The Social Attribution of Innovation (Aversa et al., 2026) | FT50 AMJ

Unwind the clock? (Koo et al., 2026) | FT50 SMJ

English Podcast Starts at 00:00:00 Bengali Podcast Starts at 00:43:49 Hindi Podcast Starts at 01:04:49 Danish Podcast Starts at 01:23:28 Reference Koo, W. W., Zhang, M., & Choudhury, P. (2026). Unwind the clock? Temporal distance and user interactions on a digital platform. Strategic Management Journal, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.70105 ‌ ‌Youtube Channel ⁠https://www.youtube.com/@weekendresearcher⁠ Podcast Website https://mayukhmukhopadhyay.com/reviseandresubmit Academy of Management PDW on Space Economy Registration Flyer https://cto.aom.org/discussion/flagship-aom-2026-pdw-space-economy-consolidating-a-research-agenda-8 AOM SIM Curriculum Committee https://sim.aom.org/curriculum/curriculum-committee AOM SIM-Bytes Episode 1 - Dr Ed Freeman https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EBSA7WvQNSI Linkedin Post By Professor Erica Steckler https://www.linkedin.com/posts/erica-steckler-ph-d-427272_simbyte-episode-1-ed-freeman-activity-7469092002098225152-PbHM 🎙️🌍 Welcome to Revise and Resubmit, a place where research is not merely read, but remembered. Thank you for joining me. There are moments when the world feels astonishingly connected. A question is asked in one country. An answer appears from another. Somewhere between midnight and sunrise, knowledge quietly crosses an ocean. We often imagine this journey to be effortless. Yet perhaps it is not. 🌌💭 Today, I invite you to linger over a remarkable paper titled "Unwind the Clock? Temporal Distance and User Interactions on a Digital Platform." Written by Wesley W. Koo, Miaomiao Zhang, and Prithwiraj Choudhury, and published in the Strategic Management Journal, one of the world's most prestigious FT50 academic journals, this study asks us to notice something we rarely see. ⏰📚✨ Time, after all, leaves no footprints. It slips quietly between people who may never know they almost met. Using proprietary data from StackOverflow, the authors reveal that every additional hour separating two regions quietly weakens the exchange of ideas. Fewer questions are seen. Fewer answers receive recognition. Conversations that might have changed someone's understanding simply fade into silence because the participants happen to live on different sides of the clock. 🌎⌛💻 What touched me most was not the mathematics, elegant though it is. It was the thought that the smallest and most specialized communities bear the greatest burden. The familiar subjects continue to find listeners. But the rare questions, the unusual skills, the lonely corners where expertise patiently waits, often remain unseen because nobody happens to be awake at the right moment. 🌱💡 And yet the paper offers quiet hope. It suggests that platforms need not surrender to the tyranny of chronology. By gently reshaping how content is presented, by allowing important ideas to surface beyond the instant they were created, technology can become less of a clock and more of a bridge. 🌉✨ Perhaps that is the deeper story here. Progress is not always about moving faster. Sometimes it begins by waiting long enough for someone else, somewhere else, to arrive. So as we begin today's conversation, I leave you with a question. 🤔💫 If knowledge can disappear simply because two curious minds greet the same day at different hours, how many remarkable conversations have already passed us by without either person ever realizing they almost met? 🙏 My heartfelt thanks to Wesley W. Koo, Miaomiao Zhang, and Prithwiraj Choudhury, and to John Wiley & Sons Ltd. for publishing this outstanding contribution in the Strategic Management Journal, a globally respected FT50 journal that continues to shape the frontiers of management research. 🌟📖 🎧 If you enjoy these journeys into influential scholarship, please subscribe to Revise and Resubmit on Spotify, subscribe to Weekend Researcher on YouTube, and remember that our episodes are also available on Amazon Prime and Apple Podcasts. Until next time, thank you for listening. 🌍🎙️📚

