Reflections on Information Systems Journal's thematic composition

Abstract

This article analyses the scholarly output of Information Systems Journal (ISJ) in relation to its seven peer journals in the Association for Information Systems Senior Scholars' Basket of Eight journals (SSB8) since ISJ's inception in 1991. To do so, cluster analyses are generated using metadata (i.e. titles, keywords and abstracts) from the articles published. The analysis results reveal commonalties and some distinguishing differences between ISJ and its peer journals. The findings illuminate that ISJ has published articles in the area of information systems development at a much higher rate than its counterparts. The analyses also illustrate that ISJ has embraced broader philosophical and methodological underpinnings than other SSB8 journals.

Twenty‐five years of the Information Systems Journal: A bibliometric and ontological overview

“…Note that the network connections indicate the keywords that are frequently used in the same documents. In a deeper analysis of the content published by ISJ, Love and Hirschheim () authors develop some general, thematic clusters of the ISJ articles and compare them with the thematic clusters of the eight journals of the Association for Information Systems (AIS) Senior Scholars' basket that also includes ISJ.…”

“…Moreover, the development of an ontological analysis (Ramaprasad & Syn, ) visualizes the leading perspectives that affect the journal and its impact. ISJ has published retrospective evaluations of the journal, particularly regarding historical perspectives (Avison, Dwivedi, Fitzgerald, & Powell, ; Avison & Fitzgerald, ; Avison, Fitzgerald, & Powell, ) and of its leading themes (Evangelopoulos, ; Love & Hirschheim, ). However, it has not yet developed a deep bibliometric and ontological overview that integrates quantitative and qualitative perspectives of a systematic description, as presented here.…”

The Unfolding and Resurfacing of Information Systems Knowledge over the Last 25 Years: A Systemic Perspective

“…From these insights, there could be several implications for IS research. Despite a high‐level dominance (mostly in USA‐based IS journals) of positivist‐oriented research (Chen and Hirschheim, ; Love and Hirschheim, ), our study highlights that for this or any other research paradigm that guides future research, it is important to maintain the notion of the systemic nature of IS phenomena that is being studied. This nature seems at times be lost to cause–effect models or frameworks.…”

“…Several studies (both conceptual and empirical) to conceive of the IS field could be regarded as emphasizing dominance, eclecticism or both. Stability-driven perspectives include IS as a set of accumulative bodies of knowledge in specific areas, for instance paradigm or design science oriented IS research (Chen and Hirschheim, 2004;Love and Hirschheim, 2016;Wagner et al, 2017). A slightly more eclectic perspective suggests core and peripheral IS knowledge elements (Vessey et al, 2002;Taylor et al, 2010;Liu et al, 2016).…”

A “Look” into the IS Discipline through the Lens of MIS Quarterly: A Visual Examination of Scholar Characteristics

“…On this golden anniversary (50 years) of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) it seems appropriate to take some time to look back and what has developed within the information systems field. While there have been plenty of quality examinations of IS research in our highest regarded journals [1][2][3][4][5][6] and at our top conferences [7][8][9][10][11], most have focused on content (topics or keywords), theory, methodology, or citation analysis. Few if any have focused on author attributes, with the notable exception of [12].…”