IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03701576.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the Merits and Limits of Replication and Negation for IS Research

Author

Listed:
  • Frantz Rowe

    (LEMNA - Laboratoire d'économie et de management de Nantes Atlantique - IEMN-IAE Nantes - Institut d'Économie et de Management de Nantes - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises - Nantes - UN - Université de Nantes)

  • Sebastian Olbrich
  • Ulrich Frank

    (Universität Duisburg-Essen = University of Duisburg-Essen [Essen])

  • Shirley Gregor

    (ANU - Australian National University)

  • Fred Niederman

    (SLU - Saint Louis University)

Abstract

A simple idea underpins the scientific process: All results should be subject to continued testing and questioning. Given the particularities of our international IS discipline, different viewpoints seem to be required to develop a picture of the merits and limits of testing and replication. Hence, the authors of this paper approach the topic from different perspectives. Following the ongoing discourse in neighbouring disciplines, we start by highlighting the significance of testing, replication and negation for scientific discourse as well as for the sponsors of research initiatives. Next, we discuss types of replication research and the challenges associated with each. In the third section, challenging questions are raised in the light of the ability of IS research for self-correction. Then, we address publication issues related to types of replications that require shifting editorial behaviors. The fifth section reflects on the possible use and interpretation of replication results in the light of contingency. As a key takeaway, the paper suggests ways to identify studies worth replicating in our field and reflects on possible roles of replication and testing for future IS research.

Suggested Citation

  • Frantz Rowe & Sebastian Olbrich & Ulrich Frank & Shirley Gregor & Fred Niederman, 2017. "On the Merits and Limits of Replication and Negation for IS Research," Post-Print hal-03701576, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03701576
    DOI: 10.17705/1atrr.00016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. João Barata & Paulo Rupino Cunha & António Dias Figueiredo, 2023. "Self-reporting Limitations in Information Systems Design Science Research," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 65(2), pages 143-160, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03701576. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.