The Theory Project

For a few years I’ve been working with my phd advisor Erik Stolterman on a research project where our primary object of inquiry is theory. We’ve looked at different theories about the design process, the role/function different theories play in scholarly publications in design and hci research, and considered questions about how theories grow in different disciplines, etc. There is lots of interesting work to do!

One outcome of this project is a collection of readings that I think will be useful to anyone who wants to engage a bit more with theory as a topic of study.  Right now the collection is alphabetical by author, but I am currently working on a concept-centric organization.

Check back frequently for new additions and re-organizations of the collection. I add new material with some regularity.

  1. Abend, G. (2008). The meaning of “theory.” Sociological Theory, 26(2), 173–199.
  2. Agoston, G. A. (2013). Color theory and its application in art and design (Vol. 19). Springer.
  3. Astbury, B., & Leeuw, F. L. (2010). Unpacking black boxes: mechanisms and theory building in evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 31(3), 363–381.
  4. Avolio, B. J. (2007). Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theory-building. American Psychologist, 62(1), 25–33. http://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.62.1.25
  5. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 496–515.
  6. Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2015). The great theory hunt: Does e-government really have a problem? Government Information Quarterly, 32(1), 1–11. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.10.003
  7. Bardzell, J., Bardzell, S., & Koefoed Hansen, L. (2015). Immodest Proposals: Research Through Design and Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2093–2102). New York, NY, USA: ACM. http://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702400
  8. Barnard, P. (1991). Bridging between basic theories and the artifacts of human-computer interaction.
  9. Barnard, P., May, J., Duke, D., & Duce, D. (2000). Systems, Interactions, and Macrotheory. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact., 7(2), 222–262. http://doi.org/10.1145/353485.353490
  10. Baskerville, P. R., & Pries-Heje, P. J. (2010). Explanatory Design Theory. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 2(5), 271–282. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-010-0118-4
  11. Beck, R., Weber, S., & Gregory, R. W. (2013). Theory-generating design science research. Information Systems Frontiers, 15(4), 637–651. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-012-9342-4
  12. Becker, H. (1954). Vitalizing sociological theory. American Sociological Review, 19(4), 377–388.
  13. Bellotti, V., Shum, S. B., MacLean, A., & Hammond, N. (1995). Multidisciplinary Modelling in HCI Design…in Theory and in Practice. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 146–153). New York, NY, USA: ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. http://doi.org/10.1145/223904.223923
  14. Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research.
  15. Berger, J., Willer, D., & Zelditch, M. (2005). Theory Programs and Theoretical Problems*. Sociological Theory, 23(2), 127–155. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.0735-2751.2005.00247.x
  16. Best, A., Stokols, D., Green, L. W., Leischow, S., Holmes, B., & Buchholz, K. (2003). An Integrative Framework for Community Partnering to Translate Theory Into Effective Health Promotion Strategy. American Journal of Health Promotion, 18(2), 168–176.
  17. Blalock, H. M. (2005). Theory construction: From verbal to mathematical formulations.
  18. Blessing, L., Chakrabarti, A., & Wallace, K. (1998). An overview of descriptive studies in relation to a general design research methodology. In Designers (pp. 42–56). Springer.
  19. Bourgeois, L. J. (1979). Toward A Method Of Middle-Range Theorizing. Academy of Management Review, 4(3), 443–447. http://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1979.4289127
  20. Bowers, J. (2012). The logic of annotated portfolios: communicating the value of’research through design’. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference (pp. 68–77). ACM.
  21. Brodbeck, M. (2013). Models, meaning, and theories. Decisions, Values and Groups, 1, 9–36.
  22. Brohman, M. K., Piccoli, G., Martin, P., Zulkernine, F., Parasuraman, A., & Watson, R. T. (2009). A Design Theory Approach to Building Strategic Network-Based Customer Service Systems*. Decision Sciences, 40(3), 403–430.
  23. Buckley, P. (1989). Expressing research findings to have a practical influence on design. Cognitive Ergonomics and Human Computer Interaction, 166–190.
  24. Calhoun, C. (1998). Explanation in Historical Sociology: Narrative, General Theory, and Historically Specific Theory 1. American Journal of Sociology, 104(3), 846–871.
  25. Carpiano, R. M., & Daley, D. M. (2006). A guide and glossary on postpositivist theory building for population health. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60(7), 564–570.
  26. Carroll, J. M. (2010). Conceptualizing a possible discipline of human–computer interaction. Interacting with Computers, 22(1), 3–12. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2009.11.008
  27. Carroll, J. M. (2014). Soft Versus Hard: The Essential Tension. Human-Computer Interaction and Management Information Systems: Applications. Advances in Management Information Systems, 424.
  28. Carroll, J. M., & Campbell, R. L. (1989). Artifacts as psychological theories: The case of human-computer interaction. Behaviour & Information Technology, 8(4), 247–256.
  29. Carroll, J. M., & Kellogg, W. A. (1989). Artifact as theory-nexus: Hermeneutics meets theory-based design (Vol. 20). ACM.
  30. Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (1992). Getting Around the Task-artifact Cycle: How to Make Claims and Design by Scenario. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst., 10(2), 181–212. http://doi.org/10.1145/146802.146834
  31. Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2003). Design rationale as theory. HCI Models, Theories and Frameworks: Toward a Multidisciplinary Science, 431–461.
  32. Carroll, J. M., Singley, M. K., & Rosson, M. B. (1992). Integrating theory development with design evaluation. Behaviour & Information Technology, 11(5), 247–255. http://doi.org/10.1080/01449299208924345
  33. Chakrabarti, A., & Blessing, L. T. M. (Eds.). (2014). An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design. London: Springer London. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-1-4471-6338-1
  34. Chinn, P. L., & Jacobs, M. K. (1978). A model for theory development in nursing. Advances in Nursing Science, 1(1), 1–12.
  35. Cohen, L. H., Sargent, M. M., & Sechrest, L. B. (1986). Use of psychotherapy research by professional psychologists. American Psychologist, 41(2), 198–206. http://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.2.198
  36. Cole, S. (1994). Why Sociology Doesn’t Make Progress like the Natural Sciences. Sociological Forum, 9(2), 133–154.
  37. Colley, S. (2003). Nursing Theory: Its importance to practice. Nursing Standard, 17(46), 33–37.
  38. Collins, R. (1994). Why the social sciences won’t become high-consensus, rapid-discovery science. Sociological Forum, 9(2), 155–177. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF01476360
  39. Colquitt, J. A., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2007). Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1281–1303.
  40. Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21.
  41. Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2011). Building theory about theory building: what constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 12–32.
  42. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Sage.
  43. Dalsgaard, P., & Dindler, C. (2014). Between theory and practice: bridging concepts in HCI research. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 1635–1644). ACM.
  44. Davis, M. S. (1971). That’s interesting: Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1(4), 309.
  45. Davis, M. S. (1986). “That”s Classic!’ The Phenomenology and Rhetoric of Successful Social Theories. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 16(3), 285–301. http://doi.org/10.1177/004839318601600301
  46. Davison, R. M., Martinsons, M. G., & Ou, C. X. (2012). The Roles of Theory in Canonical Action Research. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 763–786.
  47. Dix, A. (2010). Human–computer interaction: A stable discipline, a nascent science, and the growth of the long tail. Interacting with Computers, 22(1), 13–27. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2009.11.007
  48. Donaldson, S. I., & Lipsey, M. W. (2006). Roles for theory in contemporary evaluation practice: Developing practical knowledge. The Handbook of Evaluation: Policies, Programs, and Practices, 56–75.
  49. Doty, D. H., & Glick, W. H. (1994). Typologies as a Unique Form of Theory Building: Toward Improved Understanding and Modeling. The Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 230–251. http://doi.org/10.2307/258704
  50. Egan, T. M. (2002). Grounded Theory Research and Theory Building. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4(3), 277–295. http://doi.org/10.1177/1523422302043004
  51. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.
  52. Evans, J. H. (2007). Consensus and knowledge production in an academic field. Poetics, 35(1), 1–21. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2007.01.001
  53. Fallman, D. (2007). Why research-oriented design isn’t design-oriented research: On the tensions between design and research in an implicit design discipline. Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 20(3), 193–200.
  54. Fallman, D. (2008). The Interaction Design Research Triangle of Design Practice, Design Studies, and Design Exploration. Design Issues, 24(3), 4–18. http://doi.org/10.1162/desi.2008.24.3.4
  55. Fallman, D., & Stolterman, E. (2010). Establishing criteria of rigour and relevance in interaction design research. Digital Creativity, 21(4), 265–272.
  56. Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Is theory possible in social science? In Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again (pp. 25–37). Cambridge university press.
  57. Forlizzi, J. (n.d.). From design research to theory: Evidence of a maturing field.
  58. Forlizzi, J., Zimmerman, J., & Stolterman, E. (2009). From design research to theory: Evidence of a maturing field. In International Assoc. of Societies of Design Research Conference.
  59. Foucault, M. (2012). The archaeology of knowledge. Vintage.
  60. Freese, L. (1980). Formal Theorizing. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 187–212.
  61. Friedman, K. (2003). Theory construction in design research: criteria: approaches, and methods. Design Studies, 24(6), 507–522.
  62. Friedman, K. (2005). Building theory. What, how and why. In Third International Conference on Design Research, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
  63. Fulmer, I. S. (2012). Editor’s comments: The craft of writing theory articles—Variety and similarity in AMR. Academy of Management Review, 37(3), 327–331.
  64. Gallagher, P. (2004). How the metaphor of a gap between theory and practice has influenced nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 24(4), 263–268. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2004.01.006
  65. Galle, P. (2011). Foundational and instrumental design theory. Design Issues, 27(4).
  66. Gaver, W. (2012). What should we expect from research through design? In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 937–946). ACM.
  67. George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2000). The role of time in theory and theory building. Journal of Management, 26(4), 657–684. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(00)00051-9
  68. Gero, J. S., & Kannengiesser, U. (2004). The situated function-behaviour-structure framework. Design Studies, 25(4), 373–391. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2003.10.010
  69. Gero, J. S. (1990). Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design. AI Magazine, 11(4), 26.
  70. Gero, J. S., & Kannengiesser, U. (2007). A function–behavior–structure ontology of processes. AI EDAM: Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis, and Manufacturing, 21(04), 379–391.
  71. Gero, J. S., & Kannengiesser, U. (2008). An ontological account of Donald Schön’s reflection in designing. International Journal of Design Sciences and Technologies, 15(2), 77–90.
  72. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  73. Gilbert, G. N., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora’s box: A sociological analysis of scientists’ discourse. CUP Archive.
  74. Gioia, D., & Pitre, E. (1990). Multiparadigm Perspectives on Theory Building. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 584–602. http://doi.org/10.2307/258683
  75. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2009). Models and fictions in science. Philosophical Studies, 143(1), 101–116.
  76. Gorard, S. (2009). Sceptical or clerical? Theory as a barrier to the combination of research methods. The Journal of Educational Enquiry, 5(1).
  77. Greenwald, A. G., Pratkanis, A. R., Leippe, M. R., & Baumgardner, M. H. (1986). Under what conditions does theory obstruct research progress? Psychological Review, 93(2), 216–229. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.216
  78. Gregor, S. (2009). Building theory in the sciences of the artificial. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on design science research in information systems and technology (p. 4). ACM.
  79. Gregor, S. (2010). Theorizing in the Sciences of the Artificial.
  80. Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The anatomy of a design theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(5), 312–335.
  81. Gruber, T. R. (1995). Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43(5), 907–928.
  82. Grudin, J. (2005). Three Faces of Human-Computer Interaction. IEEE Ann. Hist. Comput., 27(4), 46–62. http://doi.org/A68E0687-6A30-4C46-9DF7-7E0A4AE9FE20
  83. Grudin, J. (2006). Is HCI homeless?: in search of inter-disciplinary status. Interactions, 13(1), 54–59.
  84. Grudin, J. (2008). A moving target: The evolution of HCI. The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies, and Emerging Applications, 1–24.
  85. Grudin, J., & Poltrock, S. (2012). Taxonomy and theory in computer supported cooperative work. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Psychology, 2, 1323–1348.
  86. Hage, J. (1972). Techniques and problems of theory construction in sociology. John Wiley & Sons.
  87. Hall, T., Baddoo, N., Beecham, S., Robinson, H., & Sharp, H. (2009). A systematic review of theory use in studies investigating the motivations of software engineers. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), 18(3), 10.
  88. Halverson, C. A. (2002). Activity theory and distributed cognition: Or what does CSCW need to DO with theories? Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 11(1-2), 243–267.
  89. Handfield, R. B., & Melnyk, S. A. (1998). The scientific theory-building process: a primer using the case of TQM. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 321–339.
  90. Hannay, J. E., Sjoberg, D. I. K., & Dyba, T. (2007). A Systematic Review of Theory Use in Software Engineering Experiments. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 33(2), 87–107. http://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2007.12
  91. Hargens, L. L., & Hagstrom, W. O. (1982). Scientific Consensus and Academic Status Attainment Patterns. Sociology of Education, 55(4), 183–196. http://doi.org/10.2307/2112671
  92. Harrison, S., Sengers, P., & Tatar, D. (2007). The Three Paradigms of HCI. In Proceedings of alt.chi [online].
  93. Hart, D. N., & Gregor, S. D. (2012). Information Systems Foundations: Theory Building in Information Systems. Acton, A.C.T.: ANU E Press.
  94. Hartson, H. R. (1998). Human-computer interaction: Interdisciplinary roots and trends. Journal of Systems and Software, 43(2), 103–118.
  95. Hatchuel, A., Le Masson, P., & Weil, B. (2004). CK theory in practice: lessons from industrial applications. In DS 32: Proceedings of DESIGN 2004, the 8th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia.
  96. Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2002). CK theory. In Proceedings of the Herbert Simon International Conference on «Design Sciences (Vol. 15, p. 16). Citeseer.
  97. Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2003). A new approach of innovative Design: an introduction to CK theory. In DS 31: Proceedings of ICED 03, the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design, Stockholm.
  98. Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2009). CK design theory: an advanced formulation. Research in Engineering Design, 19(4), 181–192.
