Theories Used in Information Systems Research: Insights from Complex Network Analysis

Abstract:Effective application of theory is critical to the development of new knowledge in information systems (IS) research. However, theory foundations of IS research are understudied. Using Complex Network Analysis, we analyze theory usage in IS research published in two premier journals (MIS Quarterly and Information Systems Research) from 1998 to 2006. Four principal findings emerge from our analysis. First, in contrast with prior studies which found a lack of dominant theories at an aggregate level, we find stronger dominance of theory usage within individual streams of IS research. Second, IS research draws from a diverse set of disciplines, with Psychology emerging as a consistently dominant source of theories for IS during our study period. Moreover, theories originating in IS were found to be widely used in two streams of research ("IS development" and "IT and Individuals" streams) and more sparingly used in other streams. Third, IS research tends to form clusters of theory usage, with little crossover across clusters. Moreover, streams of IS research constitute distinct clusters of theory usage. Finally, theories originating from Economics, Strategy, and Organization Science tend to be used together, whereas those originating from Psychology, Sociology, and IS tend to be used together. Taken together, our results contribute to a scholarly understanding of theory foundations of IS research and illustrate methodological innovations in the study of theory use by employing Complex Network Analysis.Keywords: IS theory, Complex Network Analysis, originating disciplines, IS identity, IS research issuesINTRODUCTIONExplicating the theory foundations of Information Systems (IS) research is critical to knowledge development, given that "theory is the currency of our scholarly realm" (Corley and Gioia 2011, p. 12). Theories are used to provide guidance on analysis, explanation, and prediction of phenomena and for providing design and action guidelines (Gregor 2006). Put simply, while an empirical analysis may suggest correlated phenomena, theory tells us why they are correlated (Sutton and Staw 1995). Given the salience of theory in explaining why phenomena occur, leading journals strongly recommend that manuscripts be firmly rooted in theory (Straub 2009). Indeed, an enduring theme in the literature is continued calls for "good theory" in IS research (Watson 2001) and development of our "own" theory (Weber 2003). The critical importance of theory in knowledge development would suggest a wellspring of scholarship on theory and its application in IS research. Numerous studies have examined theory structure, philosophical issues, types of theory, epistemology, and sociopolitical issues related to the role of theory in research (e.g., Davison et al. 2012; Gregor 2006; Markus and Robey 1988; Ngwenyama and Lee 1997; Weber 1987). In contrast, very few studies have examined questions related to the application of theory in IS research. Barkhi and Sheetz (2001) examine theories used in two leading journals by tabulating their occurrence. Similarly, Lee et al. (2004) develop a three-dimensional ontology for mapping theory use in leading IS journals, again drawing insights from tabulations of theory usage. In both these prior studies, a key finding is theoretical diversity, i.e., many different theories and few used often. However, insights are constrained by the use of descriptive statistics such as tabulations, a limitation acknowledged by the authors, who suggest that future researchers employ more rigorous analytical methods that "help to provide richer findings" (Lee et al. 2004, p. 560). In this study, we respond to this call by using Complex Network Analysis (CNA) to examine networks of articles and theories in IS research: which theories are used, in which research streams,1 from which disciplines are they drawn, whether the usage of some theories greatly exceeds the average, and how are articles and theories in IS research interrelated in terms of theory usage and research contexts. …