The scientific essay and its scope in the social, economic-administrative, and business sciences
Keywords:
scientific essay, social sciences, economic-administratve sciences, business sciencesSynopsis
The production of scientific knowledge in the social, economic-administrative, and business sciences today faces a landscape marked by epistemological complexity, a plurality of theoretical approaches, and increasing demands for argumentative rigor, all within a context shaped by digital transformation and the growing use of technologies based on artificial intelligence. Within this framework, the scientific essay emerges as a central intellectual device for articulating theoretical reflection, critical analysis, and academic communication, overcoming the false dichotomy between methodological rigor and interpretive thinking. Far from constituting an auxiliary or preliminary genre, the scientific essay is configured as a privileged space for problematizing knowledge, making epistemological assumptions explicit, and contributing substantively to contemporary debates, including those related to the ethical challenges of using emerging technologies in research and academic production.
This book seeks to examine the scientific essay and its scope in the social, economic-administrative, and business sciences, conceiving it not only as a form of academic writing but as an epistemological, argumentative, and formative device that structures the production, validation, and circulation of knowledge. Throughout the work, it is argued that the quality of scientific knowledge depends largely on conceptual solidity, argumentative coherence, and discursive clarity in the construction of research problems—elements that find in the scientific essay a privileged space for development, even in contexts mediated by digital tools and artificial intelligence systems.
Chapter 1, The Importance of the Scientific Essay, establishes the epistemological foundations of the book by analyzing the value of the essay as a central mechanism in the construction of scientific knowledge. This chapter examines its historical evolution, its argumentative function in academic validation, its communicative relevance, and its formative impact in higher education and postgraduate studies, demonstrating why the scientific essay constitutes a structural—rather than merely instrumental—axis of contemporary scientific practice.
Chapter 2, The Introduction, delves into the analysis of the scientific introduction as a foundational epistemological device. Here, the introduction is studied not as a formal preamble but as the space where the relevance of the problem is constructed, gaps in the state of the question are identified, the state of the art is articulated, and the author is positioned within the academic community. The analysis of ethos, logos, and pathos is also incorporated as rhetorical mechanisms that sustain the epistemological legitimacy of the scientific text.
Chapter 3, The Development, addresses the function of development as the argumentative core of the scientific essay. This section analyzes the processes of contextualization, problematization, and theoretical articulation that enable the construction of coherent and progressive reasoning. The chapter shows how the development organizes critical dialogue with existing literature and consolidates the essay’s conceptual contribution.
Chapter 4, Methodology, examines the methodological dimension of the scientific essay from a broad and integrative perspective. It analyzes the approaches, techniques, and epistemological foundations that underpin documentary, bibliometric, qualitative, and quantitative analysis, highlighting the importance of methodological coherence and the explicit articulation of analytical decisions to ensure the scientific rigor of the essay.
Chapter 5, Discussion, focuses on the interpretive and critical function of the scientific essay. This chapter examines the essay’s theoretical (scientia) and practical (praxis) contributions, demonstrating how discussion enables the re-signification of existing knowledge, the clarification of paradigmatic assumptions, and the linkage of theoretical reflection with decision-making, intervention, and continuous improvement in organizational contexts.
Chapter 6, Conclusion, analyzes the synthetic and reflective function of the closing section of the scientific essay. It explores how the conclusion responds to the research question, integrates findings, delineates scope, acknowledges limitations, and proposes future lines of research, thereby consolidating the overall coherence of the work and its contribution to the field of knowledge.
Chapter 7, Artificial Intelligence and Its Ethical Use in the Production of the Scientific Essay, critically addresses the impact of artificial intelligence tools on research, academic writing, and knowledge generation. This chapter analyzes the potential of AI as support for the scientific process—in information retrieval, idea organization, and data analysis—as well as the epistemological, methodological, and ethical risks associated with its uncritical use. It reflects on authorship, intellectual responsibility, transparency, academic integrity, and the need to establish clear ethical criteria to guide the responsible use of artificial intelligence in scientific and educational contexts.
