Trevino and Doh’s discourse-based view: Do we need a new theory of internationalization?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This counterpoint examines the relevance of Trevino and Doh’s proposed new discourse-based view of internationalization for the field of International Business (IB). Trevino and Doh introduce their framework to address gaps in Internationalization Process Theory (IPT), which does not account for the underlying processes that lead to the initial managerial decision to internationalize. Framing our counterpoint around recent debates on how interdisciplinary research fields determine which new ideas to adopt, we explore whether the introduction of the discourse-based view adds sufficient novelty to justify the risk of fragmentation within IB. To stimulate debate around this question, we explore a number of issues, such as (1) whether the constructs found in the discourse-based view are distinct from pre-existing IB concepts, (2) the relative value of isolating the initial decision to internationalize within the broader internationalization process, and (3) the degree to which Trevino and Doh have isolated discourse as a primary mechanism driving the decision to internationalize. We conclude with a call for more dialog around the questions of how IB can embrace greater openness while still maintaining coherence and advancing collective knowledge.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".