  99. Haynes, S. R., & Carroll, J. M. (2007). Theoretical Design Science in Human–Computer Interaction: A Practical Concern? Artifact, 1(3), 159–171.
  100. Haynes, S. R., & Carroll, J. M. (2010). The Range and Role of Theory in Information Systems Design Research: from Concepts to Construction. In ICIS (p. 136).
  101. Hedges, L. V. (1987). How hard is hard science, how soft is soft science? The empirical cumulativeness of research. American Psychologist, 42(5), 443–455. http://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.42.5.443
  102. Heylighen, F., & Joslyn, C. (1992). What is systems theory. Principia Cybernetica Web, 1.
  103. Holland, R. (1990). The paradigm plague: Prevention, cure, and inoculation. Human Relations, 43(1), 23–48.
  104. Holmström, J., Ketokivi, M., & Hameri, A.-P. (2009). Bridging Practice and Theory: A Design Science Approach. Decision Sciences, 40(1), 65–87. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00221.x
  105. Holmstrom, J., Tuunanen, T., & Kauremaa, J. (2014). Logic for Design Science Research Theory Accumulation. 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (hicss), 3697–3706. http://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.460
  106. Holton, E. F., & Lowe, J. S. (2007). Toward a General Research Process for Using Dubin’s Theory Building Model. Human Resource Development Review, 6(3), 297–320. http://doi.org/10.1177/1534484307304219
  107. Hooker, J. N. (2004). Is design theory possible? Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 6(2), 8.
  108. Höök, K., & Löwgren, J. (2012). Strong concepts: Intermediate-level knowledge in interaction design research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 19(3), 23.
  109. Hooper, C. J., & Dix, A. (2012). Web Science and Human-computer Interaction: When Disciplines Collide. In Proceedings of the 4th Annual ACM Web Science Conference (pp. 128–136). New York, NY, USA: ACM. http://doi.org/10.1145/2380718.2380736
  110. Howes, A., Cowan, B. R., Janssen, C. P., Cox, A. L., Cairns, P., Hornof, A. J., … Pirolli, P. (2014). Interaction Science SIG: Overcoming Challenges. In CHI ’14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1127–1130). New York, NY, USA: ACM. http://doi.org/10.1145/2559206.2559208
  111. Hubka, V., & Eder, W. E. (1990). Design Knowledge: Theory in Support of Practice. Journal of Engineering Design, 1(1), 97–108. http://doi.org/10.1080/09544829008901646
  112. Jacobs, M. K., & Huether, S. E. (1978). Nursing science: the theory-practice linkage. Advances in Nursing Science, 1(1), 63–74.
  113. Jacox, A. (1969). Issues in construction of nursing theory. In Proceedings. Nursing Theory Conference (University of Kansas) (Vol. 1, p. 8).
  114. Jennings, B. M. (1987). Nursing theory development: successes and challenges. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 12(1), 63–69. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1987.tb01304.x
  115. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85.
  116. Kamppuri, M., Bednarik, R., & Tukiainen, M. (2006). The expanding focus of HCI: case culture. In Proceedings of the 4th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: changing roles (pp. 405–408). ACM.
  117. Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2012). Activity Theory in HCI: Fundamentals and Reflections. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 5(1), 1–105. http://doi.org/10.2200/S00413ED1V01Y201203HCI013
  118. Karoly, P., Boekaerts, M., & Maes, S. (2005). Toward Consensus in the Psychology of Self-Regulation: How Far Have We Come? How Far Do We Have Yet to Travel? Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2), 300–311. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00211.x
  119. Keren, G., & Schul, Y. (2009). Two Is Not Always Better Than One: A Critical Evaluation of Two-System Theories. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(6), 533–550.
  120. Kilduff, M. (2006). Editor’s Comments: Publishing Theory. The Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 252–255.
  121. Klein, K. J., Tosi, H., & Cannella, A. A. (1999). Introduction to Special Topic Forum: Multilevel Theory Building: Benefits, Barriers, and New Developments. The Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 243–248.
  122. Kolbe, R. H., & Burnett, M. S. (1991). Content-analysis research: An examination of applications with directives for improving research reliability and objectivity. Journal of Consumer Research, 243–250.
  123. Kostakos, V. (2015). The Big Hole in HCI Research. Interactions, 22(2), 48–51. http://doi.org/10.1145/2729103
  124. Krause, M. (2016). The meanings of theorizing. The British Journal of Sociology, 67(1), 23–29. http://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12187_4
  125. Kuechler, B., & Vaishnavi, V. (2008). On theory development in design science research: anatomy of a research project. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(5), 489–504. http://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2008.40
  126. Kuechler, B., & Vaishnavi, V. (2012). Characterizing design science theories by level of constraint on design decisions. In Design Science Research in Information Systems. Advances in Theory and Practice (pp. 345–353). Springer.
