A SYSTEMATIC, TOOL-SUPPORTED METHOD FOR CONDUCTING LITERATURE REVIEWS IN INFORMATION SYSTEMS
2011
- 2,075Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage2,075
- Abstract Views1,175
- 1,175
- Downloads900
Article Description
While the importance of literature studies in the IS discipline is well recognized, little attention has been paid to the underlying structure and method of conducting effective literature reviews. Despite the fact that literature is often used to refine the research context and direct the pathways for successful research outcomes, there is very little evidence of the use of resource management tools to support the literature review process. In this paper we want to contribute to advancing the way in which literature studies in Information Systems are conducted, by proposing a systematic, pre-defined and tool-supported method to extract, analyse and report literature. This paper presents how to best identify relevant IS papers to review within a feasible and justifiable scope, how to extract relevant content from identified papers, how to synthesise and analyse the findings of a literature review and what are ways to effectively write and present the results of a literature review. The paper is specifically targeted towards novice IS researchers, who would seek to conduct a systematic detailed literature review in a focused domain. Specific contributions of our method are extensive tool support, the identification of appropriate papers including primary and secondary paper sets and a pre-codification scheme. We use a literature study on shared services as an illustrative example to present the proposed approach.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know