A simple idea underpins the scientific process: All results should be subject to continued testing and questioning. Given the particularities of our international IS discipline, different viewpoints seem to be required to develop a picture of the merits and limits of testing and replication. Hence, the authors of this paper approach the topic from different perspectives. Following the ongoing discourse in neighbouring disciplines, we start by highlighting the significance of testing, replication and negation for scientific discourse as well as for the sponsors of research initiatives. Next, we discuss types of replication research and the challenges associated with each. In the third section, challenging questions are raised in the light of the ability of IS research for self-correction. Then, we address publication issues related to types of replications that require shifting editorial behaviors. The fifth section reflects on the possible use and interpretation of replication results in the light of contingency. As a key takeaway, the paper suggests ways to identify studies worth replicating in our field and reflects on possible roles of replication and testing for future IS research.
Olbrich, Sebastian; Frank, Ulrich; Gregor, Shirley; Niederman, Fred; and Rowe, Frantz
"On the Merits and Limits of Replication and Negation for IS Research,"
AIS Transactions on Replication Research: Vol. 3
, Article 1.
Available at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/trr/vol3/iss1/1