Validity in Design Science

Researchers must ensure that the claims about the knowledge produced by their work are valid. However, validity is neither well-understood nor consistently established in design science, which involves the development and evaluation of artifacts (models, methods, instantiations, and theories) to solve problems. As a result, it is challenging to demonstrate and communicate the validity of knowledge claims about artifacts. This paper defines validity in design science and derives the Design Science Validity Framework and a process model for applying it. The framework comprises three high-level claim and validity types-criterion, causal, and context-as well as validity subtypes. The framework guides researchers in integrating validity considerations into projects employing design science and contributes to the growing body of research on design science methodology. It also provides a systematic way to articulate and validate the knowledge claims of design science projects. We apply the framework to examples from existing research and then use it to demonstrate the validity of knowledge claims about the framework itself.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
MIS Quarterly
Published
2025-09-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2024/18064
Citations
10
Primary Topic
Information Systems Theories and Implementation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
42.02
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Validity in Design Science

Veda C. Storey, Dirk S. Hovorka, Jeffrey Parsons, Roland M. Mueller et al.
10 citations
MIS Quarterly
Information Systems Theories and Implementation
42.02
article

Validity in Design Science

Veda C. Storey, Dirk S. Hovorka, Jeffrey Parsons, Roland M. Mueller, Kai R. Larsen, Debra VanderMeer, Roman Lukyanenko
article en
10 citations

Abstract

Researchers must ensure that the claims about the knowledge produced by their work are valid. However, validity is neither well-understood nor consistently established in design science, which involves the development and evaluation of artifacts (models, methods, instantiations, and theories) to solve problems. As a result, it is challenging to demonstrate and communicate the validity of knowledge claims about artifacts. This paper defines validity in design science and derives the Design Science Validity Framework and a process model for applying it. The framework comprises three high-level claim and validity types-criterion, causal, and context-as well as validity subtypes. The framework guides researchers in integrating validity considerations into projects employing design science and contributes to the growing body of research on design science methodology. It also provides a systematic way to articulate and validate the knowledge claims of design science projects. We apply the framework to examples from existing research and then use it to demonstrate the validity of knowledge claims about the framework itself.

MIS QuarterlyVol. 49(4)
The University of Sydney (AU), Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA), Georgia State University (US), University of Colorado Boulder (US), Florida International University (US), Berlin School of Economics and Law (DE), University of Virginia (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Information Systems Theories and Implementation
42.02
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.