Can Design Science Research Bridge Computer Human Interaction and Information Systems?

  • Laura TarantinoEmail author
  • Paolo Spagnoletti
Part of the Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation book series (LNISO, volume 2)


The initial view of the Information System (IS) community was to consider IS as an “applied” discipline borrowing theories and methods from more mature “reference disciplines”. As ISs shifted from a techno-centric focus to a more balanced view of technology, organizational, management, and social focus, traditional reference disciplines proved to be poor models for emergent goals of IS studies, and the IS field began to pose itself as independent of them. A further shift was advocated in 2002 by Baskerville and Myers who suggested that IS was mature enough to start to create a bidirectional flow of knowledge with other fields. Though this view has been recently challenged by some empirical studies, in this Chapter we contribute to this intellectual discourse through a conceptual analysis of links between the IS and the HCI body of knowledge. In particular we discuss about a possible role of Design Science Research as a cultural and methodological bridge between the two disciplines.


Information systems Computer human interaction Design theory 


  1. 1.
    Keen, P. G. W. (1980). MIS Research: reference disciplines and a cumulative tradition (pp. 9–18), in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Information Systems, E. McLean (Ed.), Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Culnan, M. J. (1987). Mapping the intellectual structure of MIS, 1980–1985: A co-citation analysis. MIS Quarterly, 11, 341–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gregor, S. (2006). The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611–642.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baskerville, R. L., & Myers, M. D. (2002). Information systems as a reference discipline. MIS Quarterly, 26(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davis, G. (2000). Information systems conceptual foundations: Looking backward and forward. In R. Baskerville, J. Stage, & J. DeGross (Eds.), Organizational and social perspectives on information technology (pp. 61–82). Boston: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lee, A. S. (2001). Editorial. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), iii–vii.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Loebbecke, C., & Leidner, D. (2012). The contribution of top IS publications to subsequent research: A citation analysis. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 30, 423–438.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wade, M., Biehl, M., & Kim, H. (2006). Information systems is not a reference discipline (and what we can do about it). Journal of AIS, 7, 247–269.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grover, V., Ayyagari, R., Gokhale, R., & Lim, J. (2006). A citation analysis of the evolution and state of information systems within a constellation of reference disciplines. Journal of AIS, 7, 270–325.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Avison, D., & Fitzgerald, G. (1995). Information systems development: Methodologies, techniques and tools (2nd ed.). London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analysing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ACM SIGCHI (1996). Special interest group on human-computer interaction curriculum development group, Technical Report,
  13. 13.
    Spagnoletti, P., Baskerville, R., De Marco, M. (2012). The contributions of Alessandro D’Atri to organization and information systems studies. In: Baskerville et al. (Eds.), Designing organizational systems: an interdisciplinary discourse. LNISO, vol. 1, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Spagnoletti, P., Tarantino, L. (2012). User centered systems design: The bridging role of justificatory knowledge. In: Baskerville et al. (Eds.), Designing Organizational Systems: An Interdisciplinary Discourse. LNISO vol.1, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lucas, H. C. (1975). Performance and the use of an information system. Management Science, 21(8), 908–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mantei, M., & Teorey, T. (1989). Incorporating behavioral techniques into the system development life cycle. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 257–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang, P., Carey, J., Te’eni, D., & Tremaine, M. (2005). Integrating human-computer interaction development into the systems development life cycle: A methodology. Communications of the AIS, 15, 512–543.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhang, P., Li, N. (2005). The intellectual development of human-computer interaction research: A critical assessment of the MIS. Information Systems Journal, 6(11), 227–292. Citeseer. Retrieved from Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang, P., Benbasat, I., Carey, J., Davis, F., Galletta, D., & Strong, D. (2002). Human-computer interaction research in the MIS discipline. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 9(20), 334–355.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grudin, J. (2005). Three faces of human-computer interaction. Ieee Annals of the History of Computing, 27, 46–62. IEEE educational activities department. doi: 10.1109/MAHC.2005.67.
  21. 21.
    Lee, A. S. (2010). Retrospect and prospect: Information systems research in the last and next 25 years. Journal of Information Technology, 25, 336–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolution (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Harrison, S., Sengers, P. Tatar, D. (2007). The three paradigms of HCI, Proceedings of CHI 2007, April 28–May 3, 2007, San Jose, USA.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Agre, P. E. (1997). Computation and human experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dourish, P. (2001). Where the action is. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Walls, J., Widmeyer, G. El., & Sawy, O. A. (1992). Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 36–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The anatomy of a design theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(5), 312–335.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hevner, A. (2007). A three cycle view of design science research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 87–92.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Goldkuhl, G. (2004). Design theories in information systems—a need for multi-grounding. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 6(2), 7.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fischer, C., Winter, R., & Wortmann, F. (2010). Design theory. Business Information Systems Engineering, 2(6), 387–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of L’AquilaL’AquilaItaly
  2. 2.CeRSI-LUISS Guido Carli UniversityRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations