Ifeoma:

I have merged to theories/methods in two of my papers which I have attached for your guidance that I hope would be helpful. You cannot change the name of the theories by combining them as you are not creating the two theories, so keep the original names and describe how you used this combination and why.

Article Integrating Cross-Cultural Elements Into Workforce Education...

Article Workforce Education and Development Curriculum Responsivenes...

Dear Ifeoma,

Combining, adopting, adapting, or modifying the previous theories/model in a model development is common academically, particularly in social science. As it was described by many scholars in their model development in term of its theoretical framework which covers the development. I think, it is OK to use the other theories/models in a specific context. Of course, the researcher must mention the used theories/models in respect of the plagiarism issues and the basis assumption of the use must be clear and reasonable. It is because the transparency of the modelling process is essential to reach the trust of the model development. The trust  is one of the measurement criteria of a model quality.

Thank you so much Deborah.

Thanks Subiyakto

Dear Ifeoma

Yes, it is absolutely fine to combine two theories in your work under the heading THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. However, at the end of your study, perhaps in the DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS stage, you will need to discuss which of the theories you proposed agreed with your findings more and how? It is here you then separate the two theories and say specifically which theory best fits your study. You know, when you are starting out, the theories are not yet tested within your own work - they are still being proposed as being fitting; so it is until after your findings that you are able to know which one fits. However, in any case the two theories support your findings in he end, still say so in the DISCUSSION section. 

Having said that, have you looked at Social Relationships Theory and Technological Determinism theories? They may also fit into the preoccupation of your work.

All best wishes,

Chikezie

Thank you Chikezie

Dear Ifeoma, 

I usually combine more than one theory in my theoretical framework. I just mention that I am going to use these two theories that I find relevant to my topic and that they will explain the phenomenon I am analyzing. 

However, using two theories doesn't necessarily mean that you are creating a new model. Creating a new model requires adding new variables or at least hypothesizing new correlations between variables that no one examined before. 

Hence, I recommend using both theories and referring to them with their usual titles (uses and gratifications and dependency) 

Good Luck,

Mona

Thank you Mona

Hi everybody,

I am a PHD scholar, I am working on ' project knowledge management for developing countries and their absorptive capacity', I would like to ask that what is the method of integrating various theories to develop a new actionable framework?

here i am using

theories of project management

theories of knowledge management

theory of absorptive capacity

Our research focuses on the development and use of novel tools/toolboxes in the context of data-driven product enhancement. Reliable development of toolboxes requires robust underpinning theories, which cannot necessarily be generated in an inductive way, i.e. starting out from end user interrogation data. This fact drove our attention to the issue of generating the required supporting theories in a deductive manner. Based on the doctrine of axiomatization, we have developed a dedicated methodology for axiomatic fusion of multiple, qualitative and partially interoperable theories. In a paper we are currently working on, we explain the fundamentals of axiomatization-based theory fusion (ATF), as well as the constituents of the ATF methodology. The process of ATF includes four major steps: (i) axiomatic discretization of the foundational component theories, (ii) establishing relationships among the axioms directly or through additional postulates, (iii) transcription of the system of axiomatic propositions into a textual format, and (iv) validation of the explanatory theory in application contexts. It is discussed what methods, instruments and criteria are entailed by the methodology. Our major findings are that the proposed 'novel' approach can be used efficiently to fuse knowledge and that the synthesized theory provides a robust basis for the targeted knowledge platform. The practical experience showed as well that the fusion should be deeply monitored to avoid possible errors in a such a time consuming process.

Dear Ifeoma Odumodu,

Multiple theories can be used in research to support and develop the model according to epistemological perspective (Love, 2002) for exploring the philosophical underpinnings of research (Scotland, 2012).

Hi,

My research is on teachers use of action research for professional development in my country. The study has two phases. The first phase utilizes survey method to understand teachers' general perceptions of action research and the second phase includes multiple case studies to get an in-depth understanding of the phenomena of action research use. I have realized that each phase require different theory framework. As a result I have two different theories. Would it be correct to combine two unrelated theories to provide the theoretical framework for my study?

Dear Tshewang Rabgay,

Your research work shows the mixed mode research. If I am not wrong, the first phase indicates quantitative research and the second phase indicates qualitative research.

It would be better to know about your selected two theories. Would you mind sharing these two theories, please!

Dear Bablu,

Thank you for the response. For the first phase I find Theory of Planned Behavior (TBH) relevant as it will help me to determine teachers attitude, perceptions and intention towards action research. It will also help me predict teachers likelihood of using action research for their professional development in the context where there is limited tradition of teachers using action research. Although this theory is mostly used in health, I would like to apply in education.

For the second phase I am planning to adopt Kolb's experiential learning theory as I aim to study teachers experience of using action research and how action research influences their teaching practice, knowledge and skills.

However, since the two theories are not related, I could not figure out how to establish a relationship between the two theories and produce a coherent whole to form the theoretical framework for the study. Could you kindly share any suggestions?

Did you try using Axiomatic Theory Fusion?

Hello

I made an attempt to reach a new framework of DT... In order to proposing a new one, I assume a fusion space for synthetizing previous models and processes as underpinning theories, plus the findings I grab through some case studies... am I right in my method?

Dear Tshewang

It is possible to combine different paradigms and you can back this mix by the Pragmatism and Dialectical Pluralism philosophical theories.

Dear Dr. Hamed,

Thank you for your note. Would you please be so kind to provide me with some reference materials that can be used to support conceptualization and validation of synthetic theories based on the mentioned philosophical theories? I am really interested in a philosophical underpinning, beyond the logics and semantics of axiomatization. Thank you very much in advance.

Kind regards,

I.H.

Please find the concerned paper!

Hi Imre Horvath, we are conducting a research determining which of the two (parents and news media) influence the young adults' voting decision more. Most of our related studies utilized multiple theories such as Agenda Setting, Cultivation, Framing, Uses and Gratification, and Interpersonal Discussions. Is there other theory applicable on our research?

Since it is possible to present a theoretical framework in a narrative form , you can extend the framework based on the first theory in a paragraph or two keeping in mind the theoretical needs of some of your research questions. Frameworks do not always have to be graphically presented.