论IS研究中复制与否定的优点与局限性

S. Olbrich, U. Frank, S. Gregor, F. Niederman, F. Rowe
{"title":"论IS研究中复制与否定的优点与局限性","authors":"S. Olbrich, U. Frank, S. Gregor, F. Niederman, F. Rowe","doi":"10.17705/1ATRR.00016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":146711,"journal":{"name":"AIS Trans. Replication Res.","volume":"105 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Merits and Limits of Replication and Negation for IS Research\",\"authors\":\"S. Olbrich, U. Frank, S. Gregor, F. Niederman, F. Rowe\",\"doi\":\"10.17705/1ATRR.00016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":146711,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AIS Trans. Replication Res.\",\"volume\":\"105 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AIS Trans. Replication Res.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17705/1ATRR.00016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AIS Trans. Replication Res.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17705/1ATRR.00016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

一个简单的想法支撑着科学的过程:所有的结果都应该经过持续的测试和质疑。鉴于我们国际信息系统学科的特殊性,似乎需要不同的观点来发展测试和复制的优点和局限性。因此,本文的作者从不同的角度来探讨这个问题。随着邻近学科正在进行的论述,我们首先强调测试、复制和否定对科学论述以及研究计划的赞助者的重要性。接下来,我们将讨论复制研究的类型以及与每种类型相关的挑战。在第三部分,针对IS研究的自我纠正能力提出了具有挑战性的问题。然后,我们解决了与需要改变编辑行为的复制类型相关的出版问题。第五部分从偶然性的角度思考了复制结果的可能使用和解释。作为一个关键的收获,这篇论文提出了在我们的领域中确定值得复制的研究的方法,并反映了复制和测试在未来IS研究中的可能作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On the Merits and Limits of Replication and Negation for IS Research
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信