Research Commentary—Generalizability of Information Systems Research Using Student Subjects—A Reflection on Our Practices and Recommendations for Future Research

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1120.0423

References

  • Agarwal R, Karahanna E. Time flies when you're having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quart. (2000) 24(4):665–694CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (1991) 50(2):179–211CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Benbasat I, Benb . Laboratory experiments in information systems with a focus on individuals: A critical appraisal. Harvard Business School Research Colloquium: Information Systems Research Challenge—Experimental Research Methods (1989) (Harvard Business School Press, Boston) 33–47Google Scholar
  • Benbasat I, Barki H. Quo vadis, TAM. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems (2007) 8(4):211–218Google Scholar
  • Berthon P, Pitt L, Ewing M, Carr CL. Potential research space in MIS: A framework for envisioning and evaluating research replication, extension, and generation. Inform. Systems Res. (2002) 13(4):416–427LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Burnett JJ, Dunne PM. An appraisal of the use of student subjects in marketing research. J. Bus. Res. (1986) 14(4):329–343CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Campbell DT. Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psychol. Bull. (1957) 54(4):297–312CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Campbell DT. Relabeling internal and external validity for applied social scientists. New Directions for Program Evaluation (1986) 1986(31):67–77CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Cook T, Campbell D. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings (1979) (Houghton-Mifflin, Boston) Google Scholar
  • Cronbach LJ. Designing Evaluations of Educational and Social Programs (1982) (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco) Google Scholar
  • Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Sci. (1989) 35(8):982–1003LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Dennis A, Aronson J, Heninger W, Walker E. Structuring time and task in electronic brainstorming. MIS Quart. (1999) 23(1):95–108CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fuller RM, Dennis AR. Does fit matter? The impact of task-technology fit and appropriation on team performance in repeated tasks. Inform. Systems Res. (2009) 20(1):2–17LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Gefen D, Karahanna E, Straub DW. Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quart. (2003) 27(1):51–90CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gordon ME, Slade LA, Schmitt N. The “science of the sophomore” revisited: From conjecture to empiricism. Acad. Management Rev. (1986) 11(1):191–207Google Scholar
  • Gordon M, Slade L, Schmitt N. Student guinea pigs: Porcine predictors and particularistic phenomena. Acad. Management Rev. (1987) 12(1):160–163CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Greenberg J. The college sophomore as guinea pig: Setting the record straight. Acad. Management Rev. (1987) 12(1):157–159CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Griffith T, Northcraft G. Cognitive elements in the implementation of new technology: Can less information provide more benefits? MIS Quart. (1996) 20(1):99–110CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hughes CT, Gibson ML. Students as surrogates for managers in a decision-making environment: An experimental study. J. Management Inform. Systems (1991) 8(2):153–166CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • King W, He J. External validity in IS survey research. Comm. Assoc. Inform. (2005) 880(894):894Google Scholar
  • Kumar N, Benbasat I. The influence of recommendations and consumer reviews on evaluations of websites. Inform. Systems Res. (2006) 17(4):425–439LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Lee AS, Baskerville RL. Generalizing generalizability in information systems research. Inform. Systems Res. (2003) 14(3):221–243LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Lincoln Y, Guba E. Naturalistic Inquiry (1985) (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks) CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Locke E, Locke AE. Generalizing from laboratory to field: Ecological validity or abstraction of essential elements. Generalizing From Laboratory to Field Settings: Research Findings From Industrial-Organizational Psychology, Organizational Behavior, and Human Resource Management (1986) (Lexington Books, Toronto) Google Scholar
  • Matt GE, Schulze R, Holling H, Böhning D. Will it work in Munster? Meta analysis and the empirical generalization of causal relationships. Meta Analysis: New Developments and Applications in Medical and Social Sciences (2003) (Springer, Berlin) 113–139Google Scholar
  • Mook DG. In defense of external invalidity. Amer. Psychol. (1983) 38(4):379–387CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Nadkarni S, Gupta R. A task-based model of perceived Website complexity. MIS Quart. (2007) 31(3):501–524CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Park CW, Lessig VP. Students and housewives: Differences in susceptibility to reference group influences. J. Consumer Res. (1977) 4(2):102–110CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Piccoli G, Ahmad R, Ives B. Web-based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS Quart. (2001) 25(4):401–426CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Riemenschneider CK, Harrison DA, Mykytyn PP. Understanding IT adoption decisions in small business: Integrating current theories. Inform. Management (2003) 40(4):269–285CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rosenthal R, Rosnow R. Essentials of Behavioural Research (2008) (McGraw Hill, New York) Google Scholar
  • Schultz DP. The human subject in psychological research. Psychol. Bull. (1969) 72(3):214–228CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sears DO. College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of human nature. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1986) 51(3):515–530CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Seddon PB, Scheepers R, Staub D, Klein S. Other-settings generalization in IS research. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems (2006) Milwaukee, WI:1141–1158Google Scholar
  • Smart R. Subject selection bias in psychological research. Canadian Psychologist (1966) 7a(2):115–121CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Shadish W, Cook T, Campbell D. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized casual inference (2002) 2nd ed.(Houghton-Mifflin, Boston) Google Scholar
  • Straub D. Validating instruments in MIS research. MIS Quart. (1989) 13(2):147–169CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Swieringa RJ, Weick KE. An assessment of laboratory experiments in accounting. J. Accounting Res. (1982) 20(Supplement):56–101CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Taylor S, Todd P. Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Inform. Systems Res. (1995) 6(2):144–176LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Tiwana A, Konsynski B. Complementarities between organizational IT architecture and governance structure. Inform. Systems Res. (2010) 21(2):288–304LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Tolman E. Performance vectors: An attack on emphasis, effect, and repression. Amer. Psychologist (1959) 14(1):1–7CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Venkatesh V. Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Inform. Systems Res. (2000) 11(4):342–365LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Venkatesh V, Brown S. A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: Adoption determinants and emerging challenges. MIS Quart. (2001) 25(1):71–102CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Venkatesh V, Davis F. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Sci. (2000) 46(2):186–204LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Vessey I, Ramesh V, Glass R. Research in information systems: An empirical study of diversity in the discipline and its journals. J. Management Inform. Systems (2002) 19(2):129–174CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wheeler BC, Valacich JS. Facilitation, GSS, and training as sources of process restrictiveness and guidance for structured group decision making: An empirical assessment. Inform. Systems Res. (1996) 7(4):429–450LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Yin RK. Case Study Research, Design and Methods (2002) 3rd ed.(Sage Publications, Newbuy Park) Google Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.