An overview of decision table literature.

The present report contains an overview of the literature on decision tables since its origin. The goal is to analyze the dissemination of decision tables in different areas of knowledge, countries and languages, especially showing these that present the most interest on decision table use. In the first part a description of the scope of the overview is given. Next, the classification results by topic are explained. An abstract and some keywords are included for each reference, normally provided by the authors. In some cases own comments are added. The purpose of these comments is to show where, how and why decision tables are used. Other examined topics are the theoretical or practical feature of each document, as well as its origin country and language. Finally, the main body of the paper consists of the ordered list of publications with abstract, classification and comments.

Collaboration and Author Order: Changing Patterns in IS Research

In this article we examine changes in the patterns of collaboration among information systems researchers since 1987, in terms of number of authors and order of authorship. The proportion of multiple authored papers, particularly among articles published in more prestigious journals, increased significantly. One possible explanation may be in increased research complexity, as evidenced by much longer papers. At the same time, among prestigious journals, the alphabetical model for ordering authorship all but disappeared. The article calls for consideration of a standard for authorship order in IS research

A Historiographical Examination of Information Systems

As the Information Systems (IS) field enters its fourth decade of evolution, the time is right to provide a historiographical examination of this discipline. Methodological and thematic trends are gauged through a quarterly analysis of 2098 IS articles published in eight leading journals and the ICIS Proceedings in the 12-year period between 1985-1996. The results of this study show that significant changes occurred in research strategies and themes employed by IS researchers. Even though a large proportion of IS studies are still non-empirical, we see significant upward trend in the proportion of empirical studies. The reliance on reference disciplines increased significantly over the years. Similarly, we see significantly increasing trends in organizational, environmental and educational themes. In contrast, technical issues show decreasing trends. The paper calls for collective efforts to unify knowledge necessary for progress of IS as a scientific field of inquiry

Measuring Researcher-Production in Information Systems

While many studies have assessed IS researcher-production, most have focused on either ranking IS journals or assessing prolific researchers using a restricted time frame and a small inbasketld of journals (i.e., those journals selected for sampling). We found no research that has assessed the IS specificity of journals (i.e., the suitability of journals for publishing IS research) nor any that evaluated IS researcher-production measures. Based on a coding of over 26,000 articles and more than 1,900 authors, this study attempts such an evaluation by (1) determining the rate of publication of IS researchers in 58 journals perceived by at least one IS institution as IS specific, (2) profiling prolific and typical IS researchers using descriptive statistics, (3) evaluating the convergent validity of various researcher-production measures, (4) assessing the reliability of these researcher-production measures by varying baskets of Measuring Researcher-Production in Information Systems by C. Chua, L. Cao, K. Cousins, and D. W. Straub journals and time periods, and (5) comparing the sensitivity of measures across prolific and typical researchers. The study demonstrates that many journals perceived to be of high quality by IS researchers are not specifically targeted to information systems. Changing the evaluation procedure has a significant impact on measures of typical and prolific IS researchers. For typical IS researchers, measures of production are strongly convergent and are not sensitive to changes in journal baskets. However, for prolific researchers, measures of production are not convergent and highly sensitive to changes in journal baskets. The evaluation of both prolific and typical IS researchers is also highly sensitive to temporal effects. The differences in convergent validity and reliability demonstrate that prolific researchers are more sensitive to minor variations in the assessment procedure. Based on the empirical findings, the study closes with recommendations both for the evaluation of researcher-production and for developing institutional target journal lists, i.e., lists of journals viewed favorably by an institution

A Review of the Literature on the Empathy Construct Using Cluster Analysis

Empathy plays a central role in human behavior and is a key aspect of social functioning. The extensive research on the empathy construct in fields such as psychology, social work, and education has revealed many positive aspects of empathy. Through the use of cluster analysis, this research takes a new approach to reviewing the literature on empathy and objectively identifies groups of empathy research. Next, this study relates the information systems (IS) discipline’s focus on empathy research through the projection of IS empathy paragraphs into those clusters, and identifies areas of empathy research that are currently being largely overlooked by the IS field. The use of cluster analysis and projection for conducting a literature review provides researchers with a more objective approach for reviewing relevant literature

Research Models in Information Systems

The use of research models in driving scholarly investigation is of great importance in any field, including information systems (IS). As such, a taxonomy of IS research models should be of substantial value to the discipline. Such a taxonomy is developed in this article based on the IS research literature. Eleven model types are examined in detail in order to investigate how they are used by researchers, in articles published in seven leading IS journals during a recent six year period. Interesting results emerge in the use of models overall, as well as trends over time and relationships with specific methodologies and IS journals. Multi-tier influence diagram is the most used research model in IS research, while the no model, listing of variables, mathematical model, and simple influence diagram also find significant usage among the IS research community. Patterns of model use were also identified based on top journals and prevalent research methodologies

Research Models in Information Systems

The use of research models in driving scholarly investigation is of great importance in any field, including information systems (IS). As such, a taxonomy of IS research models should be of substantial value to the discipline. Such a taxonomy is developed in this article based on the IS research literature. Eleven model types are examined in detail in order to investigate how they are used by researchers, in articles published in seven leading IS journals during a recent six year period. Interesting results emerge in the use of models overall, as well as trends over time and relationships with specific methodologies and IS journals. Multi-tier influence diagram is the most used research model in IS research, while the no model, listing of variables, mathematical model, and simple influence diagram also find significant usage among the IS research community. Patterns of model use were also identified based on top journals and prevalent research methodologies

Global Journal Prestige and Supporting Disciplines: A Scientometric Study of Information Systems Journals

Many argue that the Information Systems (IS) field is at a critical juncture in its evolving identity. In debating whether the IS field is in crisis, we agree with Hirschheim and Klein (2003) that ¡°reflective analysis¡± will contribute to the field¡¯s continued prosperity. Indeed, reflective analysis is needed to evaluate the journals of the field as well as IS journal rankings, which evaluate the effectiveness and productivity of researchers and the effectiveness and productivity of journals in communicating research results. After all, where and how we publish are fundamental aspects of the identity of the IS field¡ªreflecting our value systems, paradigms, cultural practices, reward systems, political hierarchy, and aspirations. This article reviews the results of the largest global, scientometric survey to date of IS journal rankings that targeted 8741 faculty from 414 IS departments world-wide, and resulted in 2559 responses, or a 32% response rate. Rather than using predetermined journal lists, the study required respondents to freely recall their top-four research journals. This research improves on the usual scientometric journal ranking studies by providing a foundation for further reflection and self-analysis. For instance, it first examines the global structure of the IS field and investigates perceptions among global IS academics concerning current research outlets. Specific results then illustrate the values and cultural norms in the global IS community that affect the evaluation of research and publication outlets. Finally, in addition to rankings of scholarly journals by the entire world-wide sample of IS academics, rankings are provided for top IS practitioner journals, most frequently read IS journals, top journals for the major IS supporting disciplines, and top journals by world region

AIS Faculty Familiarity And Perceptions Of AIS Journals

Much research has been published related to journal quality in fields such as accounting, finance, information systems, and management.  In accounting, the sub-disciplines of auditing, financial, management, and tax have received attention in published papers.  This study contributes to the literature by providing an in-depth study of AIS faculty familiarity and perceptions of AIS journals.  I collected faculty perceptions about AIS journals from the American Accounting Association members of the Information Systems and Artificial Intelligence / Emerging Technology sections.  The result is an AIS journal ranking that is substantially different than the rankings produced by other studies of accounting journals