The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Research Commentary: Rethinking “Diversity” in Information Systems Research
Abstract
Three types of diversity have been prominent in the Information Systems discipline for over a decade: (a) diversity in the problems addressed; (b) diversity in the theoretical foundations and reference disciplines used to account for IS phenomena; and (c) diversity in the methods used to collect, analyze, and interpret data. History has played a major part in encouraging IS researchers to use diversity as a means of countering criticisms of their discipline and increasing their research rigor and productivity. In particular, frequent recourse to reference disciplines has underpinned much of the research that has been undertaken since the early 1980s. There are now signs, however, that the level of diversity that currently exists in IS research may be problematic. In this paper, we consider some of the benefits and costs of allowing diversity to reign in the IS discipline. We also propose a structure that we hope will facilitate discourse on the benefits and costs of diversity and on the role that diversity should now play in the IS discipline.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The Nature of Theory in Information Systems1
Gregor, S. (2006) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148742 · Cited by 3,306
Zhu, K., & Kraemer, K. L. (2005) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1050.0045 · Cited by 1,723
Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology
Mingers, J. (2001) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.12.3.240.9709 · Cited by 1,380
Dubé, L., & Paré, G. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036550 · Cited by 976
Some Guidelines for the Critical Reviewing of Conceptual Papers
Louisiana State University, U., & Hirschheim, R. (2008) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00167 · Cited by 163
From computer ethics and the ethics of AI towards an ethics of digital ecosystems
Stahl, B. C. (2022) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-021-00080-1 · Cited by 68
Kifle, M., Mbarika, V. W. A., & Bradley, R. V. (2006) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.01830 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Benbasat, I., & Weber, R.
- Venue
- Information Systems Research
- Published
- 1996-12
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 389-399
- ISSN
- 1047-7047 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5536
- OpenAlex
- W2123952056
- Cited by
- 418
- References
- 0
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.