Abstract
We aim to raise awareness of context by examining its role in empirical research. We apply the dichotomy of universalism and particularism, and discuss the interaction of theory and culture in order to consider the scope of validity for research findings and conclusions. We illustrate our arguments by referencing three cases, each of which has contextual inadequacies. We aim to discourage the conduct of research, and acceptance of papers, that falsely implies universalism, relies on convenient samples or ignores indigenous constructs. We offer specific prescriptions for authors, editors and reviewers to help ensure that both the research context and scope of validity are adequately communicated and understood.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 241-249 |
| Journal | Journal of Information Technology |
| Volume | 31 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| Online published | 30 Jun 2015 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Sept 2016 |
Research Keywords
- context
- particularism
- universalism
- research
- theory
- culture
- INFORMATION-SYSTEMS RESEARCH
- CANONICAL ACTION RESEARCH
- CHINESE MANAGEMENT
- DECISION-MAKING
- ORGANIZATIONAL-CHANGE
- KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
- E-COMMERCE
- GUANXI
- TECHNOLOGY
Publisher's Copyright Statement
- COPYRIGHT TERMS OF DEPOSITED POSTPRINT FILE: The article is protected by copyright and reuse is restricted to non-commercial and no derivative uses. Users may also download and save a local copy of an article accessed in an institutional repository for the user's personal reference. For permission to reuse an article, please follow our Process for Requesting Permission. Davison, R. M., & Martinsons, M. G., Context is king! Considering particularism in research design and reporting. Journal of Information Technology, (31, 3) pp. 241-249. Copyright © 2016 (Association for Information Technology Trust). DOI: 10.1057/jit.2015.19.