Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Employing Personal Construct Theory to Understand Information Systems: A Practical Guide for Researchers

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Information Systems Theory

Part of the book series: Integrated Series in Information Systems ((ISIS,volume 29))

  • 2718 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter presents a description of Personal Construct Theory and how the theory may be employed in information systems research. Within the purview of Personal Construct Theory, the Repertory Grid technique is also described, which is an interview technique employed to elicit and document a research participant’s system of personal constructs. The concept of laddering is also presented which facilitates delving into the detailed meanings attributed by a research participant to their construct system. Examples of information systems projects are also included in this chapter to further elucidate Personal Construct Theory and the Repertory Grid technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

PCT:

Personal Construct Theory

RepGrid:

Repertory Grid

PCP:

Personal Construct Psychology

IS:

Information Systems

PM:

Project Manager

References

  • Bannister, D. (1968). The evaluation of personal constructs. London: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banister, D., & Fransella, F. (1980). Inquiring man. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannister, D., & Mair, J. M. M. (1968). The evaluation of personal constructs. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barley, S. R. (1986). Technology as an occasion for structuring: Evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 78–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beail, N. (1985). An introduction to repertory grid technique. In N. Beail (Ed.), Repertory grid technique and personal constructs (pp. 1–26). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, R. C. (2009). GRIDSTAT: A program for analyzing the data from a repertory grid. Melbourne, Australia: R. C. Bell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Botten, N., Kusiak, A., & Raz, T. (1989). Knowledge bases: Integration, erification and partitioning. European Journal of Operations Research, 42(2), 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caputi, P., Bell, R. C., & Hennessy, D. (2011). Analyzing grids: New and traditional approaches. In P. Caputi, L. L. Viney, N. Crittenden, & B. M. Walker (Eds.), Personal construct methodology. London: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Caputi, P., & Reddy, P. (1999). A comparison of triadic and dyadic methods of personal construct elicitation. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 12(3), 253–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Compeau, D., Higgins, C. A., & Huff, S. (1999). Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: A longitudinal study. MIS Quarterly, 23(2), 145–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corsini, R., & Marsella, A. J. (1983). Personality theories, research and assessment. Itasca Illinois: Peacock Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crudge, S. E., & Johnson, C. (2004). Using the information seeker to elicit construct models for search engine evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(9), 794–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, A. M., Lowry, P. B., Wells, T. M., & Higbee, T. (2008). An overview and tutorial of the repertory grid technique in information systems research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 23(3), 37–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterby-Smith, M. (1980). The design, analysis and interpretation of repertory grids. International Journal of Machine Studies, 13, 3–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C., & Jones, S. (1984). Using repertory grids for problem construction. Journal of Operations Research, 35(9), 779–798.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C., & Wheaton, G. (1980). In favour of structure, Working Paper 80/06. Centre for the Study of organizational Change and Development, University of Bath.

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Sabaa, S. (2001). The skills and career path of an effective project manager. International Journal of Project Management, 19, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fransella, F. (Ed.). (1981). Personality – Theory, measurement and research. New York: Methuen and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fransella, F., Bell, R., & Bannister, D. (2004). A manual for repertory grid technique (2nd ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, T. L., & Northcraft, G. B. (1996). Cognitive elements in the implementation of new technology: Can less information provide more benefits? MIS Quarterly, 20, 99–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G. (1978). Toward a methodology of naturalistic inquiry in educational evaluation. Los Angeles: University of California. Center for the Study of Evaluation, Los Angeles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagans, C. L., Neimeyer, G. J., & Goodholm, R. C. J. (2000). The effect of elicitation methods on personal construct differentiation and valence. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 13(2), 155–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinkle, D. (1965). The change of personal constructs from the viewpoint of a theory of construct implications. Unpublished PhD thesis, Ohio State University. Cited in: Inquiring man, Bannister, D. & Fransella, F. (1980). Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G. (1992). The essence of “excellent” systems analysts: Perceptions of five key audiences. Unpublished PhD thesis. Glasgow, Scotland: Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G. (1993). A strategy for identifying “excellent” systems analysts. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2(1), 15–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G. (1994). Excellent systems analysts: Key audience perceptions. Computer Personnel, 15(1), 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G. (1995). Managing systems analysts: A proposed decision making process. International conference on “Global Business in Transition, Prospects for the Twenty First Century” December 14–16, Hong Kong (pp. 527–534).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G. (1996). “Excellent” systems analysts: Research in progress, The Association of Management (AoM) Annual International Conference, August 2–6, Toronto, Canada. Information Systems Division Proceedings, 14(1), 32–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G. (1997). The use of RepGrids to gather interview data about information systems analysts. Information Systems Journal, 7(1), 67–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G. (1998). Systems analysts: An innovative method to find the best. Annual Atlantic schools of business conference, Oct. 30–Nov. 1, Wolfville, Nova Scotia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G. (1999). “Excellent” systems analysts: A grounded theory approach to qualitative research. In S. Clarke & B. Lehaney (Eds.), Human centered methods in information systems: Current research and practice. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G., & Beck, J. E. (1996a). A cross-cultural comparison of “excellent” systems analysts. Information Systems Journal, 6(4), 261–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G., & Beck, J. E. (1996b). “Excellent” systems analysts: The Singapore context. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management, 13(2), 25–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. G., & Beck, J. E. (2000). Using repertory grids to conduct cross-cultural information systems research. Information Systems Research, 11(1), 93–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jankowicz, D. (2004). The easy guide to repertory grids. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., & Margulis, S. (1998). Important behavioral skills for IS project managers: The judgments of experienced IS professionals. Project Management Journal, 29, 39–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, G. A. (1963). A theory of personality: The psychology of personal constructs. New York: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, G. A. (1970). A brief introduction to personal construct theory. In D. Bannister (Ed.), Perspective in personal construct theory (pp. 1–30). London: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latta, G. F., & Swigger, K. (1992). Validation of the repertory grid for use in modelling knowledge. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(2), 115–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, M. R., & Zmud, R. W. (1991). The influence of a convergence in understanding between technology providers and users of information technology innovativeness. Organization Science, 2(2), 195–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Napier, N. P., Keil, M., & Tan, F. B. (2009). IT project managers’ construction of successful IT project management practice: A repertory grid investigation. Information Systems Journal, 19(3), 255–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, K. M., Nadkarni, D., Narayanan, V. K., & Ghods, M. (2000). Understanding software operations support expertise: A revealed causal mapping approach. MIS Quaterly, 24(3), 475–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W. J., & Gash, D. C. (1994). Technological frames: Making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2), 174–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pervin, L. A. (1989). Personality – Theory and research. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phythian, G. J., & King, M. (1992). Developing an expert system for tender enquiry evaluation: A case study. European Journal of Operations Research, 56(1), 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reger, R. K. (1990). The repertory grid technique for eliciting the content and structure of cognitive constructive systems. In A. S. Huff (Ed.), Mapping strategic thought (pp. 301–309). Chicester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reger, R. K., & Huff, A. S. (1993). Strategic groups: A cognitive perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 14(2), 103–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, T. J., & Gutman, J. (1988). Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation. Journal of Advertising Research, February-March, 11–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugg, G., Eva, M., Mahmood, A., Rehman, N., Andrews, S., & Davies, S. (2002). Eliciting information about organizational culture via laddering. Information Systems Journal, 12, 215–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugg, G., & McGeorge, P. (1995). Laddering. Expert Systems, 12, 339–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, M. L. G. (1980). On becoming a personal scientist – Interactive computer elicitation of personal models of the world. London: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, P. (1964). The principal components of a repertory grid. London: Vincent Adrew.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, V., & Stewart, A. (1981). Business application of repertory grid. London, UK: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, F., & Hunter, M. G. (2002). The repertory grid technique: A method for the study of cognition in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 26(1), 39–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, F. B., & Hunter, M. G. (2004). Cognitive research in information systems using the repertory grid technique. In M. E. Whitman & A. B. Woszcynski (Eds.), The handbook for information systems research. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, F. B., & Hunter, M. G. (2005). Cognitive research in information systems. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopedia of information science and technology (Vol. I–V). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, G., & Bytheway, A. (1996). Factors affecting information systems success. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 7(1), 74–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, M. S., Edwards, H. M., McDonald, S., & Thompson, B. (2005). Personality characteristics in an XP team: A repertory grid study, workshop on human and social factors of software engineering (pp. 1–7). Missouri, USA: St. Louis.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB, T1K 3 M4, Canada

    M. Gordon Hunter

  2. School of Psychology, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia

    Peter Caputi

  3. Auckland University of Technology, 92006, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Felix B. Tan

Authors
  1. M. Gordon Hunter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Caputi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Felix B. Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Gordon Hunter .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , School of Business and Economics, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, Wales, SA2 8PP, United Kingdom

    Yogesh K. Dwivedi

  2. IMD, Ch. de Bellerive 23, Lausanne, 1001, Switzerland

    Michael R. Wade

  3. Principia College, Maybeck Place 1, Elsah, 62028, Illinois, USA

    Scott L. Schneberger

Appendix A

Appendix A

Personal Construct Theory

  • Fundamental Postulate: A person’s processes are psychologically channelized by the ways in which he anticipates events.

  • Construction Corollary: A person anticipates events by construing their replications.

  • Dichotomy Corollary: A person’s construction system is composed of a finite number of dichotomous constructs.

  • Individuality Corollary: Persons differ from each other in their construction of events.

  • Organization Corollary: Each person characteristically evolves, for his convenience in anticipating events, a construction system embracing ordinal relationships between constructs.

  • Choice Corollary: A person chooses for himself that alternative in a dichotomized construct through which he anticipates the greater possibility for extension and definition of his system.

  • Range Corollary: A construct is convenient for the anticipation of a finite range of events only.

  • Experience Corollary: A person’s construction system varies as he successively construes the replications of events.

  • Modulation Corollary: The variation in a person’s construction system is limited by the permeability of the constructs within whose ranges of convenience the variants lies.

  • Fragmentation Corollary: A person may successively employ a variety of construction subsystems which are inferentially incompatible with each other.

  • Commonality Corollary: To the extent that one person employs a construction of experience which is similar to that employed by another, his psychological processes are similar to those of the other person.

  • Sociality Corollary: To the extent that one person construes the construction processes of another, he may play a role in a social process involving the other person.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hunter, M.G., Caputi, P., Tan, F.B. (2012). Employing Personal Construct Theory to Understand Information Systems: A Practical Guide for Researchers. In: Dwivedi, Y., Wade, M., Schneberger, S. (eds) Information Systems Theory. Integrated Series in Information Systems, vol 29. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9707-4_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation