A Discipline Divided: Globalization and Parochialism in Information Systems Research

This research note examines an apparent paradox in Information Systems (IS) research. This paradox relates to the parochial nature of much of the published IS research (both in terms of the chosen journal outlet and the literature cited), notwithstanding the global nature of the phenomena being investigated. It does so by reviewing author \u27nationality\u27 in four leading IS journals over a seven-year period (1994-2000), and by reviewing the \u27nationality\u27 of the literature cited by these authors. Two of the journals are published in the USA and two are published in Europe. Despite apparent recognition of increasing globalization in our field, brought about - in part at least - by information technology (IT), the data provide firm evidence that the IS discipline is marked by a distinct parochialism along national, or at least, regional lines. A reorientation appears to be required if leading IS journals are not to continue to be the unwitting mouthpieces of unwitting researchers, publishing the results of partial, culturally biased research. The findings also contain profound implications for published material based on citation analyses and on our understanding of what constitutes the appellation \u27international\u27 in our discipline

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

The Contribution of Top IS Publications to Subsequent Research: A Citation Analysis

Information Systems (IS) research is undertaken to advance the body of knowledge on IS-related phenomena at the individual, group, and organizational levels of analysis. The goals of conducting IS research range from individual learning—e.g., the intellectual development of individual scholars over community learning; e.g., the enhancement of research in the broader IS academic community to the improvement of practice in organizations. Whereas IS research has been criticized for having limited practical relevance, many scholars have assumed that IS research is succeeding in having a major impact on the IS academic community itself. This article challenges the assumption. Using citations as a proxy for contributions to subsequent research—or research importance—this study presents average citation figures for 1,992 papers published in six peer-reviewed IS journals between 1996 and 2010. It finds that citation figures are strongly skewed, with a vast majority of works published in top IS outlets being cited rather rarely. The article offers a discussion of the factors that may account for this finding and closes with a brief summary and outlook

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

Open Access: A Cause, but not the Cause

peerReviewe

Does “Evaluating Journal Quality and the Association for Information Systems Senior Scholars Journal Basket…” Support the Basket with Bibliometric Measures?

We re-examine “Evaluating Journal Quality and the Association for Information Systems Senior Scholars Journal Basket…” by Lowry et al. (2013). They sought to use bibliometric methods to validate the Basket as the eight top quality journals that are “strictly speaking, IS journals” (Lowry et al., 2013, pp. 995, 997). They examined 21 journals out of 140 journals considered as possible IS journals. We also expand the sample to 73 of the 140 journals. Our sample includes a wider range of approaches to IS, although all were suggested by IS scholars in a survey by Lowry and colleagues. We also use the same sample of 21 journals in Lowry et al. with the same methods of analysis so far as possible. With the narrow sample, we replicate Lowry et al. as closely as we can, whereas with the broader sample we employ a conceptual replication. This latter replication also employs alternative methods. For example, we consider citations (a quality measure) and centrality (a relevance measure in this context) as distinct, rather than merging them as in Lowry et al. High centrality scores from the sample of 73 journals do not necessarily indicate close connections with IS. Therefore, we determine which journals are of high quality and closely connected with the Basket and with their sample. These results support the broad purpose of Lowry et al., finding a wider set of high quality and relevant journals than just MISQ and ISR, and find a wider set of relevant, top quality journals

Editorial Board Memberships: A Report on the Status of the Leading Information Systems Journals