  127. Kuechler, W., & Vaishnavi, V. (2012). A framework for theory development in design science research: multiple perspectives. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(6), 395–423.
  128. Kuhn, T. S. (2012). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: 50th Anniversary Edition (Fourth Edition edition). Chicago ; London: University Of Chicago Press.
  129. Lakatos, I. (1976). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In Can Theories be Refuted? (pp. 205–259). Springer.
  130. Lakatos, I. (2015). Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. Cambridge university press.
  131. Lakatos, I., & Musgrave, A. (Eds.). (1970). Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, London, 1965, Vol. 4. Cambridge England: Cambridge University Press.
  132. Laszlo, A., & Krippner, S. (1998). Systems theories: Their origins, foundations, and development. ADVANCES IN PSYCHOLOGY-AMSTERDAM-, 126, 47–76.
  133. Lee, J. S., Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2011). Theorizing in design science research. In Service-Oriented Perspectives in Design Science Research (pp. 1–16). Springer.
  134. Lewin, K. (1940). Part One: Formalization and Progress in Psychology.
  135. Lewis, M. W., & Grimes, A. J. (1999). Metatriangulation: Building theory from multiple paradigms. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 672–690. http://doi.org/10.2307/259348
  136. Lichterman, P., & Reed, I. A. (2015). Theory and Contrastive Explanation in Ethnography. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(4), 585–635. http://doi.org/10.1177/0049124114554458
  137. Lim, S., Saldanha, T. J., Malladi, S., & Melville, N. P. (2013). Theories Used in Information
  138. Systems Research: Insights from Complex Network Analysis. JITTA: Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 14(2), 5.
  139. Lim, S., Saldanha, T., Malladi, S., & Melville, N. P. (2009). Theories used in information systems research: identifying theory networks in leading IS journals. ICIS 2009 Proceedings, 91.
  140. Lim, Y.-K., Blevis, E., & Stolterman, E. (2007). Grand challenges in design research for human-centered design informatics. In Online Communities and Social Computing (pp. 106–115). Springer.
  141. Liu, Y., Goncalves, J., Ferreira, D., Xiao, B., Hosio, S., & Kostakos, V. (2014). CHI 1994-2013: Mapping Two Decades of Intellectual Progress Through Co-word Analysis. In Proceedings of the 32Nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3553–3562). New York, NY, USA: ACM. http://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2556969
  142. Lizardo, O. (n.d.). Theorizing and Cognitive Science.
  143. Long, J. (1996). Specifying relations between research and the design of human-computer interactions. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 44(6), 875–920.
  144. Long, J., & Dowell, J. (1989). Conceptions of the Discipline ofHCI: Craft, Applied Science, and Engineering. In People and Computers V: Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of the British Computer Society Human-Computer Interaction Specialist Group, University of Nottingham, 5-8 September 1989 (Vol. 5, p. 9). Cambridge University Press.
  145. Löwgren, J. (2013). Annotated portfolios and other forms of intermediate-level knowledge. Interactions, 20(1), 30–34.
  146. Lynham, S. A. (2000). Theory building in the human resource development profession. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11(2), 159.
  147. Lynham, S. A. (2002a). Quantitative research and theory building: Dubin’s method. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4(3), 242–276.
  148. Lynham, S. A. (2002b). The general method of theory-building research in applied disciplines. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4(3), 221–241.
  149. MacKenzie, I. S. (1992). Fitts’ Law As a Research and Design Tool in Human-computer Interaction. Hum.-Comput. Interact., 7(1), 91–139. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci0701_3
  150. Malinowski, B. (1944). A Scientific Theory of Culture, and Other Essays.
  151. Markus, M. L., & Saunders, C. (2007). Editor’s comments: Looking for a few good concepts… and theories… for the information systems field. Mis Quarterly, iii–vi.
  152. McCrickard, D. S. (2012). Making Claims: Knowledge Design, Capture, and Sharing in HCI (1 edition). San Rafael, Calif. (1537 Fourth Street, San Rafael, CA 94901 USA): Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
  153. Meehl, P. E. (1967). Theory-testing in psychology and physics: A methodological paradox. Philosophy of Science, 103–115.
  154. Meehl, P. E. (1978). Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46(4), 806–834. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.46.4.806
  155. Meehl, P. E. (1990a). Appraising and Amending Theories: The Strategy of Lakatosian Defense and Two Principles That Warrant It. Psychological Inquiry, 1(2), 108–141.
  156. Meehl, P. E. (1990b). Why summaries of research on psychological theories are often uninterpretable. Psychological Reports, 66(1), 195–244.
  157. Merton, R. K. (1945). Sociological Theory. American Journal of Sociology, 50(6), 462–473.
  158. Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. Simon and Schuster.
  159. Michailova, S., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E., Ritvala, T., Mihailova, I., & Salmi, A. (2014). Breaking the silence about exiting fieldwork: A relational approach and its implications for theorizing. Academy of Management Review, 39(2), 138–161.