False-Positive Psychology (Simmons et al. 2011) - Weekend Classics

English Podcast starts at 00:00:00 Bengali Podcast Starts at 00:24:36 Hindi Podcast Starts at 00:47:20 Danish Podcast Starts at 01:10:11 Reference Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359-1366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632 ‌Youtube channel link https://www.youtube.com/@weekendresearcher Podcast Website https://mayukhmukhopadhyay.com/reviseandresubmit/ 🎙️✨ Welcome to Revise and Resubmit, and to another episode of Weekend Classics. Grab your favorite cup of coffee, settle into your chair, and join me for a journey through one of those rare research papers that quietly changed the way an entire generation of scholars thinks about science. 📚☕ Have you ever wondered whether a statistically significant result is always telling the truth? Or could it simply be the product of a hundred tiny decisions that nobody ever gets to see? 🤔 Today, I am opening a paper that did exactly that. In 2011, Joseph P. Simmons, Leif D. Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn held up a mirror to psychological research and asked an uncomfortable question. What if researchers, often with no dishonest intention at all, could make almost any hypothesis appear significant simply by making ordinary choices about collecting data, selecting variables, or deciding when enough participants had been tested? 📊🔍 The brilliance of this paper is not that it accuses science. It reminds us that science is deeply human. Every spreadsheet carries judgment. Every analysis carries choice. Every manuscript tells a story about what was included and what quietly remained in the shadows. 🌱 To make their point unforgettable, the authors even presented a delightfully absurd experiment suggesting that listening to music could literally make people younger. It sounds ridiculous, and that is exactly why it works. The satire exposes a serious weakness. If flexibility hides in the research process, almost anything can look convincing. 🎵⏳😄 But this is not a story about broken science. It is a story about better science. The paper ends with practical recommendations for authors and reviewers, showing that transparency does not require expensive tools or impossible standards. It simply requires the courage to reveal the full journey instead of only the polished destination. 💡📖 So, before we begin, ask yourself this. If truth depends not only on the data we collect but also on the choices we never report, how many celebrated discoveries would survive if every hidden decision stepped into the light? 🌍✨ 🙏 My sincere thanks to Joseph P. Simmons, Leif D. Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn, and to the Association for Psychological Science for publishing this remarkable work in Psychological Science. 🎧 If you enjoy episodes like this, please subscribe to Revise and Resubmit on Spotify, subscribe to Weekend Researcher on YouTube, and remember that you can also listen on Amazon Prime Music and Apple Podcasts. Your support helps keep thoughtful research conversations alive. 🚀📚

The unintended (negative) consequence of training (Gyensare et al., 2025) | ABDC-A* JOOP