Research journals play a significant role in the generation, dissemination, and sharing of knowledge in an academic discipline. To a great extent, the editorial board members of these research journals manage and control the generation, dissemination, and sharing of knowledge. They also act as policymakers, gatekeepers, and trendsetters. In their latter roles, editorial board members can influence several factors in a discipline; namely, the research topics, the research methods, the research scope, and whose articles are published. The primary goal of this study is to investigate and report on the status of the editorial boards memberships in a set of 14 leading Information Systems (IS) journals. The study does this along the following three main diversity elements namely titles, gender, academic institution, and the geographical location of the editorial boards’ members. The set of 14 journals include the IS basket of 8 journal list. Of the 14 reviewed journals, 7 are domiciled in the US and 7 in Europe. Results reveal a lack of common editorial board classification criteria whereby members of the editorial boards were categorized into different groups and referred to using various titles such as senior editors, associate editors, editorial board members, editorial review board members, and board of editors. Also, the results show that, as of June 2020, the 14 IS journals’ editorial boards had 1214 instances (988 unique occurrences) of editorial board members who came from 44 unique countries. Of those 988 editorial board members, 253 (26%) were females while 736 (74%) were males. In addition, out of the 988 editorial board members, 48% were from US and Canada, 26% were from Europe, and 26% were from the rest of the world. The results also reveal the schools and faculty with the highest number of editorial board memberships. Having a significant number of editorial board members from US and Europe (74%) fits with what Kubota (2019) called epistemological racism; a practice in which the Western world has an upper hand in determining and controlling knowledge and academic practices. Given the roles of the editorial boards in the review process and setting the research agenda for a journal, a more diverse editorial board might publish a more diverse research output. Furthermore, a more diverse editorial board is likely to have a repertoire of internal reviewers who speed up and lower the review process costs, which are challenges inherent in a less diverse editorial board

Using Social Network Analysis to Analyze Relationships Among IS Journals

Social network analysis (SNA) offers a richer and more objective way of examining individual journal influence and relationships among journals than studies based on individual perceptions, since it avoids personal biases. This article demonstrates how SNA can be used to study the nature of the IS discipline, by presenting results from an exploratory SNA of 125 previously ranked journals from IS and allied disciplines. While many of the most prominent journals in the network are still associated with IS’s foundational disciplines, we identify several IS journals that play important roles in disseminating information throughout different subcomponents of the network. We also identify related groups of journals based not only on patterns of information flow, but also on similarity in citation patterns. This enables us to identify the core set of journals that is important for “pure IS” research, as well as other subsets of journals that are important for specialty areas of interest. Overall, results indicate that the IS discipline is still somewhat fragmented and is still a net receiver, as opposed to a net provider, of information from allied disciplines. Like other forms of analysis, SNA is not entirely free from biases. However, these biases can be systematically researched in order to develop an improved, consistent tool with which to examine the IS field via citations among member journals. Thus, while many challenges remain in applying SNA techniques to the study of IS journals, the opportunity to track trends in the discipline over time, with a larger basket of journals, suggests a number of valuable future applications of SNA for understanding the IS publication system

Digital Transformation and IT: Current State of Research

Information Systems (IS) have never been more important as digital technologies are essential for business model innovation by developing new digital products and services. Digital transformation not only affects business, but also IT. While digital transformation and digital technologies are well established research areas, the implications of digital transformation on IT are rarely in focus. Taking this topic as a reference, the paper contributes to general IS research by assessing to which extent digital innovation is already subject to mainstream IS research. A bibliometric study analyzing all 2,833 articles published in the AIS Senior Scholars’ \u27basket\u27 of eight leading IS journals between 2007 and 2016 reveals that a mere 0.2% address the impact of digital transformation on IT while 2.3% cover topics of digital transformation, innovation, or digital technologies. In contrast to previous work, this study finds that digital innovation research is already present in primarily high-ranked IS journals

IS Journal Quality Assessment Using the Author Affiliation Index

Research productivity is one means by which academic units attain legitimacy within their institutional milieu and make their case for resources. Journal quality assessment is an important component for assessing faculty research productivity. We introduce the Author Affiliation Index (AAI), a simple method for assessing journal quality, to the IS domain. Essentially, the AAI of a journal is the percentage of academic authors publishing in that journal who are affiliated with a base set of high-quality academic institutions. Besides explaining the AAI, we demonstrate its use with a set of well-known IS journals, discuss its rankings vis-à-vis those resulting from other methods, and provide an example of how the basic AAI approach can be modified by changing the base school set that is used to define journal quality. The AAI has a number of advantages. First, it is a simple, low cost and transparent method for assessing any journal given a base school set. Second, it provides a consistent ranking of journals, particularly of those beyond the top consensus journals where less consistency is achieved with other measures. Third, it enables new journals to be rapidly assessed against more established ones without the lags or costs of other measures. The AAI provides another indicator of journal quality that is different from surveys and citation analyses