  160. Miller, K. D., & Tsang, E. W. K. (2011). Testing management theories: critical realist philosophy and research methods. Strategic Management Journal, 32(2), 139–158. http://doi.org/10.1002/smj.868
  161. Mitchell, T. R., & James, L. R. (2001). Building Better Theory: Time and the Specification of When Things Happen. The Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 530–547. http://doi.org/10.2307/3560240
  162. Moss, C., Grealish, L., & Lake, S. (2010). Valuing the gap: A dialectic between theory and practice in graduate nursing education from a constructive educational approach. Nurse Education Today, 30(4), 327–332. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2009.09.001
  163. Mueller, B., & Urbach, N. (2013). The why, what, and how of theories in IS research.
  164. Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2000). The Case for Design: Creating a Culture of Intention. Educational Technology, 40(6), 29–35.
  165. Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2014). The Design Way: Intentional Change in an Unpredictable World (second edition edition). The MIT Press.
  166. Niedderer, K. (2009). Mapping the Meaning of Knowledge in Design Research. Nordes, 0(2). Retrieved from http://www.nordes.org/opj/index.php/n13/article/view/160
  167. Niehaves, B., Ortbach, K., & Tavakoli, A. (2012). On the relationship between the IT artifact and design theory: the case of virtual social facilitation. In Design Science Research in Information Systems. Advances in Theory and Practice (pp. 354–370). Springer.
  168. Ousey, K., & Gallagher, P. (2007). The theory–practice relationship in nursing: A debate. Nurse Education in Practice, 7(4), 199–205. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2007.02.001
  169. Owen, C. L. (1998). Design research: building the knowledge base. Design Studies, 19(1), 9–20. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(97)00030-6
  170. Parkhe, A. (1993). “Messy” Research, Methodological Predispositions, and Theory Development in International Joint Ventures. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 227–268. http://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1993.3997515
  171. Parsons, T. (1950). The prospects of sociological theory. American Sociological Review, 15(1), 3–16.
  172. Patel, V. L., & Groen, G. J. (1993). Comparing Apples and Oranges: Some Dangers in Confusing Frameworks with Theories. Cognitive Science, 17(1), 135–141. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1701_9
  173. Payne, C., Allgood, C. F., Chewar, C. M., Holbrook, C., & McCrickard, D. S. (2003). Generalizing interface design knowledge: lessons learned from developing a claims library. In IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration, 2003. IRI 2003 (pp. 362–369). http://doi.org/10.1109/IRI.2003.1251438
  174. Pearson, B. D. (1985). [Review of Review of Theoretical Nursing: Development and Progress, by A. I. Meleis]. The American Journal of Nursing, 85(10), 1196–1196. http://doi.org/10.2307/3425219
  175. Pedersen, E. L. (2007). Theory Is Everywhere A Discourse on Theory. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 25(1), 106–128.
  176. Piirainen, K. A., & Briggs, R. O. (2011). Design Theory in Practice – Making Design Science Research More Transparent. In H. Jain, A. P. Sinha, & P. Vitharana (Eds.), Service-Oriented Perspectives in Design Science Research: 6th International Conference (Vol. 6629, pp. 47–61). Berlin: Springer-Verlag Berlin.
  177. Popper, K. (1953). Science: Conjectures and refutations.
  178. Popper, K. (2005). The logic of scientific discovery. Routledge.
  179. Popper, K. R. (1957). Philosophy of Science: A Personal Report. In J. H. Muirhead (Ed.), British Philosophy in the Mid-Century (pp. 182–83). George Allen and Unwin.
  180. Popper, K. R. (1972). Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach.
  181. Popper, K. S. (2012). The open society and its enemies. Routledge.
  182. Potter, J. (1996). Representing reality: Discourse, rhetoric and social construction. Sage.
  183. Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2008). The Design Theory Nexus. MIS Q., 32(4), 731–755.
  184. Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2010). Cumulative Knowledge and Progress in Human Factors. In Annual Review of Psychology (Vol. 61, pp. 623–651). Palo Alto: Annual Reviews.
  185. Rawlings, C. M., McFarland, D. A., Dahlander, L., & Wang, D. (2015). Streams of Thought: Knowledge Flows and Intellectual Cohesion in a Multidisciplinary Era. Social Forces, sov004. http://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sov004
  186. Reeves, S. (2015). Human-computer interaction as science. Presented at the Critical Alternatives 2015, 5th Decennial Aarhus Conference, Aarhus, Denmark. Retrieved from http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/29279/
  187. Reeves, S. (n.d.). Locating “The Big Hole in HCI Research.” Retrieved April 14, 2015, from http://notesonresearch.tumblr.com/post/114677723783/locating-the-big-hole-in-hci-research
  188. Rew, L. R., Stuppy, D. R., & Becker, H. (1988). Construct validity in instrument development: A vital link between nursing practice, research, and theory. Advances in Nursing Science, 10(4), 10–22.
