Aesthetic Perspectives in Information Systems Research: A Hermeneutic Analysis

This academic paper examines how aesthetic philosophy implicitly shapes Information Systems research, identifying four foundational aesthetic perspectives (imitation, sensory experience, world-making, and political doing) that influence what scholars consider worthy of study. The analysis reveals that aesthetic assumptions form epistemic infrastructure that determines research visibility and legitimacy, with implications for how sociotechnical phenomena like algorithmic management are theorized.

This hermeneutic literature analysis addresses a gap in Information Systems scholarship by elevating aesthetic philosophy from an overlooked dimension to a central analytical lens. The authors argue that aesthetic perspectives—often implicit rather than explicit—fundamentally shape what IS researchers perceive as legitimate inquiry subjects and methodology choices. By identifying four distinct aesthetic frameworks, they demonstrate that research visibility isn't determined solely by empirical rigor or theoretical sophistication but by underlying aesthetic assumptions about what constitutes worthy knowledge.

The work traces how different aesthetic perspectives create different epistemological horizons. An aesthetic of imitation emphasizes representation fidelity, sensory experience foregrounds embodied interactions, world-making highlights systemic relationships, and political doing centers on social transformation. Each lens illuminates different aspects of sociotechnical systems while obscuring others. The authors illustrate this through algorithmic management and digital intimacy cases, showing how dominant aesthetic framings overlook critical dimensions that alternative perspectives would surface.

This framework carries implications for IS scholarship's development trajectory and legitimacy boundaries. Researchers operating within uncritical aesthetic assumptions may systematically exclude valuable research questions, methodologies, and phenomena from disciplinary recognition. The analysis suggests that explicit aesthetic reflexivity strengthens rather than compromises scientific rigor by clarifying interpretive foundations. For the broader academic community, this work models how philosophy of aesthetics can productively inform domain-specific scholarship, potentially inspiring similar analyses across disciplines.

Future IS research may increasingly incorporate aesthetic reflexivity as scholars recognize how aesthetic assumptions condition knowledge production, potentially opening previously invisible research territories and enabling more comprehensive theorization of sociotechnical phenomena.

• →Implicit aesthetic perspectives in IS research shape which phenomena gain recognition as legitimate study subjects and which remain invisible.
• →Four aesthetic frameworks—imitation, sensory experience, world-making, and political doing—guide how scholars perceive sociotechnical systems differently.
• →Making aesthetic assumptions explicit reveals epistemic infrastructure that conditions research horizons and methodological choices.
• →Alternative aesthetic perspectives on algorithmic management and digital intimacy expose dimensions overlooked by dominant research framings.
• →Aesthetic reflexivity strengthens IS scholarship by clarifying interpretive foundations rather than compromising scientific rigor.