liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information systems research
Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, VITS - Development of Informations Systems and Work Context. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
2012 (English)In: European Journal of Information Systems, ISSN 0960-085X, E-ISSN 1476-9344, Vol. 21, no 2, 135-146 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Qualitative research is often associated with interpretivism, but alternatives do exist. Besides critical research and sometimes positivism, qualitative research in information systems can be performed following a paradigm of pragmatism. This paradigm is associated with action, intervention and constructive knowledge. This paper has picked out interpretivism and pragmatism as two possible and important research paradigms for qualitative research in information systems. It clarifies each paradigm in an ideal-typical fashion and then conducts a comparison revealing commonalities and differences. It is stated that a qualitative researcher must either adopt an interpretive stance aiming towards an understanding that is appreciated for being interesting; or a pragmatist stance aiming for constructive knowledge that is appreciated for being useful in action. The possibilities of combining pragmatism and interpretivism in qualitative research in information systems are analysed. A research case (conducted through action research (AR) and design research (DR)) that combines interpretivism and pragmatism is used as an illustration. It is stated in the paper that pragmatism has influenced IS research to a fairly large extent, albeit in a rather implicit way. The paradigmatic foundations are seldom known and explicated. This paper contributes to a further clarification of pragmatism as an explicit research paradigm for qualitative research in information systems. Pragmatism is considered an appropriate paradigm for AR and DR.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Palgrave Macmillan , 2012. Vol. 21, no 2, 135-146 p.
Keyword [en]
qualitative research, interpretivism, pragmatism, paradigm, information systems
National Category
Social Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-76528DOI: 10.1057/ejis.2011.54ISI: 000301619100003OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-76528DiVA: diva2:515141
Available from: 2012-04-12 Created: 2012-04-11 Last updated: 2017-12-07

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(402 kB)41518 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 402 kBChecksum SHA-512
c6874f82705366c8c93ce323530626fbd7c1a4885c220b50426ba56262211fabedf980bfc8b9cbbdbd8933fe2cf419b560b0033ecfb7aec8569ba7f1d3021fbb
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Goldkuhl, Göran

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Goldkuhl, Göran
By organisation
VITS - Development of Informations Systems and Work ContextFaculty of Arts and Sciences
In the same journal
European Journal of Information Systems
Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 41518 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 2242 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf