Mixed methods in information systems research: epistemological and methodological challenges

Amandine Pascal, Bénédicte Aldebert, Audrey Rouzies

Abstract


Mixed methods are increasingly popular in social sciences thanks to their ability to generate new research results that differ from traditional methodologies. As such, because they offer a wide range of methodological choices, these methods are fruitful for the Information Systems domain (Mingers, 2001; Venkatesh et al., 2013). However, we do not have any knowledge of how they are actually mobilized. The aim of this article is to better understand the use of mixed methods by IS researchers. More specifically, based on a comparative literature review, we identify trends in how these methods are used and in their epistemological anchor. To do so, a bibliographic analysis of seven IS journals has been conducted over the period 2008-2016. This analysis allows us to bring a critical lens on the use of mixed methods in IS and thus completes the two bibliographical studies developed by Mingers (2001) and Venkatesh et al. (2013). By anchoring its reflection in epistemology, this analysis differs from previous ones, making it original and powerful. It allows us to propose recommendations for authors wishing to implement this type of method.


Keywords


Mixed methods, information system, epistemology, qualitative methods, quantitative methods

Full Text:

 Subscribers Only

References


Aldebert B. & Rouziès A. (2014) « Quelle place pour les méthodes mixtes dans la recherche francophone en management ? », Management International, Vol. 19, n°1, p. 43-60.

Allard-Poesi F., Durcker-Godard C., Ehlinger S. (2003), « Analyses de représentations et de discours » in R.A. Thiétard, Méthodes de recherche en management, p. 449-475.

Avenier M.-J. & Thomas C. (2011), « Mixer quali et quanti pour quoi faire ? Méthodologie sans épistémologie n’est que ruine de la réflexion ! », Atelier méthodologie de l’AIMS, Journée « Les approches mixtes : combiner quantitatif et qualitatif », Caen, France.

Avenier M.J. & Gavard-Perret, M.L. (2012), « Inscrire son projet de recherche dans un cadre épistémologique » in Gavard-Perret, M.-L., Gotteland, D., Haon, C. & Joliber, A. (eds) Méthodologie de la recherche en sciences de gestion. Réussir son mémoire ou sa thèse, 2ème édition, Paris, Pearson Education France, p. 11-62.

Avenier M.J. & Thomas C. (2015), “Finding one’s way around various methodological guidelines for doing rigorous case studies: A comparison of four epistemological frameworks”, Systèmes d'Information & Management, vol. 20, p. 61-98.

Bhaskar R. (1978), A Realist Theory of Science, Hassocks: Harvester Press.

Bhaskar R. (1979), The Possibility of Naturalism, Brighton: Harvester Press.

Bryman A. (1988), Quantity and quality in social research, Routledge: London.

Castelli L., Crescentini A., Pagnossin E. (2014), « Méthodes mixtes de recherche en éducation : introduction », Formation et pratiques d’enseignement en question, vol. 17, p. 19-30.

*Choudhury V., Lopes A.B., Arthur D. (2010), “IT Careers camp: an early intervention strategy to increase IS enrollments”, Information Systems Research, vol. 21, n° 1, p. 1-14.

Creswell J.W. (2003), Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. Thousand Oaks, Calif : Sage Publications.

Creswell J.W. (2011), « Controversies in mixed methods research » in N.K. Denzil & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research, Thousand Oaks, 4th ed., p. 269-284.

Creswell J.W. & Garrett A. L. (2008), « The Movement of Mixed Method Research and the Role of Educators », South African Journal of Education, vol. 28, p. 321-333.

Creswell J.W., Plano Clark V., Gutmann M. L., Hanson W. E. (2003), « Advanced mixed methods research designs », Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, p. 209-240.

Creswell J.W. & Plano Clark V. (2007), Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.

Creswell J.W. & Plano Clark V. (2011), Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 2nd edition. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.

*de Guinea A. O. & Webster J. (2013), « An Investigation of Information Systems Use Patterns: Technological Events as Triggers, the Effect of Time, and Consequences for Performance”, MIS Quarterly, vol. 37, n°4, p. 1165-1188.

*Deng X. N., Wang T., Galliers R. D. (2015), “More than providing ‘solutions’: towards an understanding of customer‐oriented citizenship behaviours of IS professionals”, Information Systems Journal, vol. 25, n°5, p. 489-530.

Denzin N.K. & Lincoln Y.S. (2005), The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Sage.

