Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research Methods

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Scientific Research in Information Systems

Part of the book series: Progress in IS ((PROIS))

Abstract

In this chapter, the most common methods used in information systems research are introduced, namely quantitative methods, such as experiments and surveys, qualitative methods, such as case study, action research, or grounded theory, design science methods, and computational methods. The advantages and disadvantages of each method are discussed, and guidelines for conducting research using these methods are provided. The chapter ends with discussing recommendations for mixing different methods.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
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

References

  • Aakhus, M., Ågerfalk, P. J., Lyytinen, K., & Te’Eni, D. (2014). Symbolic Action Research in Information Systems: Introduction to the Special Issue. MIS Quarterly, 38(4), 1187–1200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguirre-Urreta, M. I., & Marakas, G. M. (2012). Revisiting Bias Due to Construct Misspecification: Different Results from Considering Coefficients in Standardized Form. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 123–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ang, J. S. K., Sum, C.-C., & Yeo, L.-N. (2002). A Multiple-Case Design Methodology for Studying MRP Success and CSFs. Information & Management, 39(4), 271–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arazy, O., Kumar, N., & Shapira, B. (2010). A Theory-Driven Design Framework for Social Recommender Systems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 11(9), 455–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avison, D. E., Davison, R. M., & Malaurent, J. (2018). Information Systems Action Research: Debunking Myths and Overcoming Barriers. Information & Management, 55(2), 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2017.05.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avison, D. E., & Myers, M. D. (1995). Information Systems and Anthropology: An Anthropological Perspective on IT and Organizational Culture. Information Technology & People, 8(3), 43–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babbie, E. R. (1990). Survey Research Methods. Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, J. E., & Pearson, S. W. (1983). Development of a Tool for Measuring and Analyzing Computer User Satisfaction. Management Science, 29(5), 530–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandara, W., Furtmueller, E., Gorbacheva, E., Miskon, S., & Beekhuyzen, J. (2015). Achieving Rigor in Literature Reviews: Insights from Qualitative Data Analysis and Tool-Support. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37(8), 154–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandara, W., Gable, G. G., & Rosemann, M. (2005). Factors and Measures of Business Process Modelling: Model Building Through a Multiple Case Study. European Journal of Information Systems, 14(4), 347–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandara, W., & Rosemann, M. (2005). What Are the Secrets of Successful Process Modeling? Insights From an Australian Case Study. Systèmes d’Information et Management, 10(3), 47–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey Response Rate Levels and Trends in Organizational Research. Human Relations, 61(8), 1139–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R., Kaul, M., & Storey, V. C. (2017). Establishing Reliability in Design Science Research. In 38th International Conference on Information Systems, Seoul, Korea.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R., & Myers, M. D. (2004). Special Issue on Action Research in Information Systems: Making IS Research Relevant to Practice: Foreword. MIS Quarterly, 28(3), 329–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R., & Wood-Harper, A. T. (1996). A Critical Perspective on Action Research as a Method for Information Systems Research. Journal of Information Technology, 11(3), 235–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R., & Wood-Harper, A. T. (1998). Diversity in Information Systems Action Research Methods. European Journal of Information Systems, 7(2), 90–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazeley, P. (2007). Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo (2nd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat, I., & Wang, W. (2005). Trust In and Adoption of Online Recommendation Agents. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 6(3), 72–101. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat, I., & Weber, R. (1996). Research Commentary: Rethinking “Diversity” in Information Systems Research. Information Systems Research, 7(4), 389–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berente, N., Seidel, S., & Safadi, H. (2019). Data-Driven Computationally-Intensive Theory Development. Information Systems Research, 30(1), 50–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berente, N., & Yoo, Y. (2012). Institutional Contradictions and Loose Coupling: Postimplementation of NASA’s Enterprise Information System. Information Systems Research, 23(2), 376–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social Science Research: Principles, Methods and Practices (2nd ed.). Global Text Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, J. (1961). The Q-Sort Method in Personality Assessment and Psychiatric Research. Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2013). Analyzing Social Networks. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosco, F. A., Uggerslev, K. L., & Steel, P. (2017). MetaBUS as a Vehicle for Facilitating Meta-analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 27(1), 237–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boudreau, M.