English Podcast Starts at 00:00:00 Bengali Podcast Starts at 00:49:49 Hindi Podcast Starts at 01:10:05 Danish Podcast Starts at 01:27:44 Reference Gyensare, M. A., Soetan, G., Ogbonnaya, C., Agyapong, J.-A., & Roodbari, H. (2025). Sustaining employees thriving at work through polychronicity and work engagement: The unintended (negative) consequence of training. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 98, e70017. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.70017 ‌Youtube Channel ⁠https://www.youtube.com/@weekendresearcher⁠ Podcast Website https://mayukhmukhopadhyay.com/reviseandresubmit AOM SIM Curriculum Committee https://sim.aom.org/curriculum/curriculum-committee AOM SIM-Bytes Episode 1 - Dr Ed Freeman https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EBSA7WvQNSI Linkedin Post By Professor Erica Steckler https://www.linkedin.com/posts/erica-steckler-ph-d-427272_simbyte-episode-1-ed-freeman-activity-7469092002098225152-PbHM Welcome to 🎙️✨ Revise and Resubmit ✨🎙️, the podcast where academic research meets human stories, where journal articles become conversations, and where every paper invites us to see familiar workplaces in a slightly different light. 📚 Today, we turn our attention to an intriguing article published in the prestigious Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, an ABDC-A* ranked journal that has long served as a home for rigorous scholarship on work, people, and organizations. The paper, "Sustaining Employees Thriving at Work Through Polychronicity and Work Engagement: The Unintended (Negative) Consequence of Training", by Michael Asiedu Gyensare, Gbemisola Soetan, Chidiebere Ogbonnaya, Joan-Ark Agyapong, and Hamid Roodbari, asks a deceptively simple question. 🌱 Why do some employees continue to learn, grow, and flourish even when their workdays seem crowded with competing demands? Imagine a hotel lobby on a busy afternoon. A frontline employee welcomes guests, answers calls, resolves complaints, coordinates with colleagues, and somehow still finds room to learn something new. We often celebrate this ability as efficiency. Yet beneath that surface lies a deeper story about attention, energy, and the quiet ways people sustain themselves at work. 🧩 The authors explore the idea of polychronicity, a person's preference for handling multiple activities at once. Their findings suggest that people comfortable with juggling tasks often become more engaged in their work, and that engagement fuels learning, one of the key dimensions of thriving at work. But here the story takes an unexpected turn. 🎭 Training, something organizations usually view as unquestionably beneficial, can sometimes become a burden. When training demands too much time, effort, or emotional energy, it begins to erode the very engagement it seeks to create. What appears to be nourishment can, under certain circumstances, become exhaustion. There is something quietly profound about that insight. The path to growth is not always blocked by a lack of opportunities. Sometimes it is crowded by too many of them. 🌟 As we explore this study, conducted with 261 frontline hotel employees and their colleagues across ten four-star hotels in Ghana, we will reflect on a timeless organizational dilemma. How do we help people become better without overwhelming them in the process? 🤔 And perhaps the deeper question is this: when organizations offer us more opportunities to learn, how do we know whether those opportunities are helping us thrive, or merely teaching us new ways to become tired? 🙏 Our sincere thanks to the authors for their thoughtful contribution and to John Wiley & Sons Ltd and the British Psychological Society for publishing this important work. 📖 If you enjoy conversations about cutting-edge academic research, please subscribe to Revise and Resubmit on Spotify, YouTube channel Weekend Researcher, Amazon Prime, and Apple Podcasts. 🔔🎧 Until next time, keep reading, keep questioning, and keep revising. 📚✨

Thriving at work (Kleine et al. 2019) - Weekend Classics

English Podcast Start at 00:00:00 Bengali Podcast Start at 00:52:09 Hindi Podcast Start at 01:05:48 Danish Podcast Start at 01:26:39 Reference Kleine A-K, Rudolph CW, Zacher H. Thriving at work: A meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. 2019;40:973–999. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2375 Youtube channel link https://www.youtube.com/@weekendresearcher Connect on linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/mayukhpsm/ 🎙️📚 Welcome to Revise and Resubmit! 📚🎙️ And welcome to another episode of 🌟 Weekend Classics 🌟, where we revisit influential research papers that continue to shape how we think about organizations, people, and work. Today, we explore a question that sounds simple but touches almost every workplace on Earth. 💡 Why do some employees come alive at work while others merely survive? Some people walk into the office energized. They learn. They grow. They tackle challenges with curiosity. They leave work feeling accomplished rather than drained. What creates that difference? This episode dives into the landmark article "Thriving at Work: A Meta-Analysis" by Anne-Kathrin Kleine, Cort W. Rudolph, and Hannes Zacher, published in the prestigious ABDC-A* indexed Journal of Organizational Behavior. 🔍 The authors did not study a handful of workers. They analyzed evidence from 73 independent studies involving 21,739 employees. That is a research lens wide enough to reveal patterns hidden from any single organization. Their findings tell a compelling story. 🚀 Employees thrive when they bring psychological resources to work. Confidence matters. Proactivity matters. Positive emotions matter. 🤝 Relationships matter too. Supportive coworkers help. Supportive leaders help. Organizations that genuinely support employees help even more. And the outcomes? 📈 Better performance. 😊 Higher job satisfaction. 💪 Better health. 🔥 Less burnout. ❤️ Stronger commitment. But perhaps the most fascinating discovery is that thriving is not simply another name for engagement or positive mood. It stands on its own. It contributes something unique. Something measurable. Something powerful. Think about that for a moment. Organizations spend billions trying to improve productivity. Yet this research suggests that helping people feel both energized and continuously learning may be one of the most important investments of all. ✨ Thriving is not a luxury. It is not a bonus feature. It may be one of the clearest signs that human potential is being fully expressed at work. 🤔 So here is the question we leave with you today: If thriving combines vitality and learning, what would happen if organizations measured success not only by what employees produce, but by how much they grow while producing it? 🙏 Our sincere thanks to the authors for this remarkable contribution and to John Wiley & Sons Ltd for publishing this influential research in the Journal of Organizational Behavior. 🎧 If you enjoyed this episode, subscribe to Revise and Resubmit on Spotify, follow Weekend Researcher on YouTube, and find us on Amazon Prime and Apple Podcasts. 🔔 Until next time, keep reading, keep questioning, and keep revising before you resubmit!

