Theorizing in Information Systems Research: Some Preliminary Findings

Information systems (IS) research employs a wide range of theory, drawn from numerous disciplines. Over the course of the past three decades, the proliferation of theory has created considerable diversity, leading to calls for greater reflection on the nature of this diversity. Thus, this study seeks to examine the state of IS theorizing through a review of recent publications in one of the field's leading journals. The findings confirm the presence of considerable conceptual diversity within the field. A paradigmatic model is developed to frame the most salient relationships revealed in the research. The paper identifies common theories encountered in the field, along with key constructs, and the contacts under which these constructs are studied. The paper also suggests the presence of some relatively unexplored areas for potential future theorizing

[1]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Research Commentary: Rethinking "Diversity" in Information Systems Research , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[2]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[3]  Icek Ajzen,et al.  From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior , 1985 .

[4]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[5]  Vincent S. Lai,et al.  Exploring the research in information technology implementation , 1997, Inf. Manag..

[6]  Varun Grover,et al.  A Citation Analysis of the Evolution and State of Information Systems within a Constellation of Reference Disciplines , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models , 1989 .

[8]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Information Systems as a Reference Discipline , 2002, MIS Q..

[9]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the "IT" in IT Research - A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[10]  E. Burton Swanson,et al.  Information Systems Research Thematics: Submissions to a New Journal, 1987-1992 , 1993, Inf. Syst. Res..

[11]  M. Markus,et al.  Information technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research , 1988 .

[12]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[13]  R. Oliver.  A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions , 1980 .

[14]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[15]  A. Giddens,et al.  New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies. , 1977 .

[16]  Henry M. Kim,et al.  Information Systems is Not a Reference Discipline (And What We Can Do About It) , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[17]  E. Penrose.  The theory of the growth of the firm twenty-five years after , 1960 .

[18]  Abhijit Gopal,et al.  Understanding GDSS in Symbolic Context: Shifting the Focus from Technology to Interaction , 2000, MIS Q..

[19]  D. Whetten.  What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution , 1989 .

[20]  Venkataraman Ramesh,et al.  Research in Information Systems: An Empirical Study of Diversity in the Discipline and Its Journals , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[21]  Maurice Landry,et al.  Can the field of MIS be disciplined? , 1989, CACM.

[22]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[23]  J. Barney.  Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage , 1991 .

[24]  Patricia Carlson,et al.  A Review of MIS Research and Disciplinary Development , 1992, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..