-C., Gefen, D., & Straub, D. W. (2001). Validation in Information Systems Research: A State-of-the-Art Assessment. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branch, M. (2014). Malignant Side Effects of Null-hypothesis Significance Testing. Theory & Psychology, 24(2), 256–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, C. L. (1986). Learning How to Ask: A Sociolinguistic Appraisal of the Role of the Interview in Social Science Research. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. C. (Eds.). (2007). The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, T., Hughes, J., Myers, M. D., Trauth, E., & Urquhart, C. (2004). Twenty Years of Applying Grounded Theory in Information Systems: A Coding Method, Useful Theory Generation Method, or an Orthodox Positivist Method of Data Analysis? In B. Kaplan, D. P. Truex, D. G. Wastell, A. T. Wood-Harper, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Information Systems Research: Relevant Theory and Informed Practice (pp. 649–650). Kluwer Academic Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (2008). Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS 14, 15 & 16: A Guide for Social Scientists. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, C., & Lund, K. (1997). Modelling Parsing Constraints with High-dimensional Context Space. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12(2/3), 177–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis: Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life. Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton-Jones, A., & Lee, A. S. (2017). Thinking About Measures and Measurement in Positivist Research: A Proposal for Refocusing on Fundamentals. Information Systems Research, 28(3), 451–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, S. A. (2005). Developing Information Systems Design Knowledge: A Critical Realist Perspective. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methodology, 3(2), 93–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Centefelli, R. T., & Bassellier, G. (2009). Interpretation of Formative Measurement in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 33(4), 689–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What Is This Thing Called Science? (3rd ed.). Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, H. C., Kim, H.-W., & Tan, W. C. (2006). Information Systems Citation Patterns from International Conference on Information Systems Articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(9), 1263–1274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. C. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W. S., & Hirschheim, R. (2004). A Paradigmatic and Methodological Examination of Information Systems Research from 1991 to 2001. Information Systems Journal, 14(3), 197–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, M., Song, M., Comuzzi, M., & Yoo, S. (2017). Evaluating the Effect of Best Practices for Business Process Redesign: An Evidence-based Approach Based on Process Mining Techniques. Decision Support Systems, 104, 92–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chudoba, K. M., & Maznevski, M. L. (2000). Bridging Space over Time: Global Virtual Team Dynamics and Effectiveness. Organization Science, 11(5), 473–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, G. A., Jr. (1979). A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, P. A. (1972). Action Research and Organizational Change. Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1960). A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1994). The Earth is Round (p  0.05). American Psychologist, 49(12), 997–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colapinto, J. (2001). As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised As A Girl. Harper Perennials.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couper, M. P., Traugott, M. W., & Lamias, M. J. (2001). Web Survey Design & Administration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(2), 230–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 291–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct Validity in Psychological Tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowston, K., & Myers, M. D. (2004). Information Technology and the Transformation of Industries: Three Research Perspectives. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 13(1), 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czaja, R. F., & Blair, J. (1996). Designing Surveys: A Guide to Decisions and Procedures. Pine Forge Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, R., & MacKinnon, J. G. (1993). Estimation and Inference in Econometrics. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debortoli, S., Müller, O., Junglas, I., & Vom Brocke, J. (2016). Text Mining For Information Systems Researchers: An Annotated Topic Modeling Tutorial. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 39(7), 110–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhar, V. (2013). Data Science and Prediction. Communications of the ACM, 56(12), 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A. (2001). Incorporating Formative Measures into Covariance-Based Structural Equation Models. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), 335–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2006). Formative Versus Reflective Indicators in Organizational Measure Development: A Comparison and Empirical Illustration. British Journal of Management, 17(4), 263–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). Index Construction with Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale Development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 259–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J. (2015). Adapting Computational Text Analysis to Social Science (and Vice Versa). Big Data & Society, 2(2), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951715602908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doll, W. J., & Torkzadeh, G. (1998). Developing a Multidimensional Measure of System-Use in an Organizational Context. Information & Management, 33(4), 171–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dumais, S. (2004). Latent Semantic Analysis. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 38(1), 188–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutta, S., Zbaracki, M. J., & Bergen, M. (2003). Pricing Process as a Capability: A Resource-based Perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 24(7), 615–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elden, M., & Chisholm, R. F. (1993). Emerging Varieties of Action Research: Introduction to the Special Issue. Human Relations, 46(2), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679304600201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. S. (1995). Strategies for Interpreting Qualitative Data (Vol. 13). Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. (2013). Discovering Statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2018). An Introduction to Qualitative Research (6th ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2000). The Interview: From Structured Questions to Negotiated Text. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed., pp. 645–672). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, F. J. (2013). Survey Research Methods (5th ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freelon, D. (2014). On the Interpretation of Digital Trace Data in Communication and Social Computing Research. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 58(1), 59–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. (1990). The Story of Anna O. Paragon House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fromkin, H. L., & Streufert, S. (1976). Laboratory Experimentation. Rand McNally College Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaber, M. M. (Ed.). (2010). Scientific Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gable, G. G. (1994). Integrating Case Study and Survey Research Methods: An Example in Information Systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 3(2), 112–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gable, G. G., Sedera, D., & Chan, T. (2008). Re-conceptualizing Information System Success: The IS-Impact Measurement Model. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 9(7), 377–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galliers, R. D., & Whitley, E. A. (2007). Vive les Differences? Developing a Profile of European Information Systems Research as a Basis for International Comparisons. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(1), 20–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Pérez, M. A. (2012). Statistical Conclusion Validity: Some Common Threats and Simple Remedies. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(325), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaskin, J., Berente, N., Lyytinen, K., & Yoo, Y. (2014). Toward Generalizable Sociomaterial Inquiry: A Computational Approach for Zooming In and Out of Sociomaterial Routines. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 849–871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gasson, S. (2004). Rigor in Grounded Theory Research: An Interpretive Perspective on Generating Theory from Qualitative Field Studies. In M. E. Whitman & A. B. Woszczynski (Eds.), The Handbook of Information Systems Research (pp. 79–102). Idea Group Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Germonprez, M., Hovorka, D. S., & Collopy, F. (2007). A Theory of Tailorable Technology Design. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(6), 351–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, M., & Arnott, D. (2007). The Use of Focus Groups in Design Science Research. In 18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Toowoomba, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1965). Awareness of Dying. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glymour, C. (2004). The Automation of Discovery. Daedalus, 133(1), 69–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey-Smith, P. (2003). Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goodhue, D. L. (1998). Development and Measurement Validity of A Task-Technology Fit Instrument for User Evaluations of Information Systems. Decision Sciences, 29(1), 105–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodhue, D. L., Lewis, W., & Thompson, R. L. (2006). PLS, Small Sample Size, and Statistical Power in MIS Research. In 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Kauai, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodhue, D. L., Lewis, W., & Thompson, R. L. (2012). Comparing PLS to Regression and LISREL: A Response to Marcoulides, Chin, and Saunders. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 703–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, L. D. (2001). Interrater Agreement and Reliability. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 5(1), 13–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed Method Evaluation Designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S. (2018). The Value of Feyerabend’s Anarchic Thinking for Information Systems Research. ACM SIGMIS Database, 49(3), 114–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S., Chandra Kruse, L., & Seidel, S. (2020). The Anatomy of a Design Principle. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(6), 1622–1652. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. R. (2013). Positioning and Presenting Design Science Research for Maximum Impact. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 337–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The Anatomy of a Design Theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(5), 312–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.). Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, C. G. (1965). Aspects of Scientific Explanation and other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henfridsson, O., & Bygstad, B. (2013). The Generative Mechanisms of Digital Infrastructure Evolution. MIS Quarterly, 37(3), 907–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A. R. (2007). A Three Cycle View of Design Science Research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A. R., & Chatterjee, S. (2010). Design Research in Information Systems: Theory and Practice (Vol. 22). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschheim, R., & Newman, M. (1991). Symbolism and Information Systems Development: Myth, Metaphore and Magic. Information Systems Research, 2(1), 29–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoaglin, D. C., Light, R. J., McPeek, B., Mosteller, F., & Stoto, M. A. (1982). Data for Decisions: Information Strategies for Policy Makers. Abt Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howison, J., Wiggins, A., & Crowston, K. (2011). Validity Issues in the Use of Social Network Analysis with Digital Trace Data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(12), 767–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iivari, J. (2007). A Paradigmatic Analysis of Information Systems As a Design Science. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 39–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iivari, J., Hansen, M. R. P., & Haj-Bolouri, A. (2021). A Proposal for Minimum Reusability Evaluation of Design Principles. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(3), 286–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1793697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iivari, J., & Lyytinen, K. (1999). Research on Information Systems Development in Scandinavia: Unity in Plurality. In W. L. Currie & R. D. Galliers (Eds.), Rethinking Management Information Systems: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (pp. 57–102). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Indulska, M., Hovorka, D. S., & Recker, J. (2012). Quantitative Approaches to Content Analysis: Identifying Conceptual Drift Across Publication Outlets. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(1), 49–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2001). LISREL 8: User’s Reference Guide. Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A. (1998/1964). The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science. Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplowitz, M. D., Hadlock, T. D., & Levine, R. (2004). A Comparison of Web and Mail Survey Response Rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(1), 84–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keil, M. (1995). Pulling the Plug: Software Project Management and the Problem of Project Escalation. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 421–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The Action Research Reader (3rd ed.). Deakin University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ketter, W., Peter, M., Collins, J., & Gupta, A. (2016). A Multiagent Competitive Gaming Platform to Address Societal Challenges. MIS Quarterly, 40(2), 447–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, G., Shin, B., & Grover, V. (2010). Investigating Two Contradictory Views of Formative Measurement in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 34(2), 345–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, W. R., & He, J. (2005). External Validity in IS Survey Research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 16(45), 880–894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, H. K., & Myers, M. D. (1999). A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 67–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozinets, R. V. (2002). The Field behind the Screen: Using Netnography for Marketing Research in Online Communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.39.1.61.18935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998). Introduction to Latent Semantic Analysis. Discourse Processes, 25(2 & 3), 259–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landry, M., & Banville, C. (1992). A Disciplined Methodological Pluralism for MIS Research. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, 2(2), 77–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lange, M., Mendling, J., & Recker, J. (2016). An Empirical Analysis of the Factors and Measures of Enterprise Architecture Management Success. European Journal of Information Systems, 25(5), 411–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, K. R. T., & Bong, C. H. (2016). A Tool for Addressing Construct Identity in Literature Reviews and Meta-Analyses. MIS Quarterly, 40(3), 529–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, K. R. T., Lukyanenko, R., Mueller, R. M., Storey, V. C., VanderMeer, D. E., Parsons, J., & Hovorka, D. S. (2020). Validity in Design Science Research. In 15th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology, Kristiansand, Norway.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazer, D., Pentland, A. P., Adamic, L. A., Aral, S., Barabási, A.-L., Brewer, D., Christakis, N., Contractor, N., Fowler, J., Gutmann, M., Jebara, T., King, G., Macy, M., Roy, D., & Van Alstyne, M. (2009). Computational Social Science. Science, 323(5915), 721–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levina, N., & Vaast, E. (2015). Leveraging Archival Data from Online Communities for Grounded Process Theorizing. In K. D. Elsbach & R. M. Kramer (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Organizational Research: Innovative Pathways and Methods (pp. 215–224). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, S. D., & Dubner, S. J. (2005). Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything. William Morrow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg, A. (2020). Developing Theory through Integrating Human and Machine Pattern Recognition. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(1), 90–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindman, H. R. (1974). ANOVA in Complex Experimental Designs. W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, F., & Myers, M. D. (2011). An Analysis of the AIS Basket of Top Journals. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 13(1), 5–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M., Hansen, S., & Tu, Q. (2014). The Community Source Approach to Software Development and the Kuali Experience. Communications of the ACM, 57(5), 88–96. https://doi.org/10.1145/2593687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lukyanenko, R., Evermann, J., & Parsons, J. (2014). Instantiation Validity in IS Design Research. In M. C. Tremblay, D. E. VanderMeer, M. A. Rothenberger, A. Gupta, & V. Yoon (Eds.), Advancing the Impact of Design Science: Moving from Theory to Practice (Vol. 8463, pp. 321–328). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lyytinen, K., & King, J. L. (2004). Nothing At The Center? Academic Legitimacy in the Information Systems Field. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 5(6), 220–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maaradji, A., Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., & Ostovar, A. (2017). Detecting Sudden and Gradual Drifts in Business Processes Based on Event Logs. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 29(10), 2140–2154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2011). Construct Measurement and Validation Procedures in MIS and Behavioral Research: Integrating New and Existing Techniques. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), 293–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and Natural Science Research on Information Technology. Decision Support Systems, 15(4), 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcoulides, G. A., & Saunders, C. (2006). Editor’s Comments: PLS: A Silver Bullet? MIS Quarterly, 30(2), iii–ix.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus, M. L. (1983). Power, Politics, and MIS Implementation. Communications of the ACM, 26(6), 430–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus, M. L. (1994). Electronic Mail as the Medium of Managerial Choice. Organization Science, 5(4), 502–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus, M. L., Majchrzak, A., & Gasser, L. (2002). A Design Theory for Systems that Support Emergent Knowledge Processes. MIS Quarterly, 26(3), 179–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matavire, R., & Brown, I. (2012). Profiling Grounded Theory Approaches in Information Systems Research. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(1), 119–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathiassen, L., Chiasson, M., & Germonprez, M. (2012). Style Composition in Action Research Publications. MIS Quarterly, 36(2), 347–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazaheri, E., Lagzian, M., & Hemmat, Z. (2020). Research Directions in Information Systems Field, Current Status and Future Trends: A Literature Analysis of AIS Basket of Top Journals. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 24. https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v24i0.2045

  • McKay, J., & Marshall, P. (2005). A Review of Design Science in Information Systems. In 16th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Sydney, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mertens, W., Pugliese, A., & Recker, J. (2017). Quantitative Data Analysis: A Companion for Accounting and Information Systems Research. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mertens, W., & Recker, J. (2020a). How Store Managers can Empower their Teams to Engage in Constructive Deviance: Theory Development through a Multiple Case Study. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 52, 101937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mertens, W., & Recker, J. (2020b). New Guidelines for Null Hypothesis Significance Testing in Hypothetico-Deductive IS Research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(4), 1072–1102. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J. (2001). Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology. Information Systems Research, 12(3), 240–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mullarkey, M. T., & Hevner, A. R. (2019). An Elaborated Action Design Research Process Model. European Journal of Information Systems, 28(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2018.1451811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Wienbergen, F., Müller, O., Seidel, S., & Becker, J. (2011). Leaving the Beaten Tracks in Creative Work—A Design Theory for Systems that Support Convergent and Divergent Thinking. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(11), 714–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, M. D. (2009). Qualitative Research in Business and Management. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, M. D., & Newman, M. (2007). The Qualitative Interview in IS Research: Examining the Craft. Information and Organization, 17(1), 2–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunamaker, J. F., Jr., Chen, M., & Purdin, T. D. M. (1991). Systems Development in Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 7(3), 89–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, D. R., Wygant, S. A., & Brown, B. L. (2004). Electronic Survey Administration: Assessment in the Twenty-First Century. Assessment Update, 16(3), 1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W. J. (1993). CASE Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating Incremental and Radical Changes in Systems Development. MIS Quarterly, 17(3), 309–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pentland, B. T. (1999). Building Process Theory with Narrative: From Description to Explanation. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 711–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pentland, B. T., Recker, J., Ryan Wolf, J., & Wyner, G. (2020). Bringing Context Inside Process Research With Digital Trace Data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(5), 1214–1236. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pentland, B. T., Vaast, E., & Ryan Wolf, J. (2021). Theorizing Process Dynamics with Directed Graphs: A Diachronic Analysis of Digital Trace Data. MIS Quarterly, 45(2), 967–984. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2021/15360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perdue, B. C., & Summers, J. O. (1986). Checking the Success of Manipulations in Marketing Experiments. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(4), 317–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pernet, C. (2016). Null Hypothesis Significance Testing: A Guide to Commonly Misunderstood Concepts and Recommendations for Good Practice [version 5; peer review: 2 approved, 2 not approved]. F1000Research, 4(621). https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6963.5

  • Peshkin, A. (1986). God’s Choice: The Total World of a Fundamentalist Christian School. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petter, S., Straub, D. W., & Rai, A. (2007). Specifying Formative Constructs in IS Research. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 623–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, A. M. (1998). Catching Reality in Flight. In A. G. Bedeian (Ed.), Management Laureates (Vol. 5, pp. 171–206). JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Basic Books (Logik der Forschung, Vienna, 1935)

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J. (2007). Why Do We Keep Using A Process Modelling Technique? In 18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Toowoomba, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J. (2010). Opportunities and Constraints: The Current Struggle with BPMN. Business Process Management Journal, 16(1), 181–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J. (2016). Toward A Design Theory for Green Information Systems. In 49th Hawaiian International Conference on Systems Sciences, Kuaui, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J., & Dreiling, A. (2011). The Effects of Content Presentation Format and User Characteristics on Novice Developers’ Understanding of Process Models. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 28(6), 65–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J., Holten, R., Hummel, M., & Rosenkranz, C. (2017). How Agile Practices impact Customer Responsiveness and Development Success: A Field Study. Project Management Journal, 48(2), 99–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J., Lukyanenko, R., Jabbari, M., Samuel, B. M., & Castellanos, A. (2021). From Representation to Mediation: A New Agenda for Conceptual Modeling Research in a Digital World. MIS Quarterly, 45(1), 269–300. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2020/16207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J., & Rosemann, M. (2010a). A Measurement Instrument for Process Modeling Research: Development, Test and Procedural Model. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 22(2), 3–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J., & Rosemann, M. (2010b). The Measurement of Perceived Ontological Deficiencies of Conceptual Modeling Grammars. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 69(5), 516–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Green, P., & Indulska, M. (2011). Do Ontological Deficiencies in Modeling Grammars Matter? MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 57–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reich, B. H., & Benbasat, I. (1990). An Empirical Investigation of Factors Influencing the Success of Customer-Oriented Strategic Systems. Information Systems Research, 1(3), 325–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, A. (2015). Statistics Done Wrong: The Woefully Complete Guide. No Starch Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rialp, A., Rialp, J., Urbano, D., & Vaillant, Y. (2005). The Born-Global Phenomenon: A Comparative Case Study Research. Journal of international Entrepreneurship, 3(2), 133–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Straub, D. W. (2012). Editor’s Comments: A Critical Look at the Use of PLS-SEM in MIS Quarterly. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), iii–xiv.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robey, D. (1996). Research Commentary: Diversity in Information Systems Research: Threat, Promise, and responsibility. Information Systems Research, 7(4), 400–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2004). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (2nd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saldana, J. (2016). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H., & Brazil, K. (2002). Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research. Quality & Quantity, 36(1), 43–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarker, S., & Lee, A. S. (2001). Using A Positivist Case Research Methodology To Test Three Competing Theories-In-Use Of Business Process Redesign. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2(1), 1–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarker, S., & Lee, A. S. (2002). Using a Case Study to Test the Role of Three Key Social Enablers in ERP Implementation. Information & Management, 40(8), 813–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarker, S., Xiao, X., Beaulieu, T., & Lee, A. S. (2018). Learning from First-Generation Qualitative Approaches in the IS Discipline: An Evolutionary View and Some Implications for Authors and Evaluators (PART 1/2). Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(8), 752–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schensul, S. L., Schensul, J. J., & LeCompte, M. D. (1999). Essential Ethnographic Methods: Observations, Interviews, and Questionnaires. AltaMira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlagwein, D., & Bjørn-Andersen, N. (2014). Organizational Learning with Crowdsourcing: The Revelatory Case of LEGO. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 15(11), 754–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultze, U., & Avital, M. (2011). Designing Interviews to Generate Rich Data for IS Research. Information and Organization, 21(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, A., Abrahamson, E., Starbuck, W. H., & Fidler, F. (2011). PERSPECTIVE—Researchers Should Make Thoughtful Assessments Instead of Null-Hypothesis Significance Tests. Organization Science, 22(4), 1105–1120. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidel, S., Chandra Kruse, L., Székely, N., Gau, M., & Stieger, D. (2018). Design Principles for Sensemaking Support Systems in Environmental Sustainability Transformations. European Journal of Information Systems, 27(2), 221–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidel, S., Recker, J., & vom Brocke, J. (2013). Sensemaking and Sustainable Practicing: Functional Affordances of Information Systems in Green Transformations. MIS Quarterly, 37(4), 1275–1299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidel, S., & Urquhart, C. (2013). On Emergence and Forcing in Information Systems Grounded Theory Studies: The Case of Strauss and Corbin. Journal of Information Technology, 28(3), 237–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sein, M. K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., & Lindgren, R. (2011). Action Design Research. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), 37–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2001). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference (2nd ed.). Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva, L., & Hirschheim, R. (2007). Fighting against Windmills: Strategic Information Systems and Organizational Deep Structures. MIS Quarterly, 31(2), 327–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, D. (2013). Doing Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial (3rd ed.). MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, S. (1997). Fermat’s Last Theorem: The Story of a Riddle that Confounded the World’s Greatest Minds for 358 Years. Fourth Estate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siponen, M. T., & Klaavuniemi, T. (2020). Why is the Hypothetico-Deductive (H-D) Method in Information Systems not an H-D Method? Information and Organization, 30(1), 100287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2020.100287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivo, S. A., Saunders, C., Chang, Q., & Jiang, J. J. (2006). How Low Should You Go? Low Response Rates and the Validity of Inference in IS Questionnaire Research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(6), 351–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slater, L. (2005). Opening Skinner’s Box: Great Psychological Experiments of the Twentieth Century. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. E., & Humphreys, M. S. (2006). Evaluation of Unsupervised Semantic Mapping of Natural Language with Leximancer Concept Mapping. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 38(2), 262–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, J. P. (2001). Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences (4th ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Straub, D. W., Boudreau, M.-C., & Gefen, D. (2004). Validation Guidelines for IS Positivist Research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13(24), 380–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 273–285). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streiner, D. L. (2003). Starting at the Beginning: An Introduction to Coefficient Alpha and Internal Consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80(1), 99–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strong, D. M., & Volkoff, O. (2010). Understanding Organization-Enterprise System Fit: A Path to Theorizing the Information Technology Artifact. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 731–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Susman, G. I., & Evered, R. D. (1978). An Assessment of the Science Merits of Action Research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(4), 582–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szucs, D., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2017). When Null Hypothesis Significance Testing Is Unsuitable for Research: A Reassessment. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11(390), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics (4th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C., & Sines, M. C. (2012). Utilizing Mixed Methods in Psychological Research. In J. A. Schinka & W. F. Velicer (Eds.), Research Methods in Psychology (Vol. 2, 2nd ed., pp. 428–450). Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, D. M., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Q-Sorting and MIS Research: A Primer. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 8(9), 141–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Törnberg, P., & Törnberg, A. (2018). The Limits of Computation: A Philosophical Critique of Contemporary Big Data Research. Big Data & Society, 5(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718811843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treiblmaier, H. (2018). Paul Feyerabend and the Art of Epistemological Anarchy—A Discussion of the Basic Tenets of Against Method and an Assessment of Their Potential Usefulness for the Information Systems Field. ACM SIGMIS Database, 49(2), 93–101. https://doi.org/10.1145/3229335.3229342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tremblay, M. C., Hevner, A. R., & Berndt, D. J. (2010). Focus Groups for Artifact Refinement and Evaluation in Design Research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 26(27), 599–618.