The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Critical Analysis of Decision Support Systems Research Revisited: The Rise of Design Science
Abstract
In 2005 the Journal of Information Technology article ‘A critical analysis of decision support systems research’ analyzed 1020 decision support systems (DSS) articles from 1990 to 2003. Since 2003 business intelligence (BI) and business analytics have gained popularity in practice. In theory and research the period since 2003 has seen a change in the decision-making theory orthodoxy and the codification and acceptance of design science. To investigate the changes in the DSS field, a number of expectations were derived from previous literature analyses. These expectations were assessed using bibliometric content analysis. The article sample to 2010 now includes 1466 articles from 16 journals. The analysis of the expectations yields mixed results for the DSS field. On the negative side, there has been an overall decline in DSS publishing, the relevance of DSS research published in journals to IT professionals has declined, and the rigor of DSS research designs has not improved. On the positive side, there has been improvement in relevance to managers, grant funding of DSS research has increased, there has been a positive shift in judgment and decision-making foundations, BI publishing has increased, and group support systems publishing has reduced to a more balanced level. An important result from the analysis of the last 7 years of DSS research is the significant increase in DSS design-science research (DSR) to almost half of published articles. It is clear from the analysis that DSS is undergoing a transition from a field based on statistical hypothesis testing and conceptual studies to one where DSR is the most popular method.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 18,497 · cited 1×
“Importantly, and as described above, a generosity bias was used in coding to mitigate any negative framing effect (Tversky and Kahneman, 1981).”
Hartley, J. (2004) · Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research · doi:10.4135/9781446280119.n26 · Cited by 15,461
The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update
(2003) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748 · Cited by 11,791
Bell, E., Bryman, A., & Harley, B. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/hebz/9780198869443.001.0001 · Cited by 10,965
Design Science in Information Systems Research1
Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148625 · Cited by 10,707 · cited 7×
“It is no accident that when Hevner et al. (2004) analyzed three exemplars of DSR they chose two DSS articles or when Kuechler and Vaishnavi (2012) analyzed DSR articles for theorizing they only chose DSS studies.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialDesign science in information systems research
(2004) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.5555/2017212.2017217 · Cited by 8,254
Weber, R. (1990) · doi:10.4135/9781412983488 · Cited by 7,750
Business intelligence and analytics: from big data to big impact
Chen, H., Chiang, R. H. L., & Storey, V. C. (2012) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41703503 · Cited by 6,250
Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance
Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249689 · Cited by 6,006
Cited by
Debating big data: a literature review on realizing value from big data
Günther, W. A., Rezazade Mehrizi, M. H., Huysman, M., & Feldberg, F. (2017) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2017.07.003 · Cited by 880
Jussupow, E., Spohrer, K., Heinzl, A., & Gawlitza, J. (2021) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2020.0980 · Cited by 422
Understanding the Factors Affecting the Organizational Adoption of Big Data
Sun, S., Cegielski, C. G., Jia, L., & Hall, D. J. (2018) · Journal of Computer Information Systems · doi:10.1080/08874417.2016.1222891 · Cited by 304
Research Landscape of Business Intelligence and Big Data analytics: A bibliometrics study
Liang, T.-P., & Liu, Y.-H. (2018) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2018.05.018 · Cited by 256
Yang, Q., Steinfeld, A., & Zimmerman, J. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300468 · Cited by 247
Metadata
- Authors
- Arnott, D., & Pervan, G.
- Venue
- Journal of Information Technology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-12
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 269-293
- ISSN
- 0268-3962 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4437
- OpenAlex
- W2000402020
- Cited by
- 198
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 31.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Critical Analysis of Decision Support Systems Research Revisited: The Rise of Design Science. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1057/jit.2014.16
- The paper
- Arnott, D., & Pervan, G. (2014). A Critical Analysis of Decision Support Systems Research Revisited: The Rise of Design Science. Journal of Information Technology. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2014.16
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.