The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Review of MIS Research and Disciplinary Development
Abstract
:The current study focuses on the development of MIS as a field of research and inquiry and examines its intellectual evolution. These issues are addressed through a systematic examination and analysis of 908 MIS articles published between 1968 and 1988 in eight core journals. The articles were analyzed for themes, topics. and research approach. The findings identify popular research topics. the dominant research perspective, and the relationship between MIS research and practice. The popular research topics consist of: IS management, information systems types and characteristics, and development and operation of systems. The dominant research perspective employed in almost all of the empirical articles included in the study can be characterized as a traditional approach reflecting a positivist orientation.
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
Information Technology and Organizational Change: Causal Structure in Theory and Research
Markus, M. L., & Robey, D. (1988) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.34.5.583 · Cited by 2,108
User Involvement and MIS Success: A Review of Research
Ives, B., & Olson, M. H. (1984) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.30.5.586 · Cited by 1,318
An Assessment of the Contingency Theory of Management Information Systems
Weill, P., & Olson, M. H. (1989) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.1989.11517849 · Cited by 351
Viewpoint: choosing appropriate information systems research methodologies
Galliers, R. D., & Land, F. F. (1987) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/32206.315753 · Cited by 181
Cited by
Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology
Hu, P. J., Chau, P. Y. K., Sheng, O. R. L., & Tam, K. Y. (1999) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.1999.11518247 · Cited by 1,951
A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Information Systems Research
Okoli, C., & Schabram, K. (2011) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1954824 · Cited by 1,849
A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review
Okoli, C. (2015) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.03743 · Cited by 1,413
The maturity of maturity model research: A systematic mapping study
Wendler, R. (2012) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2012.07.007 · Cited by 693
The state of online impulse-buying research: A literature analysis
Chan, T. K. H., Cheung, C. M. K., & Lee, Z. W. Y. (2017) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2016.06.001 · Cited by 686
Metadata
- Authors
- Alavi, M., & Carlson, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Management Information Systems
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1992-03
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 45-62
- ISSN
- 0742-1222 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-928X
- OpenAlex
- W1487101402
- Cited by
- 558
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 10.79
- 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
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.
