This commentary is on Shirley Gregor’s (2006) article titled “The Nature of Theory in Information Systems”, published in MIS Quarterly. In terms of theories, five types have been prominent in Gregor’s classification: (a) Theory of Analyzing (b) Theory of Explaining (c) Theory of Prediction (d) Theory of Explaining and Predicting (e) Theory of Design and Action. The author argued that this can help researchers to choose a differing epistemological approach to develop a theory that is under development. Furthermore, a structural breakdown of the theory has been projected that gives a better and clear understanding of the essential parts of the theory to researchers. However, some important questions emerge after reading the most cited article about the nature of theory in IS. The major ones are: (a) What is the difference between theory in general and theory in IS?, (b) Are the structural parts of the theory described by Gregor exhaustive and correctly presented?, (c) Different classifications of theories presented by Gregor are theory or theorizing in nature, and finally, (d) Gregor argued that management scientists did not provide anything regarding design and action theory, is that true?

该评论基于Shirley Gregor（2006）发表在《 MIS Quarterly》上的题为“信息系统理论的本质”的文章。在理论上，Gregor的分类有五种类型：（a）分析理论（b）解释理论（c）预测理论（d）解释和预测理论（e）设计与行动理论。作者认为这可以帮助研究人员选择不同的认识论方法来发展正在发展的理论。此外，已计划对该理论进行结构分解，以使研究人员可以更好，更清楚地了解该理论的基本部分。但是，在阅读了引用最多的有关IS中理论性质的文章后，出现了一些重要问题。主要的是：