Choosing critical IS research

Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research: Theory and Application

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 1-15

  Howcroft, Debra ^a   Trauth, Eileen M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745775989     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4337/9781845426743.00007     Document Type: Chapter

References (40)

1. Alvesson, M. and Willmott, H. (1992), ‘On the idea of emancipation in management and organization studies’, Academy of Management Review, 17(3): 432-64.
2. Alvesson, M. and Willmott, H. (1996), Making Sense of Management: A Critical Introduction, London: Sage.
3. Bijker, W.E. (1995), ‘Sociohistorical technology studies’, in T. Pinch (ed.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 229-56.
4. Bourdieu, P. (1990), The Logic of Practice, Cambridge: Polity.
5. Brooke, C. (2002a), ‘Critical perspectives on information systems: an impression of the landscape’, Journal of Information Technology, 17: 271-83.
6. Brooke, C. (2002b), ‘Editorial: critical research in information systems’, Journal of Information Technology, 17: 45-7.
7. Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2001), ‘Doing critical IS research: the question of methodology’, in Trauth (ed.), pp. 141-63.
8. Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., Moodie, D., Busuttil, A. and Plesman, F. (1999), ‘Organisational change mediated by e-mail and intranet: an ethnographic study’, Information Technology and People, 12(1): 9-26.
9. Doolin, B. (1998), ‘Information technology as disciplinary technology: being critical in interpretive research on information systems’, Journal of Information Technology, 13: 301-11.
10. Doolin, B. and Lowe, A. (2002), ‘To reveal is to critique: actor-network theory and critical information systems research’, Journal of Information Technology, 17: 69-78.
11. Dooyeweerd, H. (1973), ‘Introduction’, Philosophia Reformata, 38: 5-16.
12. Forester, J. (1992), ‘Critical ethnography: on fieldwork in a Habermasian way’, in M. Alvesson and H. Wilmott (eds), Critical Management Studies, London: Sage, pp. 46-65.
13. Foucault, M. (1979), Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
14. Fournier, V. and Grey, C. (2000), ‘At the critical moment: conditions and prospects for critical management studies’, Human Relations, 53(1): 7-32.
15. Hammersley, M. (1995), The Politics of Social Research, London: Sage.
16. Heidegger, M. (1953), Being and Time, New York: State University of New York Press.
17. Hirschheim, R. and Klein, H.K. (1994), ‘Realizing emancipatory principles in information systems development: the case for ETHICS’, MIS Quarterly, 18(1): 83-109.
18. Horkheimer, M. (1976), ‘Traditional and critical theory (1937)', in P. Connerton (ed.), Critical Sociology, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
19. Howcroft, D. and Trauth, E.M. (2004), ‘The choice of critical IS research’, in B. Kaplan, D. Truex, D. Wastell, A.T. Wood-Harper, and J. DeGross (eds), Relevant Theory and Informed Practice: Looking Forward from a 20-year Perspective on IS Research, Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic, pp. 195-211.
20. Klein, H.K. and Hirschheim, R. (1993), ‘The application of neohumanist principles in information systems development’, in D. Avison, E.J. Kendall and J.I. DeGross (eds), Human, Organizational and Social Dimensions of Information Systems Development, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, North-Holland, pp. 263-79.
21. Kvasny, L. (2004), ‘On the existential problem of evil and information technology in the hotel civilization’, Keynote speech, Second International CRIS Workshop: Critical Reflections on Critical Research in Information Systems, University of Salford, Manchester, UK, 14 July.
22. Land, F. (2004), ‘Concluding remarks’, IFIP WG8.2 20th Year Retrospective: Relevant Theory and Informed Practice -Looking Forward from a 20-year Perspective on IS Research, 15-17 July 2004, Manchester, UK.
23. Latour, B. (1991), ‘Technology is society made durable’, in J. Law (ed.), A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, London: Routledge, pp. 103-31.
24. Lyytinen, K. (1992), ‘Information systems and critical theory’, in M. Alvesson and H. Wilmott (eds), Critical Management Studies, London: Sage, pp. 159-80.
25. Lyytinen, K. and Hirschheim, R. (1988), ‘Information systems as rational discourse: an application of Habermas’s theory of communicative action’, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 4(1/2): 19-30.
26. Lyytinen, K. and Hirschheim, R. (1989), ‘Information systems and emancipation: promise or threat?', in H.K. Klein and K. Kumar (eds), Systems Development for Human Progress, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, North-Holland, pp. 115-39.
27. Lyytinen, K. and Klein, H.K. (1985), ‘The critical theory of Jürgen Harbermas as a basis for a theory of information systems’, in E. Mumford, R. Hirschheim, G. Fitzgerald and A.T. Wood-Harper (eds), Research Methods in Information Systems, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, North-Holland, pp. 219-36.
28. Marx, K. ([1867] 1974), Capital, London: Penguin.
29. Mingers, J. (1992), ‘Technical, practical and critical OR: past, present and future?', in M. Alvesson and H. Wilmott (eds), Critical Management Studies, London: Sage, pp. 90-112.
30. Mingers, J. (2000), ‘What is it to be critical? Teaching a critical approach to management undergraduates’, Management Learning, 31(2): 219-37.
31. Myers, M.D. and Avison, D.E. (2002), Qualitative Research in Information Systems: A Reader, London: Sage.
32. Ngwenyama, O.K. (1991), ‘The critical social theory approach to information systems: problems and challenges’, in H.E. Nissen, H.K. Klein and R. Hirschheim (eds), Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, North-Holland, pp. 267-80.
33. Ngwenyama, O.K. and Lee, A.S. (1997), ‘Communication richness in electronic mail: critical social theory and the contextuality of meaning’, MIS Quarterly, 21(2): 145-67.
34. Orlikowski, W.J. and Baroudi, J.J. (1991), ‘Studying IT in organizations: research approaches and assumptions’, Information Systems Research, 2(1): 1-28.
35. Parker, M. (1992), ‘Postmodern organizations or postmodern organization theory’, Organization Studies, 13(1): 1-17.
36. Russell, S. and Williams, R. (2002), ‘Social shaping of technology: frameworks, findings and implications for policy with glossary of social shaping concepts’, in R. Williams (ed.), Shaping Technology, Guiding Policy: Concepts, Spaces and Tools, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar, pp. 37-132.
37. Trauth, E. (ed.) (2001) Qualitative Research in IS: Issues and Trends, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
38. Wajcman, J. (1991), Feminism Confronts Technology, Cambridge: Polity.
39. Williams, R. and Edge, D. (1996), ‘The social shaping of technology’, Research Policy, 25: 865-99.
40. Wilson, F. (1997), ‘The truth is out there: the search for emancipatory principles in information systems design’, Information Technology & People, 10(3): 187-204.