Stopczyński, B. (2020). The perception of organisational nepotism depending on the membership in selected Christian churches. Religions, 11(1), 47. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11010047.
  28. Jędrych, E. (2015). Personal Innovation in Organizations Issues for Managers. Warsaw: Vistula Academy of Finance and Business.
  29. Kurdoglu, R. S., & Ateş, N. Y. (2022). Arguing to defeat: eristic argumentation and irrationality in resolving moral concerns. Journal of Business Ethics, 175(3), 519–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04659-2.
  30. Kurdoglu, R. S., Ates, N. Y., & Lerner, D. A. (2023). Decision-making under extreme uncertainty: eristic rather than heuristic. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 29(3), 763–782. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-07-2022-0587.
  31. Kurdoglu, R. S., Jekel, M., & Ateş, N. Y. (2023). Eristic reasoning: Adaptation to extreme uncertainty. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1004031. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1004031.
  32. Kurdoglu, R. S. (2020). The Mirage of Procedural Justice and the Primacy of Interactional Justice in Organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(3), 495–512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04166-z.
  33. Kurdoglu, R. S., & Islam, G. (2024). Eristic Legitimation of Controversial Managerial Decisions. Journal of Management Studies, 61(3), 627–685. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13008.
  34. Kuzior A., & Balahurovska, I. (2022). Interaction between the manager and the hidden informal leader. Scientific Papers of Silesian University of Technology, Organization & Management, 165, 173–181. http://dx.doi.org/10.29119/1641-3466.2022.165.12.
  35. Lauring, J., Selmer, J., & Kubovcikova, A. (2019). Personality in context: Effective traits for expatriate managers at different levels. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(6), 1010–1035. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1381137.
  36. Lemanski, J. (2022). Discourse ethics and eristic. The Polish Journal of Aesthetics, 63(3), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.19205/62.21.7.
  37. Li, M., & Armstrong, S. J. (2015). The relationship between Kolb’s experiential learning styles and Big Five personality traits in international managers. Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 422–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.07.001.
  38. Macagno, F., & Walton, D. (2005). Common Knowledge and Argumentation Schemes. Studies in Communication Sciences, 5(2), 1–22.
  39. Maier, M. A. (2014). What innovation managers really do-An empirical study about tasks, skills and traits of innovation managers in Germany. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (1116–1120). https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM.2014.7058812.
  40. Masood, M., Khan, R. A., & Shaikh, S. (2018). Impact of personality traits of project manager on project success. Journal of Business Strategies, 12(1), 21–44. https://doi.org/10.29270/JbS.2018.12.1(23).
  41. Nelson, R. H. (2012). Is Max Weber Newly Relevant? The Protestant-Catholic Divide in Europe Today. Finnish Journal of Theology, 5(2), 420–445.
  42. Obeagu, E. I., & Obeagu, G. U. (2023). From Awareness to Action: Encouraging Adolescent Engagement in Sickle Cell Disease Prevention. Elite Journal of Public Health, 1(1), 42–50.
  43. Rehman, U., & Shahnawaz, M. G. (2021). Machiavellianism and task-oriented leadership: moderating effect of job autonomy. Leadership, Education, Personality: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 3(2), 79–85. https://doi.org/10.1365/s42681-021-00024-7.
  44. Rupp, D. E., Shapiro, D. L., Folger, R., Skarlicki, D. P., & Shao, R. (2017). A critical analysis of the conceptualization and measurement of organizational justice: Is it time for reassessment? Academy of Management Annals, 11(2), 919–959. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2014.0051.
  45. Serenko, A., & Choo, C. W. (2020). Knowledge sabotage as an extreme form of counterproductive knowledge behavior: the role of narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and competitiveness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(9), 2299–2325. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-06-2020-0416.
  46. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research Methods for Business Students. Edinburgh: Pearson Educational Limited.
  47. Tsirimokou, C., Richardson, C., & Palaskas, T. (2023). A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Machiavellian Personality Scale in Greek Family Business’s Stakeholders (GR-MPS). Trends in Psychology, 31(2), 233–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-022-00147-w.
  48. Van der Geest, S. (2021). Vanity in Anthropology. Ethnofoor, 33(1), 91–106.
  49. Van Laar, J. A. (2010). Argumentative bluff in eristic discussion: An analysis and evaluation. Argumentation, 24(3), 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-010-9184-5.
  50. Van Kerkhoff, L., & Lebel, L. (2006). Linking knowledge and action for sustainable development. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31(1), 445–477. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.31.102405.170850.
  51. Wagemans, J. H. M. (2003). Conceptualizing fallacies: The informal logic and pragmadialectic approaches to the argumentum ad ignorantiam. In van Eemeren, F. H., Blair, J. A., Willard, C. A., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (1049–1051). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
  52. Walton, D. N. (2004). Argumentation schemes and historical origins of the circumstantial ad hominem argument. Argumentation, 18(3), 359–368. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ARGU.0000046706.45919.83.
  53. Walton, D., & Koszowy, M. (2014). Two Kinds of Arguments from Authority in the Ad Verecundiam Fallacy. https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/crrarpub/17/. Access: 23.07.2024.
  54. Walton, D. N. (2001). Searching for the roots of the circumstantial ad hominem. Argumentation, 15(2), 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011120100277.
  55. Ward, V. L., House, A. O., & Hamer, S. (2009). Knowledge brokering: exploring the process of transferring knowledge into action. BMC Health Services Research, 9, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-9-12.
  56. Yu, S., & Zenker, F. (2023). A Scheme and Critical Questions for the argumentum ad baculum. Topoi, 42(2), 527–541. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11245-023-09904-7.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/joim-2024-0011 | Journal eISSN: 2543-831X | Journal ISSN: 2080-0150
Language: English
Page range: 58 - 77
Published on: Nov 30, 2024
Published by: SAN University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2024 Grzegorz Ignatowski, published by SAN University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License.