Templates · theory-building
Theory construction (E2ET theory lab)
Cross-disciplinary IS theory generation via bisociation: 60 disciplinary personas across 8 tiers in an iterative loop that converges on propositions, constructs and a research agenda.
Where it sits
left: what it builds on · right: what builds on it · pale: exampleContributed by E2ET contributors
How studies reach it
Disciplines it reaches
Solid: published studies. Light: examples.
Computed from the records on this site: what each study, template and specialist names as used, which study extends which, and who contributed what. 3 studies in total.
- Input
- A raw phenomenon seed
- Output
- A theory brief: propositions, constructs, mechanisms, boundary conditions, theory type and a research agenda
Description
Data model- Discipline
- Information systems
- Method family
- Theoretical
- Design
- not specified
- Research stage
- Research questionLiterature synthesisHypothesesFormal modelingReview
- Contributors
- E2ET contributors (Software, Methodology, Conceptualization)
- Usage
- not used in published research yet · Examples: 3 example studies
- Source
- E2ET theory lab (local) · src/theory_lab
- Record
- template:theory-building · JSON
Solid tags are declared by the source or mapped from its terms; dashed tags are inferred by a published rule. Hover a tag for its provenance.
The theory lab at a glance
The core creative mechanism is bisociation (Koestler): combining two previously unrelated frames of reference. The rounds repeat until the evaluator's weighted score reaches the threshold, for at most five rounds; after the fifth, E2ET marks the run as converged whatever the score.
- Phenomenologist refines the seed
- Cartographer maps the theory landscape
- Scout director picks a core team and a guest pool
- Personas write transfer reports in parallel
- Bisociation links reports that connect
- Synthesizer: batch 1: abduction, articulation, coherence; batch 2: formalization, severe test; batch 3: story check, type check
- Evaluator scores the theory
- Integrator builds the theory brief
- Researcher approves, iterates or rejects
Evaluation criteria
| Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|
| novelty Does the theory offer genuinely new insight through cross-disciplinary bisociation? Does it reveal something that researchers in the home field would not see? | 0.25 |
| explanatory coherence Is the theory internally consistent? Do propositions support each other? Are there contradictions or gaps in the causal chain? | 0.30 |
| falsifiability Are the predictions specific, concrete, and testable? Could an empirical study clearly confirm or refute them? Are falsification conditions stated? | 0.25 |
| boundary clarity Are scope conditions well-defined? Is it clear when and where the theory applies and when it does not? Are boundary conditions precise rather than vague? | 0.20 |
Quoted from src/theory_lab/agents/evaluator.py. The theory converges at a weighted score of 0.70.
Tiers of intellectual distance
Personas are grouped by their distance from information systems, from tier 0 (IS itself) to tier 7 (law).
Steps
- 1 specialistphenomenologistPre-round agent that refines a raw phenomenon seed into a structured phenomenon analysis suitable for theory landscape mapping.
- 2 specialistcartographerPre-round agent that maps the existing theory landscape around a refined phenomenon, identifying gaps and cross-disciplinary opportunities.
- 3 specialistscout_directorPre-round agent that selects core team and guest pool personas from the roster, based on the phenomenon and theory landscape analysis.
- 4 checkteam_validationEvery selected persona must exist in the roster, and the core team and guest pool must not overlap.
- 5 specialists, parallel, each roundpersona_reportsCore team and guests each write a transfer report: source model, target phenomenon, structural mapping, proposed mechanism, boundary conditions and testable predictions. From round 2 each persona also receives the evaluator’s feedback.
- 6 each roundbisociationLinks reports that share a mechanism, use structurally analogous mappings, address each other’s boundary conditions or yield converging predictions.
- 7 specialist, each roundsynthesisSeven micro-stages in three batches: abduction, articulation, coherence, formalization, severe test, story check, type check.
- 8 check, each roundevaluationScores novelty, explanatory coherence, falsifiability and boundary clarity. At a weighted score of 0.7 or more the theory has converged; otherwise guests rotate and the next round starts, up to five rounds.
- 9 specialistintegratorPost-convergence agent that transforms raw propositions, constructs, and mechanisms into a coherent, integrated theoretical framework with: 1.
- 10 humanhuman_reviewThe researcher approves, iterates with feedback or a different team, or rejects the theory brief.
Versions and evaluations
One version, unreleasedOne version so far: E2ET's src/theory_lab, which runs locally and is not yet released. No evaluation records exist yet.
Checks on this template
- ✓Output contracts · Every step produced the artifact it declared, in the declared form
Required of every template. - ✓Execution reliability · Analysis code ran and wrote a parseable, non-empty result
Required of every template. - –Numbers · Every number in tables and text matches the output of executed code
Not applicable. This method produces no computed numbers to match. - ○Citations · Every reference resolves to an existing publication via OpenAlex, Semantic Scholar or Crossref
Proposed. Proposed for the floor; runs log it but may not block on it. - ○Verbatim passages · Every claim about a source points to a passage found word for word in that source
Proposed. Proposed for the floor; runs log it but may not block on it.