Finally, the Final Reflection articulates the book’s main contributions, underscoring the role of the scientific essay as a key device for addressing the contemporary challenges of the social, economic-administrative, and business sciences. In a context characterized by organizational complexity, digital transformation, and the growing presence of artificial intelligence in academic production, the scientific essay is presented as an indispensable tool for understanding organizational action, strengthening ethical reflection, and contributing to the responsible transformation of scientific knowledge.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Adorno, T. W. (2003). El ensayo como forma.(Ed.original, 1962).
Alvesson, M., Bridgman, T., & Willmott, H. (Eds.). (2011). The Oxford handbook of critical management studies. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199595686.001.0001
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).
https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice. Addison-Wesley.
https://www.amazon.com/Organizational-Learning-II-Theory-Practice/dp/0201629836
Aristóteles. (2002). La retórica (Trad. A. Tovar). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. https://www.paginaspersonales.unam.mx/app/webroot/files/5880/Asignaturas/1877/Archivo2.4609.pdf
(Obra original publicada ca. siglo IV a. C.)
Biesta, G. (2020). Educational research: An unorthodox introduction. Bloomsbury. https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/educational-research-9781350097988/
Biesta, G. (2021). World-centred education: A view for the present. Routledge.
https://www.routledge.com/World-Centred-Education-A-View-for-the- Present/Biesta/p/book/9780367565527
Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., Williams, J. M., Bizup, J., & FitzGerald, W. T. (2024). The craft of research (5th ed.). University of Chicago Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo215874008.html
Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2016). Systematic approaches to a successful literature review (2nd ed.). Sage.
https://uk.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-assets/78595_book_item_78595.pdf
Bornmann, L., & Haunschild, R. (2017). Does evaluative scientometrics lose its main focus on scientific quality by the new orientation towards societal impact? Scientometrics, 110(2):937-943. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28239207/
Connell, R. (2020). The good university: What universities actually do and why it’s time for radical change. Amazon Books.
https://www.amazon.com/Good-University-Raewyn-Connell/dp/1786995417
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
https://edge.sagepub.com/creswellrd5e
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/qualitative-inquiry-and-research- design/book266033
Crossref. (2023). Metadata basics. https://www.crossref.org/blog/metadata-connects-the-global-community-summary-of-our-community-update-2023/
Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2006). Learning for action: A short definitive account of soft systems methodology. Wiley.
https://books.google.com.mx/books/about/Learning_For_Action.html?id=YKaIEAA AQBAJ&redir_esc=y
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Douglas, H. (2021). The rightful place of science: Science, values, and democracy: The 2016 Descartes Lectures. Tempe, AZ: Consortiumfor Science, Policy & Outcomes
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354176132_The_Rightful_Place_of_S cie nce_Science_Values_and_Democracy
Turnitin (2023). What is iThenticate? Uphold research integrity outside the classroom. https://www.turnitin.com/blog/what-is-ithenticate-who-is-it-for
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. En N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Sage.https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1994-98625-005
Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529716641
Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810503
Foucault, M. (1984). The use of pleasure: The history of sexuality (Vol. 2). Pantheon Books. https://monoskop.org/images/a/a3/Foucault_Michel_The_History_of_Sexuality_2_T he_Use_of_Pleasure.pdf
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/a-primer-on-partial-least-squares-structural-equation-modeling-pls-sem/book270548
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse: English in a global context (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury. https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/academic-discourse-9780826498045/
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. University of Michigan Press.
https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.6719
Hyland, K. (2012). Disciplinary identities: Individuality and community in academic discourse. Cambridge University Press. https://www.amazon.com.mx/Disciplinary-Identities-Dr-Ken-Hyland/dp/0521197597
Hyland, K. (2014). Disciplinary discourse: Writer stance in research articles. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 40, 118–135.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Disciplinary-discourses%3A-writer-stance-in-research-
Hyland/2b610e0a6b19c9e9810ab241d17096f89c6d39c2
Kahneman, D., Rosenfield, A. M., Gandhi, L., & Blaser, T. (2016). Noise: How to overcome the high, hidden cost of inconsistent decision making. Harvard Business Review, 94(10), 38–46. https://hbr.org/2016/10/noise
Klein, J. T. (2021). Beyond interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press.
