|
Track Co-Chairs
Emmanuel Monod
(Universite Paris Dauphine, France)
Rudy Hirschheim
(LSU,
USA)
Description
The current epistemological and philosophical debate in IS relies on
distinctions like positivism versus interpretivism and critical 'research
philosophies'. Other classical distinctions are process approach versus
variance approach or quantitative research versus qualitative research.
However, many alternative research trends in IS tend to challenge these
classical distinctions. This call for papers encourages either classical or
alternative trends that either validate or challenge these distinctions.
They might especially claim for a different status for design sciences,
systems thinking, socio-technical approaches, critical realism or
constructivism in IS.
Another category of paper might compare the epistemological debate in other
sciences, especially in other human and social sciences, like Sociology or
History. For instance, sociology of action is often opposed to different
forms of functionalism, structuralism, or behaviorism. Another important
debate in sociology is about scope. Indeed, holism has been classically
opposed to methodological individualism. In the field of History, the
epistemological debate focused on comprehension versus explanation. As some
historical trends try to understand the historical actor, others try to
explain historical phenomena through the use of a more wide range of
cultural and socio-economical factors.
Papers applying to IS research alternative philosophical and epistemological
distinctions are also encouraged. This might be for instance the case of the
distinction: nomothetical versus ideographical. Are we seeking for universal
laws or are we simply describing peculiar phenomena? Another possible
distinction is descriptive versus normative. Many trends in IS would
probably appear to be more normative than descriptive, especially those
referring to Ethics, Rationalism, Marxism, or ideal-types. Many other
philosophical questions could be addressed. For instance, papers might claim
that little attention has been paid in IS to the consequences the linguistic
turn, or the phenomenological revolution, or conventionalism and relativism
that are so important in other human sciences.
This track expects research papers about philosophy, epistemology and
research methods in IS. If papers relying on classical IS epistemological
and methodological distinctions are welcome, this call for papers also
strongly encourages any alternative philosophical and epistemological
distinctions. They will be especially welcome if they allow fruitful
comparative points of view about IS research or if they allow to make
progresses in the quest for an epistemological or a methodological
pluralism.
Suggested
topics include, but are not limited to, the following:
-
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the distinction between IS
‘philosophies’ like positivism versus interpretivism and critical social
theory
-
Is the debate about process versus variance relevant in IS?
-
Is the distinction between quantitative research versus qualitative
research fruitful in IS?
-
What is the status in IS of design sciences, systems thinking,
socio-technical approaches, critical realism or constructivism?
-
Can we apply the distinction between sociology of action and functionalism
in IS?
-
Is the distinction between comprehension versus explanation relevant for
IS research?
-
Should IS research be rather nomothetical or ideographical?
-
Should IS research be rather descriptive or normative?
-
What are the consequences for IS research of the linguistic turn, the
phenomenological revolution, conventionalism or relativism?
-
What are the conditions of possibility of an epistemological or a
methodological pluralism?
Associate Editors (A-Z)
-
Dick Boland (Case Western Reserve University, USA)
-
Laurence Brooks (Brunel University, UK)
-
Deborah Bunker (University of New South Wales, Australia)
-
Andrew Burton-Jones (Georgia state University, USA)
-
Jim Courtney (University of Central Florida, USA)
-
Wendy Currie (University of Warwick, UK)
-
Alessandro D’Atri (University of Rome LUISS, Italy)
-
Anita Greenhill (University of Manchester, UK)
-
Marco de Marco (Universita Catholica de Milano, Italy)
-
John Haynes (University of Central Florida, USA)
-
Juhani Iivari (Universty of Oulu, Finland)
-
Lucas Introna (University of Lancaster, UK)
-
Henri Isaac (Paris Dauphine University, France)
-
Michel Kalika (Paris Dauphine University, France)
-
Kalle Lyytinen (Case Western Reserve University, USA)
-
David Paradice (Florida State University, USA)
-
Suzanne Rivard (HEC Montréal, Canada)
-
Florence Rodhain (University of Montpellier II, France)
-
Ulrike Schultze (Southern Methodist University, USA)
-
Maddalena Sorrentino (Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy)
-
Erik Stolterman (University of Umea, Sweden)
-
Elke Wolf (University of Auckland, New Zealand)
|
