The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Review : Power and Information Technology Research: A Metatriangulation Review1, 2
Open accessAbstract
This study uses a metatriangulation approach to explore the relationships between power and information technology impacts, development or deployment, and management or use in a sample of 82 articles from 12 management and MIS journals published between 1980 and 1999. We explore the multiple paradigms underlying this research by applying two sets of lenses to examine the major findings from our sample. The technological imperative, organizational imperative, and emergent perspectives (Markus and Robey 1988) are used as one set of lenses to better understand researchers’ views regarding the causal structure between IT and organizational power. A second set of lenses, which includes the rational, pluralist, interpretive, and radical perspectives (Bradshaw-Camball and Murray 1991), is used to focus on researchers’ views of the role of power and different IT outcomes. We apply each lens separately to describe patterns emerging from the previous power and IT studies. In addition, we discuss the similarities and differences that occur when the two sets of lenses are simultaneously applied. We draw from this discussion to develop metaconjectures, (i.e., propositions that can be interpreted from multiple perspectives), and to suggest guidelines for studying power in future research.
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
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.398 · Cited by 4,957
Information Technology and Organizational Change: Causal Structure in Theory and Research
Markus, M. L., & Robey, D. (1988) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.34.5.583 · Cited by 2,108
Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building
Gioia, D. A., & Pitre, E. (1990) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1990.4310758 · Cited by 1,426
Burkhardt, M. E., & Brass, D. J. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393552 · Cited by 947
Cited by
(2004) · Cited by 5,198
Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews
Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008 · Cited by 1,987
A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Information Systems Research
Okoli, C., & Schabram, K. (2011) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1954824 · Cited by 1,849
A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review
Okoli, C. (2015) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.03743 · Cited by 1,413
(2004) · doi:10.5555/998675.999432 · Cited by 656
Metadata
- Authors
- Jasperson, J. (., Carte, T. A., Saunders, C. S., Butler, B. S., Croes, H. J. P., & Zheng, W.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2002-12-01
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 397-459
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1605686797
- Cited by
- 411
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 39.05
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Review : Power and Information Technology Research: A Metatriangulation Review1, 2. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/4132315
- The paper
- Jasperson, J. (., Carte, T. A., Saunders, C. S., Butler, B. S., Croes, H. J. P., & Zheng, W. (2002). Review : Power and Information Technology Research: A Metatriangulation Review1, 2. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/4132315
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.