The PIOCO model for information systems design
MIS Quarterly
Price and value of decision support systems
MIS Quarterly
Expert systems: a question of liability?
MIS Quarterly
Strategic data planning: lessons from the field
MIS Quarterly
Controlling prototype development through risk analysis
MIS Quarterly
The untapped potential of IT chargeback
MIS Quarterly
Understanding GDSS in symbolic context: shifting the focus from technology to interaction
MIS Quarterly - Special issue on Intensive research in information systems: using qualitative, interpretive, and case methods to study information technology—third installment
ACM SIGMIS Database - Special issue on Critical analysis of ERP systems: the macro level
ACM SIGMIS Database
A theoretical framework of component-based software development phases
ACM SIGMIS Database
Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Bridging the Socio-technical Gap in Decision Support Systems: Challenges for the Next Decade
Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Emergent Digital EcoSystems
A feature model of actor, agent, and object programming languages
Proceedings of the compilation of the co-located workshops on DSM'11, TMC'11, AGERE!'11, AOOPES'11, NEAT'11, & VMIL'11
Theories in online information privacy research: A critical review and an integrated framework
Decision Support Systems
Framing the Context of Use for Mobile HCI
International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction
Key factors for adopting inner source
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)
Toward an understanding of the nature and conceptualization of outsourcing success
Information and Management
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Review and framework articles, which are commonly used to synthesize the research literature on a topic area can be important tools for advancing the state of knowledge in a field of inquiry. However, the appraisal of, and the distinction between, survey review and framework articles are often difficult because of the common focus on analyzing a substantial volume of literature. As more review and framework articles are produced with the concomitant increase in outlets for publication, such as MISQ Review and JAIS, it seems this is an opportune time for a reflexive pause regarding what are appropriate criteria for authors and reviewers to have in assessing such articles and recognizing their salient features. By assessing a representative sample of North American journals and IS researchers currently working in U.S. institutions, we present a set of criteria for the assessment of survey review and framework articles and identify the most salient features of these types of articles. Our findings suggest that, among other things, a "good" framework article should offer a clear guideline (indicating possible problems that can be examined within the stated framework), consist of a parsimonious set of elements, and have a clearly defined boundary. On the other hand, a good review article should advance the field as a result of consolidating prior research, identify and propose testable hypotheses, and focus on simplifying past results. We also found that both framework and review articles can be characterized according to their stated objective, comprehensiveness, relationship to research boundaries, temporal focus, and content focus. As our effort focuses primarily on our colleagues working in U.S. institutions, we invite our colleagues from other regions and academic traditions to make similar assessments of work from their perspectives.