Financial Stress Research Under the Magnitude Mind Lens | ||
| Iranian Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance | ||
| مقاله 10، دوره 10، شماره 3 - شماره پیاپی 36، پاییز 2026، صفحه 201-221 اصل مقاله (800.09 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Original Article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22067/ijaaf.2026.48223.1647 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Taqi Al Abduwani1؛ Shima Ebrahimi* 2؛ Iliya Pishghadam3 | ||
| 1Department of Business and Management Studies, Faculty of Management, Gulf College, Muscat, Oman | ||
| 2Department of Persian Language and Literature, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran | ||
| 3Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| This study applied the Magnitude Mind Model (MMM) to evaluate the quality of cross-sectional financial stress literature beyond traditional methodological checklists. The MMM integrates magnitude thinking (SICHA: Scale, Impact, Complexity, Holism, Accuracy) with measures of intellectual humility (acknowledging uncertainty, context, and specific limitations) and hubris (simple causal claims, overgeneralization, false certainty). Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we consecutively selected the first 20 open-access English-language, Scopus Q1/Q2-indexed cross-sectional studies on financial stress published between 2015 and 2025 from a pool of 670 records. Two independent raters scored each paper on the 11 MMM sub-items, achieving excellent inter-rater reliability. Results suggested that, within this exploratory sample, only 10% of papers attained a high Magnitude Mind score, whereas 45% scored low. Hubris was the strongest correlate of MM scores in exploratory analyses. Low-MM papers frequently used causal language such as "causes" and "impacts" from cross-sectional data, overgeneralized findings from convenience samples, and presented generic limitation statements. Holism was the weakest SICHA sub-item, with 50% of papers scoring low. Analytical methods did not guarantee epistemic quality; two methodologically complex papers scored low due to extreme hubris. Temporal analysis revealed no significant improvement from 2015 to 2025. Within this sample, 45% of papers were classified as Low MM. The MMM may offer a potentially useful diagnostic and prescriptive tool for researchers, reviewers, and editors to promote more rigorous, humble, and credible science. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Epistemic Humility, Financial Stress؛ Hubris, Magnitude Mind Model, Systematic Review | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 335 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 200 |
||