WINNING THE CITATION GAME (1 May 2024)

Description

In science, citations are used to give credit to sources that are relevant to the topic that is being discussed where the citation appears.  They are a key vehicle through which we establish a cumulative knowledge tradition – we use them to acknowledge material that informs our arguments. But citations are much more than that. They have become a key metric of academic success in their own right, providing a quantifiable basis to measure a scholar’s impact, reputation, and fame. And as any metrics-based systems, also the citation system can be gamed, and is being gamed. Time to unpack the role that citations play and discuss which citations are legit – and which may just be a bit flunky.

Episode Reading List

  • Davidsson, P., & Honig, B. (2003). The Role of Social And Human Capital Among Nascent Entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 301-331.
  • Davidsson, P. (2016). Researching Entrepreneurship: Conceptualization and Design (2nd ed.). Springer.
  • Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew Effect in Science. Science, 159(3810), 56-63.
  • Vial, G. (2019). Understanding Digital Transformation: A Review and a Research Agenda. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118-144.
  • Berente, N., Gu, B., Recker, J., & Santhanam, R. (2021). Managing Artificial Intelligence. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1433-1450.
  • Markus, M. L. (1983). Power, Politics, and MIS Implementation. Communications of the ACM, 26(6), 430-444.
  • Urquhart, C., Lehmann, H., & Myers, M. D. (2010). Putting the Theory Back Into Grounded Theory: Guidelines for Grounded Theory Studies in Information Systems. Information Systems Journal, 20(4), 357-381.
  • Sarker, S., Xiao, X., Beaulieu, T., & Lee, A. S. (2018). Learning from First-Generation Qualitative Approaches in the IS Discipline: An Evolutionary View and Some Implications for Authors and Evaluators (PART 1/2). Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(8), 752-774.
  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (4th ed., Vol. 5). Sage Publications.
  • Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-105.
  • Indulska, M., & Recker, J. (2010). Design Science in IS Research: A Literature Analysis. In S. Gregor & D. Hart (Eds.), Information Systems Foundations: The Role of Design Science (pp. 285-303). ANU E-Press.
  • Miranda, S. M., Berente, N., Seidel, S., Safadi, H., & Burton-Jones, A. (2022). Computationally Intensive Theory Construction: A Primer for Authors and Reviewers. MIS Quarterly, 46(2), i-xvi.
  • Rai, A. (2017). Editor’s Comments: Avoiding Type III Errors: Formulating IS Research Problems that Matter. MIS Quarterly, 41(2), iii-vii.
  • Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). The New Organizing Logic of Digital Innovation: An Agenda for Information Systems Research. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 724-735.
  • Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., & Sørensen, C. (2010). Digital Infrastructures: The Missing IS Research Agenda. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 748-459.
  • Vodanovich, S., Sundaram, D., & Myers, M. D. (2010). Digital Natives and Ubiquitous Information Systems. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 711-723.
  • Tiwana, A., Konsynski, B. R., & Bush, A. A. (2010). Platform Evolution: Coevolution of Platform Architecture, Governance, and Environmental Dynamics. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 675-687.
  • Davidsson, P. (1995, November 23-24, 1995). Determinants of Entrepreneurial Intentions RENT XI Workshop, Piacenza, Italy.
  • Zahra, S. A., Sapienza, H. J., & Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and Dynamic Capabilities: A Review, Model and Research Agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 43(4), 917-955.
  • Tiwana, A., & Safadi, H. (2024). Atrophy in Aging Systems: Evidence, Dynamics, and Antidote. Information Systems Research, 35(1), 66-86.
  • Leidner, D. E., & Kayworth, T. (2006). Review: A Review of Culture in Information Systems Research: Toward a Theory of Information Technology Culture Conflict. MIS Quarterly, 30(2), 357-399.
  • Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136.
  • Leidner, D., