Thinking About Measures and Measurement in Positivist Research: A Proposal for Refocusing on Fundamentals

References

• Bagozzi RP (1984) A prospectus for theory construction in marketing. J. Marketing 48(Winter):11–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bagozzi RP (2011) Measurement and meaning in information systems and organizational research: Methodological and philosophical foundations. MIS Quart. 35(2):261–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Becker HS (1996) The epistemology of qualitative research. Jessor R, Colby A, Shweder RA, eds. Ethnography and Human Development (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 53–72.Google Scholar
• Bhaskar R (1979) The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences (Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, NJ).Google Scholar
• Birks DF, Fernandez W, Levina N, Nasirin S (2013) Grounded theory method in information systems research: Its nature, diversity, and opportunities. Eur. J. Inform. Systems 22(1):1–8.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borsboom D (2009) Book review: Educational Measurement, 4th ed. Structural Equation Modeling 16(4):702–711.Google Scholar
• Borsboom D, Mellenberg GJ, van Heerdon J (2004) The concept of validity. Psych. Rev. 111(4):1061–1071.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borsboom D, Cramer AOJ, Kievit RA, Scholten AZ, Franic S (2009) The end of construct validity. Lissitz RW, ed. The Concept of Validity: Revisions, New Directions, and Applications (Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC), 135–170.Google Scholar
• Boudreau M-C, Gefen D, Straub DW (2001) Validation in information systems research: A state-of-the-art assessment. MIS Quart. 25(1):1–16.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bryant A, Charmaz K (2007) Grounded theory in historical perspective: An epistemological account. Bryant A, Charmaz K, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory (Sage Publications, London), 31–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burton-Jones A (2009) Minimizing method bias through programmatic research. MIS Quart. 33(3):445–471.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell DT (1974) Evolutionary epistemology. Schilpp PA, ed. The Philosophy of Karl Popper, Vol. 1 (Open Court, La Salle, IL),413–463.Google Scholar
• Cenfetelli R (2004) Inhibitors and enablers as dual factor concepts in technology usage. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 5(11–12):472–492.Google Scholar
• Churchill GA (1979) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J. Marketing Res. 16:64–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Copi I (1986) Introduction to Logic, 7th ed. (Macmillan, New York).Google Scholar
• Corbin J, Strauss A (1990) Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociol. 13(1):3–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Corbin J, Strauss A (2015) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 4th ed. (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Davis F (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and end user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart. 13(3):318–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Sci. 35(8):982–1003.Link, Google Scholar
• DeLone WH, McLean ER (1992) Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Inform. Systems Res. 3(1):60–95.Link, Google Scholar
• Dimoka A, Pavlou PA, Davis FD (2007) Neuro-IS: The potential of cognitive neuroscience for information systems research. Rivard S, Webster J, eds. Proc. 28th Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems, Montréal, 1–20.Google Scholar
• Easterby-Smith M, Golden-Biddle K, Locke K (2008) Working with pluralism: Determining quality in qualitative research. Organ. Res. Methods 11:419–429.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR (2001) Multidimensional constructs in organizational behavior research: An integrative analytic framework. Organ. Res. Methods 4(2):144–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Acad. Management Rev. 14:532–550.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Graebner ME (2007) Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Acad. Management J. 50(1):25–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ericsson KA, Simon HA (1993) Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data, revised ed. (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Evermann J, Tate M (2011) Fitting covariance models for theory generation. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 12(9):632–661.Google Scholar
• Feldman JM, Lynch JG (1988) Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. J. Appl. Psych. 73(3):421–435.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flick U (2009) An Introduction to Qualitative Research, 4th ed. (Sage Publications, London).Google Scholar
• Gefen D, Karahanna E, Straub DW (2003) Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quart. 27(1):1–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glaser BG, Holton J (2004) Remodeling grounded theory. Forum: Qualitative Soc. Res. 5(2):1–22. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs040245.Google Scholar
• Glaser BG, Strauss AL (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory (Aldine, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Glaser R (1978) Theoretical Sensitivity (Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA).Google Scholar
• Goertz G (2006) Social Science Concepts (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Grace RC (2001) On the failure of operationism. Theory Psych. 11(1):5–33.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grover V, Lyytinen K (2015) New state of play in information systems research: The push to the edges. MIS Quart. 39(2):271–296.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heider KG (1988) The Rashomon effect: When ethnographers disagree. Amer. Anthropologist 90(1):73–81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hofweber T (2014) Logic and ontology. Zalta EN, ed. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fall 2014 edition (Stanford University, Stanford, CA). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2014/entries/logic-ontology/.Google Scholar
• Houston MB (2004) Assessing the validity of secondary data proxies for marketing constructs. J. Bus. Res. 57:154–161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Im G, Wang J (2007) A TETRAD-based approach for theory development in information systems research. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems 20:322–345.Google Scholar
• Jarvis CB, MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff NP (2003) A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. J. Consumer Res. 30:199–218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karabenick SA, Woolley ME, Friedel JM, Ammon BV, Blazevski J, Bonney CR, Groot ED, et al. (2007) Cognitive processing of self-report items in educational research: Do they think what we mean? Educational Psych. 42(3):139–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ketchen DJ, Ireland RD, Baker LT (2012) The use of archival proxies in strategic management studies: Castles made of sand? Organ. Res. Methods 16(1):32–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim SS, Malhotra NK (2005) A longitudinal model of continued IS use: An integrative view of four mechanisms underlying post-adoption phenomena. Management Sci. 51(5):741–755.Link, Google Scholar
• King WR, Liu CZ, Haney MH (2007) Method effects in IS survey research: An assessment and recommendations. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems 20:457–482.Google Scholar
• Klenk V (1994) Understanding Symbolic Logic, 3rd ed. (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Law KS, Wong C-S, Mobley WH (1998) Toward a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs. Acad. Management Rev. 23(4):741–755.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee AS (1994) Electronic mail as a medium for rich communication: An empirical investigation using hermeneutic interpretation. MIS Quart. 18(2):143–157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee AS, Hubona GS (2009) A scientific basis for rigor in information systems research. MIS Quart. 33(2):237–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lissitz RW, ed. (2009) The Concept of Validity: Revisions, New Directions, and Applications (Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC).Google Scholar
• Lissitz RW, Samuelson K (2007) A suggested change in terminology and emphasis regarding validity and education. Educational Researcher 36(8):437–448.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Locke K (2001) Grounded Theory in Management Research (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Lofland J, Snow DA, Anderson L, Lofland LH (2006) Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis (Wadsworth, Belmont, CA).Google Scholar
• MacCorquodale K, Meehl PE (1948) On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. Psych. Rev. 55:95–107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff PM, Jarvis CB (2005) The problem of measurement model misspecification in behavioral and organizational research and some recommended solutions. J. Appl. Psych. 90(4):710–730.Crossref, Google Scholar
• MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff PM, Podsakoff NP (2011) Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: Integrating new and existing techniques. MIS Quart. 35(2):293–334.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Markus ML (1983) Power, politics, and MIS implementation. Comm. ACM 26(6):430–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matavire R, Brown I (2013) Profiling grounded theory approaches in information systems research. Eur. J. Inform. Systems 22:119–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mathieu JE, DeShon RP, Bergh DD (2008) Mediational inferences in organizational research: Then, now, and beyond. Organ. Res. Methods 11(2):203–223.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meade AW, Craig SB (2012) Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psych. Methods 17(3):437–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Messick S (1989) Validity. Linn RL, ed. Educational Measurement, 3rd ed. (Macmillan, New York), 13–103.Google Scholar
• Michell J (1997) Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology. British J. Psych. 88:355–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mingers J (2001) Combining IS research methods: Towards a pluralistic methodology. Inform. Systems Res. 12(3):240–259.Link, Google Scholar
• Moore GC, Benbasat I (1991) Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting and information technology innovation. Inform. Systems Res. 2:192–222.Link, Google Scholar
• Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• O’Reilly K, Paper D, Marx S (2012) Demystifying grounded theory for business research. Organ. Res. Methods 15(2):247–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ortiz de Guinea A, Webster J (2013) An investigation of information system use patterns: Technological events as triggers, the effects of time, and consequences for performance. MIS Quart. 37(4):1165–1188.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pare G (2004) Investigating information systems with positivist case research. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems 13:233–264.Google Scholar
• Payne S, Finch JF, Tremble TR Jr (2003) Validating surrogate measures of psychological constructs: The application of construct equivalence to archival data. Organ. Res. Methods 6(3):363–382.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petter S, McLean ER (2009) A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and McLean IS success model: An examination of IS success at the individual level. Inform. and Management 46:159–166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reichardt CS, Rallis SF (1994) Qualitative and quantitative inquiries are not incompatible: A call for a new partnership. Reichardt CS, Rallis SF, eds. The Qualitative-Quantitative Debate: New Perspectives, Vol. 61 (Jossey Bass, San Francisco), 85–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rossiter JR (2002) The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 19:305–335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sarker S, Lee AS (2003) Using a case study to test the role of three key social enablers in ERP implementation. Inform. and Management 40(8):813–829.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sartori G (1970) Concept misformation in comparative politics. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 64(4):1033–1053.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schriesheim CA, Cogliser CC, Scandura TA, Lankau MJ, Powers KJ (1999) An empirical comparison of approaches for quantitatively assessing the content adequacy of paper-and-pencil measurement instruments. Organ. Res. Methods 2(April):140–156.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Segars AH, Grover V (1993) Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: A confirmatory factor analysis. MIS Quart. 18(4):517–525.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shanks G (2002) Guidelines for conducting positivist case study research in information systems. Australasian J. Inform. Systems 10(1):76–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sharma R, Yetton P, Crawford J (2009) Estimating the effect of common method variance: The method-method pair technique with an illustration from TAM research. MIS Quart. 33(3):473–490.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shoemaker PJ, Tankard JW, Lasorsa DL (2004) How to Build Social Science Theories (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spector PE, Brannick MT (2011) Methodological urban legends: The misuse of statistical control variables. Organ. Res. Methods 14(2):287–305.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spiggle S (1994) Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data in consumer research. J. Consumer Res. 21(3):491–503.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stern PN (2007) On solid ground: Essential properties for growing grounded theory. Bryant A, Charmaz K, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory (Sage Publications, London), 114–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stevens SS (1946) On the theory of scales of measurement. Science 103:667–680.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stock B (1983) The Implications of Literacy: Written Language and Models of Interpretation in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Straub DW (1989) Validating instruments in MIS research. MIS Quart. 13(2):147–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Straub DW, Boudreau M-C, Gefen D (2004) Validation guidelines for IS positivist research. Comm. AIS 13:380–427.Google Scholar
• Strauss A (1987) Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sun H, Fang Y, Hsieh JP-A (2014) Consuming information systems: An economic model of user satisfaction. Decision Support Systems 57:188–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tambe P, Hitt LM (2014) Measuring information technology spillovers. Inform. Systems. Res. 25(1):53–71.Link, Google Scholar
• Todd PA, Benbasat I (1987) Process tracing methods in decision support systems research: Exploring the black box. MIS Quart. 11(4):493–512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trenkler G, Stahlecker P (1996) Dropping variables versus use of proxy variables in linear regression. J. Statist. Planning Inference 50:65–75.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Urquhart C, Lehmann H, Myers MD (2010) Putting the “theory” back into grounded theory: Guidelines for grounded theory studies in information systems. Inform. Systems J. 20:357–381.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Leeuwen TM (1981) Surplus of Meaning: Ontology and Eschatology in the Philosophy of Paul Ricoeur (Rodopi B.V., Amsterdam).Google Scholar
• Van Maanen J (1979) The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. Admin. Sci. Quart. 24(4):539–550.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Maanen J, Pentland BT (1994) Cops and auditors: The rhetoric of records. Sitkin SB, Bies RJ, eds. The Legalistic Organization (Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA), 53–90.Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Brown SA, Bala H (2013) Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems. MIS Quart. 37(1):21–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Webb E, Campbell DT, Schwartz RD, Sechrest L (2000) Unobtrusive Measures: Non-Reactive Research in the Social Sciences (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Wennberg K (2005) Entrepreneurship research through databases: measurement and design issues. New England J. Entrepreneurship 8(2):9–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yin RK (1994) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 2nd ed., Vol. 5 (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Zetterberg HL (1965) On Theory and Verification in Sociology, 3rd ed. (Bedminster Press, New York).Google Scholar