CONCEPTUALIZING GENERALIZABILITY: NEW CONTRIBUTIONS AND A REPLY.

Author List: Lee, Allen S.; Baskerville, Richard L.;

MIS Quarterly, 2012, Volume 36, Issue 3, Page 749-A7.

Tsang and Williams offer some good and provocative ideas in their critique of our earlier article on generalizing and generalizability. In this essay we will advance some new ideas by building on those collected in both Tsang and Williams and our original article (Lee and Baskerville 2003). Because IS is a pluralist scientific discipline, one in which both qualitative and quantitative (and both interpretive and positivist) research approaches are valued, "generalize" is unlikely to be a viable term or concept if only one IS research paradigm may lay claim to it and excludes others from using it. Both papers agree on this point, but approach the problem differently. Where we originally generalized generalizability by offering new language, Tsang and Williams conceptualize generalizability by framing it more closely to its older, more statistically oriented form. We agree about the importance of induction and about the classification or taxonomy of different types of induction. We build further in this essay, advancing the ethical questions raised by generalization: A formulation of judgment calls that need to be made when generalizing a theory to a new setting. We further demonstrate how the process of generalizing may actually proceed, based on the common ground between Tsang and Williams and our original article.

Keywords: philosophical approach; philosophy; reference theory; Research approach; type of theory

Algorithm:

List of Topics

#175	0.245	taxonomy systems different concept isd alternative generalization mechanistic distinction types generalizability theoretical speech richer induction original form inductive empirical organic
#32	0.168	research studies issues researchers scientific methodological article conducting conduct advanced rigor researcher methodology practitioner issue relevance findings validation papers published
#21	0.141	research information systems science field discipline researchers principles practice core methods area reference relevance conclude set focus propose perspective inquiry
#147	0.141	process problem method technique experts using formation identification implicit analysis common proactive input improvements identify traditional stages identifying explicit setting
#110	0.095	theory theories theoretical paper new understanding work practical explain empirical contribution phenomenon literature second implications different building based insights need
#44	0.090	approach analysis application approaches new used paper methodology simulation traditional techniques systems process based using proposed method present provides various
#238	0.064	shared contribution groups understanding contributions group contribute work make members experience phenomenon largely central key common especially major conceptualizing study