Linear analysis of inherently nonlinear relationships often produces illogical and often times misleading results (Edwards 1994; Sullivan 1998, etc.).  Thus, it is not all that surprising that we often observe conflicting findings in the literature, or that studies that fail to find a construct relationship previously established in the literature go unpublished. For example, does firm size always positively influence internationalization? Researchers indicate that the probability of international activity increases with firm size (Aaby and Slater, 1989; Ali and Camp, 1993; Erramilli and Rao, 1993; Katsikeas, 1994; Keng and Jiuan, 1989; Samiee and Walters, 1991).  Resource theory is used to explain firm size’s relationship to internationalization (cf., Aaby and Slater, 1989; Bonaccorsi, 1992).  Aaby and Slater (1989) argue that international expansion requires a great deal of resource commitment by the expanding firm.  They indicate that the larger a firm becomes, the greater its ability to effectively engage in export activity, and that larger firms are better suited to absorb the risks associated with internationalization.  However, not all studies have found the positive relationship between firm size and internationalization.  Some studies have found no relationship between the constructs, or even a negative relationship.  Were the contradictory findings do to poor operationlization of the constructs?  Different operationlizations of the constructs that thus created construct domain inconsistencies? Or, could these findings be simply the observance of the curvilinear relationship between firm size and internationalization at different points along the construct relationship.  For example, as firms become larger their ability to quickly adjust to a hyper-competitive global marketplace is lessened, thus resulting in lackluster results and a need to reduce international operations. Is there a point at which firm size is detrimental to internationalization? While the relationship between firm size and internationalization is interesting, the research issue posed is not in relation to the issue of firm size and internationalization.  Rather, the question that persists is whether the linear testing that has dominated the literature accurately reflects the construct relationships examined. Through employing curvilinear testing, researchers may be able identify new nuances to global marketing phenomena.