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/beyond-interdisciplinarity9780197571156?cc=mx&lang=en&
MacInnis, D. J. (2011). A framework for conceptual contributions in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.4.136
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Organizations (2nd ed.). Blackwell. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Organizations%2C+2nd+Edition-p-9780631186311
Mayne, J. (2015). Useful theory of change models. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 30(2), 119–142. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.230
Mejía-Trejo, J. (2023a). Estadística Multivariante. TOMO I. Técnicas Interrdependientes con SPSS en las Ciencias Sociales.Ed. Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación (AMIDI).
https://amidibiblioteca.amidi.mx/index.php/AB/catalog/book/51
Mejía-Trejo, J. (2023b). Estadística Multivariante. TOMO II. Técnicas Interdependientes con SPSS en las Ciencias Sociales.Ed. Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación (AMIDI).
https://amidibiblioteca.amidi.mx/index.php/AB/catalog/book/52
Mejía-Trejo, J. (2023c). Análisis cualitativo comparativo. Tomo I. NÍTIDO (csQCA): Teoría y práctica (1ª ed.). Ed. Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación (AMIDI).
https://amidibiblioteca.amidi.mx/index.php/AB/catalog/book/53
Mejía-Trejo, J. (2023d). Análisis cualitativo comparativo. Tomo I. DIFUSO (fsQCA): Teoría y práctica (1ª ed.).Ed. Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación (AMIDI).
https://amidibiblioteca.amidi.mx/index.php/AB/catalog/book/54
Mejía Trejo, J. (2023e). Diseño de cuestionarios para la creación de escalas en las ciencias sociales: Uso del análisis factorial exploratorio (SPSS) y confirmatorio (EQS).Ed. Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación (AMIDI).
https://amidibiblioteca.amidi.mx/index.php/AB/catalog/book/49
Mejía Trejo, J. (2023f). Evaluación de Impacto Social. TOMO I. Uso de STATA con los métodos: Inferencia Causal, Aleatorización, Propensión de Coincidencia por Puntaje y Doble Diferencia.Ed. Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación (AMIDI). https://amidibiblioteca.amidi.mx/index.php/AB/catalog/book/55
Mejía Trejo, J. (2023g). Evaluación de Impacto Social. TOMO II. Uso de STATA con los métodos: Estimación por Variable Instrumental y Regresión Discontínua. Ed. Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación (AMIDI). https://amidibiblioteca.amidi.mx/index.php/AB/catalog/book/56
Mejía-Trejo, J. (2024). Inteligencia Artificial. Fundamentos de Ingeniería de Prompts con ChatGPT como Innovación Impulsora de la Creatividad (Más de 500 prompts incluídos). Ed. Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación (AMIDI).
https://amidibiblioteca.amidi.mx/index.php/AB/catalog/book/48
Mejía-Trejo, J. (2025). Inteligencia Artificial y su repercusión en la Educación Superior. Ed. Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación (AMIDI). https://amidibiblioteca.amidi.mx/index.php/AB/catalog/book/70
Mejía-Trejo, J. (2026). Análisis cualitativo. Uso de Atlas.ti en la investigación de las ciencias de la administración. Ed. Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación (AMIDI).