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trochim, W. M. K., Donnelly, J. P., & Arora, K. (2016). Research Methods: The Essential Knowledge Base (2nd ed.). Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsang, E. W. K., & Williams, J. N. (2012). Generalization and Induction: Misconceptions, Clarifications, and a Classification of Induction. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 729–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urquhart, C. (2013). Grounded Theory for Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide. Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Urquhart, C., & Fernandez, W. D. (2013). Using Grounded Theory Method in Information Systems: The Researcher as Blank Slate and Other Myths. Journal of Information Technology, 28(3), 224–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urquhart, C., Lehmann, H., & Myers, M. D. (2010). Putting the Theory Back Into Grounded Theory: Guidelines for Grounded Theory Studies in Information Systems. Information Systems Journal, 20(4), 357–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaast, E., Safadi, H., Lapointe, L., & Negoita, B. (2017). Social Media Affordances for Connective Action: An Examination of Microblogging Use During the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill. MIS Quarterly, 41(4), 1179–1205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2016). Process Mining: Data Science in Action. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vegas, S., Apa, C., & Juristo, N. (2016). Crossover Designs in Software Engineering Experiments: Benefits and Perils. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 42(2), 120–135. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2015.2467378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venable, J. R. (2006). The Role of Theory and Theorising in Design Science Research. In 1st International Conference on Design Science in Information Systems and Technology, Claremont, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venable, J. R., Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2016). FEDS: A Framework for Evaluation in Design Science Research. European Journal of Information Systems, 25(1), 77–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., & Bala, H. (2013). Bridging the Qualitative-Quantitative Divide: Guidelines for Conducting Mixed Methods Research in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 37(1), 21–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walls, J. G., Widmeyer, G. R., & El Sawy, O. A. (1992). Building an Information Systems Design Theory for Vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 36–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive Case Studies in IS Research: Nature and Method. European Journal of Information Systems, 4, 74–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsham, G. (2015). Using Quantitative Data in Mixed-Design Grounded Theory Studies: An Enhanced Path to Formal Grounded Theory in Information Systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 24, 531–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wassermann, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserstein, R. L., & Lazar, N. A. (2016). The ASA’s Statement on P-values: Context, Process, and Purpose. The American Statistician, 70(2), 129–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserstein, R. L., Schirm, A. L., & Lazar, N. A. (2019). Moving to a World Beyond “p < 0.05”. The American Statistician, 73(Suppl 1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whelan, E., Teigland, R., Vaast, E., & Butler, B. S. (2016). Expanding the Horizons of Digital Social Networks: Mixing Big Trace Datasets with Qualitative Approaches. Information and Organization, 26(1–2), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wierzchoń, S., & Kłopotek, M. (2018). Modern Algorithms of Cluster Analysis. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wiesche, M., Jurisch, M., Yetton, P., & Krcmar, H. (2019). Grounded Theory Methodology in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 41(3), 685–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M. C., Regnell, B., & Wesslén, A. (2000). Experimentation in Software Engineering: An Introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wunderlich, P., Veit, D. J., & Sarker, S. (2019). Adoption of Sustainable Technologies: A Mixed-Methods Study of German Households. MIS Quarterly, 43(2), 673–691. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2019/12112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, H., Zhang, N., & Zhou, L. (2020). Validity Concerns in Research Using Organic Data. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1257–1274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319862027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Vol. 5, 4th ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, Y., Duan, W., & Cao, Q. (2013). The Impact of Social and Conventional Media on Firm Equity Value: A Sentiment Analysis Approach. Decision Support Systems, 55(4), 919–926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Jan Recker

Authors
  1. Jan Recker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Recker, J. (2021). Research Methods. In: Scientific Research in Information Systems. Progress in IS. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85436-2_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation