  Research in information systems includes a wide range of approaches which
make a contribution in terms of knowledge, understanding, or practical
developments. The measure of any research is, ultimately, its validity: are its
finding true, or its recommendations correct? However, empirical studies show
that discussion of validity in research is often weak. In this paper we examine
the nature of truth and correctness in order to construct a validation
framework that can encompass all the varied forms of research. Within
philosophy, there has been much debate about truth, is it correspondence,
coherence, consensual or pragmatic, and in fact current views revolve around
the idea of a pluralist view of truth: it is one and many. Related to truth is
the concept of correctness, and in particular the necessity of both internal
correctness and external correctness. The framework we develop based on these
concepts of truth and correctness has been applied to a range of research forms
including positivist, mathematical, interpretive, design science, critical and
action oriented. The benefits are: i) that a greater and more explicit focus on
validity criteria will produce better research; ii) having a single framework
can unite what at times seem conflicting approaches to research; iii) having
criteria made explicit should encourage debate and further development.
