Cited by 344Information Systems Theories and ImplementationBusiness Strategies and Management Researchscientometrics and bibliometrics research

Evaluating and Developing Theories in the Information Systems Discipline

Open access
Monash University, Weber, Ron·2012·Journal of the Association for Information Systems

Abstract

This paper articulates a framework and criteria that can be used to evaluate the quality of theories. While the framework and criteria have general applicability, my focus is the evaluation of theories within the information systems discipline. To illustrate the usefulness of the framework and criteria, I show how they can be employed to pinpoint the strengths and weaknesses of a theory which, based upon citation evidence, has had a significant impact on other researchers within the information systems discipline. Because the evaluation of existing theories often provides the basis for refining existing theories or building new theories, I also show how the framework and criteria can be used to inform the development of high-quality theory.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.17705/1jais.00284

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

8 of the 79 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Monash University, & Weber, R.
Affiliations
CPA Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Weber, Ron
Venue
Journal of the Association for Information Systems
Published
2012-01
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
1-30
ISSN
1536-9323 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W110163661
Cited by
344
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 8
FWCI
97.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the Association for Information Systems (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of the Association for Information Systems (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian National University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Business Strategies and Management Research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Keywords
theory evaluation, theory development, information systems theory, evaluation criteria, citation analysis, theory refinement, research quality

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