How We Invent What We Measure: A Constructionist Critique of the Empiricist Bias in IS Research

This paper starts out with the discussion of two metaphysical assumptions on which IS research can be based, namely positivism and constructionism. While positivism believes in the existence of an objective and measurable world, constructionism holds that the world is a social construct. Depending on the metaphysical basis, the IS researcher chooses a methodological approach. Traditionally, positivist researchers use empirical research since this corresponds well with the metaphysical assumptions. However, even those researchers who hold constructionist beliefs and accordingly use other methodologies such as interpretivist, hermeneutic or action research tend to do empirical research. The paper gives a critique of empiricism. It demonstrates that the idea that empirical research can show us the world as it is is based on positivist ideas. Empiricism generally produces self-fulfilling prophecies. Empirical research can only function on the basis of a pre-conception of the world and it can only be relevant within that pre-conception. If this is so then the question remains why constructionist researchers still use empirical methods. The paper concludes by arguing that empirical research by constructionist researchers may have a value as a starting point for narratives. However, taking constructionism serious also means that empiricism's value neutrality does not exist and that IS researchers must face their social responsibilities.