CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 112E-Government and Public ServicesPublic Policy and Administration ResearchPublic Administration and Political Analysis

A meta-analysis of empirical e-government research and its future research implications

Wirtz, Bernd W., Daiser, Peter·2018·International Review of Administrative Sciences
DOI 10.1177/0020852315599047
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The desired e-government potentials and its shortcomings in reality are key reasons why e-government has become a major topic of interest to academics and practitioners, leading to an extensive body of knowledge. However, the literature still demands further quantitative empirical research to substantiate theory development. This situation calls for a specific review of the literature that arranges relevant knowledge and provides a solid foundation for future research. However, available meta-analyses do not deliver the particular insights to appropriately address the shortage of quantitative empirical e-government research. Therefore, this study explicitly focuses on this specific field to systematically uncover areas requiring further exploration, and defines promising research directions for a solid foundation for future investigations. Key findings of the meta-analysis are: the existence of a systematic divide of existing quantitative empirical e-government studies into 12 research subtopics, which are assessed according to different classification criteria for scientific research gap-spotting; the identification of emerging subtopics that carry innovative research potential; and that e-government is expected to be an ongoing, open-ended research environment that still provides manifold investigative opportunities. Based on these findings, straightforward suggestions for future research are provided. Points for practitioners: Beyond providing insights into the current state of quantitative empirical research for scientific researchers, this article also delivers value for professionals working in public management and administration. First, the study provides a comprehensive overview of e-government-related meta-analyses, which allows us to quickly identify the literature in order to tackle particular e-government management issues. Second, the article classifies existing quantitative empirical studies, defines specific subject areas and arranges relevant knowledge, which eases the processes of confining and labelling e-government activities. Last, since these deliverables are based on empirical studies that draw their conclusions from perceptions of reality, the summaries and classifications are thus regarded to be of special importance for public managers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0020852315599047

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is a lack of studies that consider both user and provider perspectives in empirical e-government research.

    “It should also be noted that, in general, there is a lack of studies that consider both user and provider perspectives in empirical e- government research (Wirtz and Daiser, 2018).”

    From Recommendations for digital inclusion in the use of European digital public services (2025) · cites this paper as Wirtz and Daiser, 2018

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wirtz, B. W., & Daiser, P.
Affiliations
German University of Administrative Sciences (DE)
Corresponding author
Wirtz, Bernd W.
ORCID
Venue
International Review of Administrative Sciences
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2016-07-09
Volume
84
Issue
1
Pages
144-163
ISSN
  • 0020-8523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7226
DOI
10.1177/0020852315599047
OpenAlex
W2460398570
Cited by
112
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4
FWCI
5.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
International Review of Administrative Sciences (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Public Administration and Political Analysis
Keywords
e-government, research gaps, research directions, emerging research areas, public sector management, e-government management

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