{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016853932584269662, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002106741573033708, 'mean_word_length': 5.1688311688311686, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Viewpoint: choosing appropriate information systems research methodologies

We believe we should draw attention to two disturbing tendencies in information systems (IS) research. The first relates to the primacy of traditional, empirical research more suited to the natural sciences, at the expense of less conventional approaches that nevertheless provide important contributions to our search for improved knowledge. Although the experimental design of such IS research may well be academically acceptable and internally consistent, all too often it leads to inconclusive or inapplicable results. The second relates to the tendency of some of our most respected institutions to advocate a particular mode of IS research irrespective of the particular IS topic being studied. Evidence for both these contentions can he found in the results of a study undertaken by Vogel and Wetherbe [6]. For example, they suggest that as much as 85 percent of published IS research undertaken by leading U.S. institutions is of the traditional kind. In order to gain some insight into what constitutes appropriate research in the field of IS, it is advisable first to consider the nature of information systems themselves and then to look at what we hope to gain from undertaking research in the area. Traditionally, the topic has often been viewed as residing, for the most part at least, within the province of technology. Increasingly,