The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Investigating Information Systems with Positivist Case Research
Open accessAbstract
This paper offers a rigorous step-by-step methodology for developing theories and contains specific and detailed guidelines for IS researchers to follow in carrying out positivist case studies. The methodology is largely inspired by the work of Yin [2003], Eisenhardt [1989], Miles and Huberman [1994] and several others who are strong proponents of and have wide experience in this research approach. It also relies on previous key contributions to the positivist case research method in IS [Benbasat et al., 1987; Lee, 1989; Dubé and Paré, 2003]. We illustrate how this methodology can be applied in our field to help find new perspectives and empirical insights. In addition, the desired qualities associated with several of the proposed concepts and the techniques and tools included in the methodology are presented. We believe that the two detailed case studies presented in this paper represent highly rigorous, yet different applications of the positivist case research method and, hence, we strongly encourage IS researchers to follow their respective approaches.
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
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
Handbook of Qualitative Research
Crozier, G., Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1994) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3121684 · Cited by 26,666
Hartley, J. (2004) · Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research · doi:10.4135/9781446280119.n26 · Cited by 15,461
A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems1
Klein, H. K., & Myers, M. D. (1999) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249410 · Cited by 5,263
Explaining Development and Change in Organizations
van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1995.9508080329 · Cited by 3,762
Codebook Development for Team-Based Qualitative Analysis
MacQueen, K. M., McLellan, E., Kay, K., & Milstein, B. (1998) · CAM Journal · doi:10.1177/1525822x980100020301 · Cited by 1,675
Leonard-Barton, D. (1990) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1.3.248 · Cited by 1,360
Cited by
Clohessy, T., & Acton, T. (2019) · Industrial Management & Data Systems · doi:10.1108/imds-08-2018-0365 · Cited by 436
Lehrer, C., Wieneke, A., vom Brocke, J., Jung, R., & Seidel, S. (2018) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2018.1451953 · Cited by 404
How affordances of chatbots cross the chasm between social and traditional enterprise systems
Stoeckli, E., Dremel, C., Uebernickel, F., & Brenner, W. (2020) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-019-00359-6 · Cited by 55
Metadata
- Authors
- Paré, G.
- Venue
- Communications of the Association for Information Systems
- Publisher
- Association for Information Systems
- Published
- 2004
- Volume
- 13
- ISSN
- 1529-3181 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W182190200
- Cited by
- 339
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 19.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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.