Feilzer M.Y. (2010), « Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm », Journal of Mixed Methods Research, vol. 4, p. 6-16.

*Feller J., Finnegan P., Fitzgerald B., Hayes J. (2008), “From peer production to productization: A study of socially enabled business exchanges in open source service networks”, Information Systems Research, vol. 19, n°4, p. 475-493.

*Furneaux B. & Wade M. (2011), “An Exploration of Organizational Level Information Systems Discontinuance Intentions”, MIS Quarterly, vol. 35, n°3, p. 573-598.

Gavard-Perret M.L. & Helme-Guizon M. (2012), “Choisir parmi les techniques spécifiques d'analyse qualitative”, dans Gavard-Perret, M. L., Gotteland, D., Haon, C., & Jolibert, A. (2012). Méthodologie de la recherche : réussir son mémoire ou sa thèse en science de gestion, Pearson Education.

Giddings L. S. (2006), “Mixed-methods research Positivism dressed in drag ?”, Journal of research in nursing, vol. 11, n°3, p. 195-203.

Greene J.C., Caracelli V.J., Graham W.F. (1989), « Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-methods evaluation designs », Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, vol. 11, n°3, p. 255-274.

Glaser B.G. & Strauss A.L. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co.

Hall R. (2012), « Mixed methods: in search of a paradigm », [WWW document] http://www.auamii.com/proceedings_Phuket_2012/Hall.pdf

*Han W., Ada S., Sharman R., Rao H. R. (2015), “Campus Emergency Notification Systems : An examination of Factors Affecting Compliance with Alerts”, MIS Quarterly, vol. 39, n°4, p. 909-929.

*Hansen J. M. & Walden E. (2013), “The role of restrictiveness of use in determining ethical and legal awareness of unauthorized file sharing”, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, vol. 14, n°9, p. 521-549.

*Ibrahim M., Ribbers P. M., Bettonvil B. (2012), “Human‐knowledge resources and interorganisational systems”, Information Systems Journal, vol. 22, n°2, p. 129-149.

Jick T. D. (1979), « Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action », Administrative science quarterly, p. 602-611.

Johnson R. B. & Onwuegbuzie A. J. (2004), “Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come”, Educational researcher, vol. 33, n°7, p. 14-26.

Johnson R. B., Onwuegbuzie A., Turner L. (2007), « Toward a definition of mixed methods research », Journal of Mixed Methods Research, vol. 1, p. 112-133.

*Johnston A. C., Warkentin M., Siponen M. T. (2015), “An Enhanced Fear Appeal Rhetorical Framework: Leveraging Threats to the Human Asset Through Sanctioning Rhetoric”, MIS Quarterly, vol. 39, n°1, p. 113-134.

*Kane G. C. & Labianca G. (2011), “IS avoidance in health-care groups: A multilevel investigation”, Information Systems Research, vol. 22, n°3, p. 504-522.

Kaplan B. & Duchon D. (1988), « Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in information systems research: a case study », MIS quarterly, p. 571-586.

Kuhn T. S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

*Lee G. & Xia W. (2010), “Toward agile: an integrated analysis of quantitative and qualitative field data on software development agility”, MIS Quarterly, vol. 34, n°1, p. 87-114.

*Li M., Jiang Q., Tan C. H., Wei K. K. (2014), “Enhancing user-game engagement through software gaming elements”, Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 30, n°4, p.115-150.

Le Moigne J.L. (1995), Les Epistémologies constructivistes, Que Sais-Je ?, 1ère édit., 2007, 2nde édit., Paris.

Maxcy S. J. (2003), « Pragmatic threads in mixed methods research in the social sciences: the search for multiple modes of inquiry and the end of the philosophy of formalism » in Tashakkori, A., & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, p. 51-89.

Mertens D. M. (2003), « Mixed methods and the politics of human research: the transformative emancipatory perspective » in Tashakkori, A., & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, p. 135-166.

*Michel S. & Cocula F. (2014), « Adaptation au domaine bancaire du modèle d'évaluation du succès des systèmes d'information (ISSM) de Delone et McLean », Systèmes d'Information & Management, vol. 19, n°1, p. 7-49.

Miles M. B. & Huberman A. M. (2003), Analyse des données qualitatives. De Boeck Supérieur.

Mingers J. (2001), « Combining IS research methods: towards a pluralist methodology », Information systems research, vol. 12, n°3, p. 240-259.

