The hypothetico-deductive (H-D) method is reported to be common in information systems (IS). In IS, the H-D method is often presented as a Popperian, Hempelian, or natural science method. However, there are many fundamental differences between what Popper or Hempel actually say and what the alleged H-D method per Hempel or per Popper means in IS. To avoid possible misunderstanding and conceptual confusion about the basic philosophical concepts, we explain some of these differences, which are not mentioned in IS literature describing the H-D model. Due to these distinctive differences, the alleged H-D method per Hempel or per Popper in IS cannot be regarded as the H-D model per Hempel or per Popper. Further, the H-D model is sometimes confused with another model in IS, the deductive-nomological (D-N) model of explanations. Confusing the H-D and D-N methods can also produce stagnation in the fundamental methodological thinking in IS. As one example, the H-D model (per Hempel or per Popper) does not require hypotheses to be based on existing theories or literature. As a result, misunderstanding the H-D model in IS may seriously limit new hypothesis or theory development, as the H-D model in the philosophy of science allows guessing and imagination as the source for hypotheses and theories. We argue that although IS research (1) generally does not follow the H-D method (per Hempel or per Popper), and (2) should not follow the H-D method, (3) we can still learn from the H-D method and criticisms of it. To learn from the H-D method, we outline method of hypothesis (MoH) approaches for further discussion. These MoH approaches are not hypothetico-deductive, but hypothetico-inductive-qualitative or hypothetico-inductive-statistical. The former MoH endeavors to be suitable for qualitative research, while the latter is aimed for statistical research in IS.

据报道，假设演绎（HD）方法在信息系统（IS）中很常见。在IS中，HD方法通常表示为Popperian，Hempelian或自然科学方法。但是，Popper或Hempel实际说的话与所谓的每个Hempel或每个Popper的HD方法在IS中的含义之间有许多根本区别。为了避免对基本哲学概念的可能的误解和概念上的混淆，我们解释了其中的一些差异，在描述HD模型的IS文献中未提及。由于这些明显的差异，IS中每个Hempel或每个Popper所谓的HD方法不能被视为每个Hempel或每个Popper的HD模型。此外，HD模型有时会与IS中的另一个模型（演绎演绎（DN）模型）相混淆。HD和DN方法的混淆也会在IS的基本方法论思想中产生停滞。作为一个示例，HD模型（每个He​​mpel或每个Popper）不需要假设基于现有的理论或文献。结果，对IS中HD模型的误解可能会严重限制新的假设或理论的发展，因为科学哲学中的HD模型允许猜测和想象作为假设和理论的来源。我们认为，尽管IS研究（1）通常不遵循HD方法（针对每个Hempel或针对Popper），并且（2）不应当遵循HD方法，但（3）我们仍然可以从HD方法及其批评中学习。要从高清方法中学习，我们概述了假设方法（MoH）方法，以供进一步讨论。这些MoH方法不是假设推论的，但假设归纳定性或假设归纳统计。前者卫生部致力于适合定性研究，而后者旨在进行IS中的统计研究。