Author(s):  
Sven A. Carlsson

The information systems (IS) field is dominated by positivistic research approaches and theories (Chen & Hirschheim, 2004). IS scholars have pointed out weaknesses in these approaches and theories and in response different strands of post-modern theories and constructivism have gained popularity— see, Lee, Liebenau, and DeGross (1997) and Trauth (2001). The approaches argued for include ethnography, constructivism, grounded theory, and theories like Giddens’ structuration theory and Latour’s actor-network theory. (We refer to these different research approaches and theories as “post-approaches” and “post-theories” when distinction is not required).


Author(s):  
Charlotte P. Lee ◽  
Kjeld Schmidt

The study of computing infrastructures has grown significantly due to the rapid proliferation and ubiquity of large-scale IT-based installations. At the same time, recognition has also grown of the usefulness of such studies as a means for understanding computing infrastructures as material complements of practical action. Subsequently the concept of “infrastructure” (or “information infrastructures,” “cyberinfrastructures,” and “infrastructuring”) has gained increasing importance in the area of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) as well as in neighboring areas such as Information Systems research (IS) and Science and Technology Studies (STS). However, as such studies have unfolded, the very concept of “infrastructure” is being applied in different discourses, for different purposes, in myriad different senses. Consequently, the concept of “infrastructure” has become increasingly muddled and needs clarification. The chapter presents a critical investigation of the vicissitudes of the concept of “infrastructure” over the last 35 years.


1997 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 69-74
Author(s):  
Sushil Jajodia ◽  
Daniel Barbará ◽  
Alex Brodsky ◽  
Larry Kerschberg ◽  
Ami Motro ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document