Molina-Azorin J. (2010), « The Use and Added Value of Mixed Methods in Management Research », Journal of Mixed Methods Research, vol. 5, p. 7-24.

Morgan D. L. (2007), « Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained, Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods », Journal of Mixed Methods Research, vol. 1, p.48-76.

Morse J. M. (1991), « Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation », Nursing Research, vol. 40, p.120–123.

Morse J. M., Niehaus L., Wolfe R. R., Wilkins S. (2006), « The role of the theoretical drive in maintaining validity in mixed-method research », Qualitative Research in Psychology, vol. 3, n°4, p.279-291.

Morse J. (2003), « Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design » in Tashakkori, A., & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, p. 189-208.

Morse J. (2010), “Procedures and practice of mixed method design: maintaining control, rigor, and complexity” in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie C. Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research, Sage, California, p. 339-352.

*Moser C., Ganley D., Groenewegen P. (2013), “Communicative genres as organising structures in online communities–of team players and storytellers”, Information Systems Journal, vol. 23, n°6, p. 551-567.

*Mouakhar K. & Tellier A. (2013), “How combine market and non-market: an empirical taxonomy of OSSC’ strategic behaviors”, Systèmes d'Information et Management, vol. 18, n°3.

Patton M. Q. (2002), Qualitative research and evaluation methods, (3rd ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

*Picoto W. N., Bélanger F., Palma-dos-Reis A. (2014), “An organizational perspective on m-business: usage factors and value determination”, European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 23, n°5, p. 571-592.

*Posey C., Roberts T., Lowry P. B., Bennett B., Courtney J. (2013), “Insiders’ protection of organizational information assets: Development of a systematics-based taxonomy and theory of diversity for protection-motivated behaviors”, MIS Quarterly, vol. 37, n°4, p. 1189-1210.

Reichardt C. S. & Cook T. D. (1979), « Beyond qualitative versus quantitative methods » in T. D. Cook & C. S. Reichardt (Eds.), Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, p.7- 32.

*Remus U. & Wiener M. (2010), “A multi‐method, holistic strategy for researching critical success factors in IT projects”, Information Systems Journal, vol. 20, n°1, p. 25-52.

*Spears J. L. & Barki H. (2010), “User participation in information systems security risk management”, MIS quarterly, p. 503-522.

*Tan C. H., Sutanto J., Phang C. W., Gasimov A. (2014), “Using personal communication technologies for commercial communications: a cross-country investigation of email and SMS”, Information Systems Research, vol. 25, n°2, p. 307-327.

Tashakkori A. & Teddlie C. (1998), Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, Sage.

Tashakkori A. & Teddlie C. (2003), Handbook of mixed-methods in social & behavioral research, Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.

Tashakkori A. & Teddlie C. (2008), « Quality of inferences in mixed methods research » in Bergman, M. (Ed.) Advances in mixed methods research: Theories and applications, London, UK: Sage.

Teddlie C. & Tashakkori A. (2009), Foundations of Mixed Methods Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Tsoukas H. (2011), “Craving for Generality and Small-N Studies: A Wittgensteinian Approach towards the Epistemology of the Particular in Organization and Management Studies” in David A. Buchanan and Alan Bryman (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Research Methods, Paperback Edition, p.285-301.

Tashakkori A. & Teddlie C. (2010), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd Edition), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

*Turel O. & Bart C. (2014), “Board-level IT governance and organizational performance”, European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 23, n°2, p. 223-239.

Venkatesh V., Brown S. A., Bala H. (2013), « Bridging the Qualitative-Quantitative Divide: Guidelines for Conducting Mixed Methods Research in Information Systems », MIS quarterly, vol. 37, n°1, p. 21-54.

Walsh I. (2014), « A Strategic Path to study IT Use through Users’ IT Culture and IT Needs: A Mixed-Method Grounded Theory », Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 23, n° 2, p. 146–173.

Wittink M.N., Barg F.K., Gallo J.J. (2006), « The unwritten rules of talking to doctors about depression », Annals of Family Medicine, vol. 4, p. 302–309.

Wu P. F. (2011), “A mixed methods approach to technology acceptance research”, Journal of the AIS.

Zachariadis M., Scott S., Barrett M. (2013), « Methodological implications of critical realism for mixed-methods research », MIS Quarterly, vol. 37, n°3, p. 855- 879.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.9876/sim.v23i3.831

Copyright (c) 2018 Systèmes d'Information et Management (French Journal of Management Information Systems)