The Social Attribution of Innovation (Aversa et al., 2026) | FT50 AMJ

English Podcast Starts at 00:00:00 Bengali Podcast Starts at 00:47:06 Hindi Podcast Starts at 01:06:28 Danish Podcast Starts at 01:21:43 Reference Aversa, P., Gouvard, P., & Makarova, M. A. (2026). The Social Attribution of Innovation: Uncovering the Heads Behind the Guillotine. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2024.0314 ‌Youtube Channel ⁠https://www.youtube.com/@weekendresearcher⁠ Podcast Website https://mayukhmukhopadhyay.com/reviseandresubmit Academy of Management PDW on Space Economy Registration Flyer https://cto.aom.org/discussion/flagship-aom-2026-pdw-space-economy-consolidating-a-research-agenda-8 AOM SIM Curriculum Committee https://sim.aom.org/curriculum/curriculum-committee AOM SIM-Bytes Episode 1 - Dr Ed Freeman https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EBSA7WvQNSI Linkedin Post By Professor Erica Steckler https://www.linkedin.com/posts/erica-steckler-ph-d-427272_simbyte-episode-1-ed-freeman-activity-7469092002098225152-PbHM 🎙️✨ Welcome to Revise and Resubmit. I’m so glad you’re here. There are some research articles that do more than present an argument. They quietly unsettle the habits of thought we have carried for years, and ask us to look again at something we believed we already understood. Today, I want to sit for a while with one such piece: The Social Attribution of Innovation: Uncovering the Heads Behind the Guillotine by Paolo Aversa, Paul Gouvard, and Maria A. Makarova, published online on 12 June 2026 in the Academy of Management Journal 📚 This is, of course, no ordinary journal. Academy of Management Journal is one of the most prestigious outlets in management research and belongs to the FT50 journal list 🏛️✨ So when a paper appears here, it often arrives carrying both rigor and consequence. And this one does exactly that. What I find especially moving is the paper’s refusal to accept the familiar comfort of the “hero innovator” story. Instead, the authors lead us into a subtler and more human terrain, where inventions and inventors are not simply paired by fact, but bound together through public memory, social judgment, and repeated acts of attribution. Through the strange and enduring case of the guillotine, they show us how Dr. Joseph-Ignace Guillotin, who did not invent the machine, nevertheless became inseparable from it in the historical imagination. ⚙️🩸🧠 Paolo Aversa, Paul Gouvard, and Maria A. Makarova write with a precision that feels, to me, almost forensic, yet the implications are deeply human. They remind us that recognition is rarely innocent. It gathers around those who seem to embody a problem, a value, or a public mood. Their idea of an evaluation-attribution spiral is especially compelling, because it captures how society slowly fastens a name to an innovation until the bond feels inevitable, even when it is not. 🔍💭 In a way, this is a paper about invention, but also about memory, reputation, and the quiet machinery by which history decides who will stand at the center of the story. My thanks to Paolo Aversa, Paul Gouvard, and Maria A. Makarova, and to the Academy of Management, for publishing this fascinating article in such a prestigious FT50 journal 🙏📖 If you enjoy these reflective research conversations, please subscribe to Revise and Resubmit on Spotify, and also follow the Weekend Researcher YouTube channel 🎧📺 The podcast is also available on Amazon Prime and Apple Podcast 🍎✨ And as we begin, I want to leave you with a question 🤔 If history remembers the wrong inventor for the right reasons, what does that reveal about innovation, and what does it reveal about us?