Seeking Middle-Range Theories in Information Systems Research
2015
- 514Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage514
- Abstract Views282
- Downloads232
Article Description
The information systems (IS) research community continues to raise questions about the characteristics and role of theory in IS. Some suggest the preeminence and misplaced emphasis on theory distorts and limits IS research, while others suggest the manner in which theory is borrowed and adapted impedes creative and innovative theorizing. This essay describes an established mode of theorizing that produces middle-range theories, abstract enough to allow for generalizations and useful conclusions, but close enough to observed data to be empirically validated. Theorizing in this manner holds the potential to produce novel and exciting theories, far removed from the formulaic, endless rearrangement of variables that are typically derived from grand theories. After elaborating on the differences between grand theories and middle-range theories, this essay suggests several guidelines on how to build middle-range theories.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know