  189. Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
  190. Ritzer, G., Zhao, S., & Murphy, J. (2001). Metatheorizing in Sociology: The Basic Parameters and the Potential Contributions of Postmodernism. In J. H. Turner (Ed.), Handbook of Sociological Theory (pp. 113–131). Springer US. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/0-387-36274-6_6
  191. Rode, J. A. (2011). A theoretical agenda for feminist HCI. Interacting with Computers, 23(5), 393–400.
  192. Rogers, Y. (2004). New theoretical approaches for human-computer interaction. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 38(1), 87–143.
  193. Rogers, Y. (2011). Interaction Design Gone Wild: Striving for Wild Theory. Interactions, 18(4), 58–62. http://doi.org/10.1145/1978822.1978834
  194. Rogers, Y. (2012). HCI Theory: Classical, Modern, and Contemporary (1 edition). Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
  195. Sayes, E. (2014). Actor–Network Theory and methodology: Just what does it mean to say that nonhumans have agency? Social Studies of Science, 44(1), 134–149. http://doi.org/10.1177/0306312713511867
  196. Schön, D. A. (1990). The design process. Varieties of Thinking, 110–141.
  197. Scott, W. R., & others. (2005). Institutional theory: Contributing to a theoretical research program. Great Minds in Management: The Process of Theory Development, 460–485.
  198. Selg, P. (2013). The Politics of Theory and the Constitution of Meaning. Sociological Theory, 31(1), 1–23.
  199. Seow, S. C. (2005). Information theoretic models of HCI: A comparison of the Hick-Hyman law and Fitts’ Law. Human-Computer Interaction, 20(3), 315–352. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci2003_3
  200. Serlin, R. C. (1987). Hypothesis testing, theory building, and the philosophy of science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34(4), 365–371. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.34.4.365
  201. Shapere, D. (1984). Scientific Theories and Their Domains. In Reason and the Search for Knowledge (pp. 273–319). Springer Netherlands. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-010-9731-4_13
  202. Simon, H. A. (1979). Rational decision making in business organizations. The American Economic Review, 493–513.
  203. Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (Vol. 136). MIT press.
  204. Sjøberg, D. I., Dyb\a a, T., Anda, B. C., & Hannay, J. E. (2008). Building theories in software engineering. In Guide to advanced empirical software engineering (pp. 312–336). Springer.
  205. Smith, K. G., & Hitt, M. A. (2005). Great minds in management: The process of theory development. Oxford University Press on Demand.
  206. Sonnenwald, D. H. (Ed.). (2016). Theory Development in the Information Sciences. University of Texas Press.
  207. Stolterman, E. (2008). The nature of design practice and implications for interaction design research. International Journal of Design, 2(1), 55–65.
  208. Stolterman, E., & Wiberg, M. (2010). Concept-Driven Interaction Design Research. Human–Computer Interaction, 25(2), 95–118. http://doi.org/10.1080/07370020903586696
  209. Strong, S. R. (1991). Theory-driven science and naive empiricism in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(2), 204–210. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.38.2.204
  210. Sutcliffe, A. (2000). On the effective use and reuse of HCI knowledge. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 7(2), 197–221.
  211. Sutcliffe, A. (2006). Grand Challenges in HCI: the Quest for Theory-led Design. In T. M. Ms. ILTM PgCert, MBCS, CITP, Ceng, J. G. MSc, & D. B. Bs. MSc (Eds.), People and Computers XIX — The Bigger Picture (pp. 491–505). Springer London. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/1-84628-249-7_31
  212. Swanson, R. A. (2007). Theory framework for applied disciplines: Boundaries, contributing, core, useful, novel, and irrelevant components. Human Resource Development Review, 6(3), 321–339.
  213. Swedberg, R. (2012). Theorizing in sociology and social science: turning to the context of discovery. Theory and Society, 41(1), 1–40.
  214. Tavory, I. (2016). The pragmatist wave of theory construction. The British Journal of Sociology, 67(1), 50–56. http://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12187
  215. Thimbleby, H. (2004). Supporting diverse HCI research. In Proceedings BCS HCI Conference (Vol. 2, pp. 125–128).
  216. Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory Construction in Qualitative Research: From Grounded Theory to Abductive Analysis. Sociological Theory, 30(3), 167–186.
  217. Tuckett, A. G. (2005). Applying thematic analysis theory to practice: a researcher’s experience. Contemporary Nurse, 19(1-2), 75–87.
  218. Turner, J. H. (1998). Must sociological theory and sociological practice be so far apart?: A polemical answer. Sociological Perspectives, 41(2), 243–258.
