Jais Theory Development

Theory Development (jais-theory-development)

When to trigger

• Your claims are descriptive ("A is associated with B") with no IS mechanism
• You are targeting the Theory category and need a genuinely new construct or framework, not a relabeled import
• You built an IT artifact but cannot say what generalizable design knowledge it embodies
• A Senior Editor or reviewer says "the theoretical contribution is unclear" or "this is a borrowed-theory application"
• You have a novel digital phenomenon and need a disciplined pre-theoretical framing

Why theory carries more weight at JAIS

JAIS is the AIS flagship and the Basket journal that treats theory as a contribution in its own right — it runs a standalone Theory category for "original theory" that proposes new concepts or integrates existing theories into novel frameworks. Even in empirical Research Articles, JAIS discourages primary construct development as the headline move — meaning a paper whose contribution is a new construct usually belongs in Theory, not as a bolt-on to a Research Article. This is the JAIS-specific discipline: name your theoretical genre, then build to that genre's bar.

Theory takes a different shape by genre — pick your row

Build a new construct properly (the Theory-category trap)

A relabeled existing construct is the most common Theory desk-reject. To clear the bar: define the construct precisely; distinguish it from its nearest neighbors (discriminant logic, not just a new name); specify its dimensions and how it would be measured; and embed it in a nomological net of antecedents and consequences. JAIS reviewers reward a construct that does work the field's existing vocabulary cannot.

Cross- and inter-disciplinary borrowing is a feature, used correctly

JAIS explicitly "encourages theory based multi- or inter-disciplinary research," so importing from economics, psychology, sociology, organization theory, or computer science is welcome — but the import must be transformed by the IS context. The strongest theory papers run a round trip: they borrow a theory, show how a digital phenomenon breaks or extends one of its assumptions, and return a revised theory that the source discipline would also find new. A one-way import ("we apply self-determination theory to app use") is the weak version; a round trip ("autonomous AI agents violate self-determination theory's assumption that competence is self-earned, requiring a revised account of motivation under delegated competence") is the JAIS version.

Integrate theories without flattening them

A "novel integration" must change what each source theory predicts, not staple them side by side. State the tension or gap between the theories, then show how the integration resolves it and yields predictions neither theory makes alone. Multi- or inter-disciplinary borrowing is encouraged — but the IS phenomenon must reshape the borrowed theory, not merely host it.

Derive claims before you look at results

Whatever the genre, JAIS expects the theoretical logic to precede the evidence. State the mechanism in words — what is the IT-enabled force, on whom, through what channel, and when does it reverse — then write the hypotheses (behavioral), comparative-statics predictions (economics), or design propositions (design science) that follow from it. Theorize mediation as a channel and moderation as a reason the IT effect strengthens or weakens, rather than as terms you happen to test. Predictions that merely restate correlations the data already revealed are HARKing, and a developmental Senior Editor will read the seams.