https://amidibiblioteca.amidi.mx/index.php/AB/catalog/book/93
Meyer, M., Sedlmair, M., & Munzner, T. (2020). Criteria for rigor in visualization design study. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 26(1), 87–97. https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/22644/1/Criteria%20for%20Rigor%20in%20 Visualization%20Design%20Study.pdf
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis (4th ed.). SAGE. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/qualitative-data-analysis/book246128
Montaigne, M. de. (2003). Ensayos https://ministeriodeeducacion.gob.do/docs/biblioteca-virtual/3Xls-de-montaigne- michel-ensayos-pdf.pdf (Obra original publicada en 1580)
Murray, R., & Moore, S. (2006). The handbook of academic writing (2nd ed.). Open University Press. https://repository.unar.ac.id/jspui/bitstream/123456789/5202/1/The%20Handbook%20of%20Academic%20Writing%20by%20Rowena%20Murray%20and%20Sarah%20Moore%20%28z-lib.org%29.pdf
Nicolini, D. (2012). Practice theory, work, and organization: An introduction. Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/ukhe/product/practice-theory-work-and-organization-9780199231591?cc=mx&lang=en&
Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using evidence: How research can inform public services. Policy Press. https://books.google.com.mx/books/about/Using_Evidence.html?id=L981DwAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y
OECD. (2020). Policy responses to coronavirus (COVID-19). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-policy-responses-to-coronavirus-covid-19_5b0fd8cd-en.html
OECD. (2021).Research Ethics and New Forms of Data for Social and Economic Research. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2016/11/research-ethics-and-new-forms-of-data-for-social-and-economic- research_g17a28ac/5jln7vnpxs32-en.pdf
Plavén-Sigray, P., Matheson, G. J., Schiffler, B. C., & Thompson, W. H. (2021). The readability of scientific texts is decreasing over time. eLife, 10, e6328. https://elifesciences.org/articles/27725
Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226702797.001.0001
Resnik, D. B. (2020). What is ethics in research & why is it important? Journal of Clinical Research Best Practices, 16(2)
https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis
Ridley, D. (2020). The literature review: A step-by-step guide for students (3rd ed.). SAGE. https://archive.org/details/literaturereview0000ridl_n4x9
Rihoux, B., & Ragin, C. C. (2009). Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative |comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452226569
Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Henry, G. T. (2019). Evaluation: A systematic approach (8th ed.). Sage Publications.
https://books.google.com.mx/books/about/Evaluation.html?id=GpPWtAEACAAJ&re dir_esc=y
Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE. https://www.ajqr.org/download/the-coding-manual-for-qualitative-researchers-12085.pdf
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations (4th ed.). Sage.https://www.amazon.com/Institutions-Organizations-W-Richard- Scott/dp/1452242224
Shmueli, G., & Koppius, O. R. (2011). Predictive analytics in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 35(3), 553–572. https://doi.org/10.2307/23042796
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371–384. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393788
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students (3rd ed.). University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.2173936
Sword, H. (2020). Stylish academic writing (2nd ed.). Harvard University Press. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/file/feeds/PDF/9780674064485_sample.pdf
Taylor & Francis Journals. (2021). Taylor & Francis Journals standard reference style guide: American Psychological Association, Seventh Edition (APA-7). https://files.taylorandfrancis.com/tf_apa.pdf
Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing integrative literature reviews: Using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404–428. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1534484316671606
Turnitin. (2021). Undestanding the Tutnitin similarity report. Turnitin. https://help.turnitin.com/Resources/PDF/understanding_the_turnitin_similarity_report-a_student_guide.pdf
Tsoukas, H. (2009). Craving for generality and small-n studies: A Wittgensteinian approach towards the epistemology of the particular in organization and management studies. In D. A. Buchanan & A. Bryman (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational research methods (pp. 285–301). Sage Publications Ltd. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0170840609349861
Tufte, E. R. (2001). The visual display of quantitative information (2nd ed.). Graphics Press. https://kyl.neocities.org/books/%5BTEC%20TUF%5D%20the%20visual%20display%20of%20quantitative%20information.pdf
UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379707
Von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory. George Braziller. https://fad.unsa.edu.pe/bancayseguros/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2019/03/Teoria-General-de-los-Sistemas.pdf
Wacker, J. G. (1998). A definition of theory. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 361–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(98)00019-9
Weiss, C. H. (1995). The four I’s of school reform: How interests, ideology, information, and institutions affect teachers and principals. Harvard Educational Review, 65(4), 571–593. https://www.harvardeducationalreview.org/content/65/4/571
Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 490–495. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308371
Wingate, U. (2021). Academic literacy across the curriculum: Towards a collaborative instructional approach. Language Teaching, 54(2), 1–14. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/language-teaching/article/abs/academic- literacy-across-the-curriculum-towards-a-collaborative-instructional-approach/784BAFF04385BDBD2AD6C8EC481FDB6F
Downloads
Published
February 22, 2026
Series
Categories
Copyright (c) 2026 Juan Mejía-Trejo
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Details about this monograph
JP e-code (27)
978-607-69341-5-9
doi
10.55965/abib.9786076934159
