This paper examines the role played by context and subjectivity in the epistemology of information systemsresearch. Different assumptional frameworks underlying the opposing worldviews of positivism andinterpretivism explain the differing treatments of context and subjectivity within these two frames of referenceand thus the different criteria for quality that can be applied to each. The discussion examines how embeddedassumptions concerning appropriate process and the ways in which we account for the research process affectthe value-judgments applied to various research studies. It is argued that subjectivity has an important roleto play in both positivist and interpretive research, but that this role is significant at different stages of theresearch life-cycle. Interpretive research is only indefensible if it is presented in the discourse of the positivisttradition. It is suggested that alternative notions of rigor and generalizability replace these traditions tolegitimize interpretivism. This conclusion has significant implications for how we conduct and generalize fromresearch in the information systems field.
展开▼