  219. Vakkari, P., & Kuokkanen, M. (1997). Theory growth in information science: applications of the theory of science to a theory of information seeking. Journal of Documentation, 53(5), 497–519.
  220. Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Nothing is quite so practical as a good theory. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 486–489.
  221. Venable, J. (2006). The role of theory and theorising in design science research. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Design Science in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2006) (pp. 1–18). Citeseer.
  222. Venable, J. R. (2010). Design Science Research Post Hevner et al.: Criteria, Standards, Guidelines, and Expectations. In R. Winter, J. L. Zhao, & S. Aier (Eds.), Global Perspectives on Design Science Research (Vol. 6105, pp. 109–123). Berlin: Springer-Verlag Berlin.
  223. Wacker, J. G. (1998). A definition of theory: research guidelines for different theory-building research methods in operations management. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 361–385. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(98)00019-9
  224. Wagner, D. G., & Berger, J. (1985). Do Sociological Theories Grow? American Journal of Sociology, 90(4), 697–728.
  225. Walker, H. A. (2000). Three Faces of Explanation: Rethinking the Theory Project. Sociological Focus, 33(1), 41–56.
  226. Walls, J. G., Widmeyer, G. R., & El Sawy, O. A. (1992). Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 36–59.
  227. Weber, R. (2012). Evaluating and developing theories in the information systems discipline. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(1), 1.
  228. Webster, M., & Whitmeyer, J. M. (2001). Applications of Theories of Group Processes. Sociological Theory, 19(3), 250–270.
  229. Weick, K. E. (1974). Middle range theories of social systems. Behavioral Science, 19(6), 357–367.
  230. Weick, K. E. (1989). Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 516–531.
  231. Weick, K. E. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 385–390.
  232. Weick, K. E. (1999). Theory construction as disciplined reflexivity: Tradeoffs in the 90s. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 797–806.
  233. Weis, D. L. (1998). The Use of Theory in Sexuality Research. The Journal of Sex Research, 35(1), 1–9.
  234. Westhues, A., Ochocka, J., Jacobson, N., Simich, L., Maiter, S., Janzen, R., & Fleras, A. (2008). Developing Theory From Complexity: Reflections on a Collaborative Mixed Method Participatory Action Research Study. Qualitative Health Research, 18(5), 701–717. http://doi.org/10.1177/1049732308316531
  235. Whetten, D. A. (1989). What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution? The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 490–495. http://doi.org/10.2307/258554
  236. Whetten, D. A. (2002). Modeling-as-theorizing: A systematic methodology for theory development. Essential Skills for Management Research, 45.
  237. Whetten, D. A., Felin, T., & King, B. G. (2009). The Practice of Theory Borrowing in Organizational Studies: Current Issues and Future Directions. Journal of Management, 35(3), 537–563. http://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308330556
  238. Whittaker, S., Terveen, L., & Nardi, B. A. (2000). Let’s Stop Pushing the Envelope and Start Addressing It: A Reference Task Agenda for HCI. Hum.-Comput. Interact., 15(2), 75–106. http://doi.org/10.1207/S15327051HCI1523_2
  239. Wiberg, M., & Stolterman, E. (2014). What Makes a Prototype Novel?: A Knowledge Contribution Concern for Interaction Design Research. In Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Fun, Fast, Foundational (pp. 531–540). New York, NY, USA: ACM. http://doi.org/10.1145/2639189.2639487
  240. Wickson, F., Carew, A. L., & Russell, A. W. (2006). Transdisciplinary research: characteristics, quandaries and quality. Futures, 38(9), 1046–1059. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2006.02.011
  241. Wieringa, R., Daneva, M., & Condori-Fernandez, N. (2011). The structure of design theories, and an analysis of their use in software engineering experiments. In Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 2011 International Symposium on (pp. 295–304). IEEE.
  242. Wilson, E. O. (1999). Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (Reprint edition). New York: Vintage.
  243. Winch, S., Henderson, A., & Creedy, D. (2009). The growth of ideas and theoryin nursing. Contexts of Nursing: An Introduction, 95.
  244. Zald, M. N. (1995). Progress and Cumulation in the Human Sciences after the Fall. Sociological Forum, 10(3), 455–479.
  245. Zetterberg, H. L. (1963). On Theory and Verification in Sociology (2nd edition). Bedminster Press.
  246. Ziman, J. (2002). Universalism and Unification. In … Real Science: What it Is and What it Means (pp. 117–154). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  247. Zimmerman, J., Evenson, S., & Forlizzi, J. (2005). Discovering and Extracting Knowledge in the Design Project.
  248. Zimmerman, J., & Forlizzi, J. (2008). The role of design artifacts in design theory construction. Artifact, 2(1), 41–45.
  249. Zimmerman, J., Stolterman, E., & Forlizzi, J. (2010). An analysis and critique of Research through Design: towards a formalization of a research approach. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (pp. 310–319). ACM.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: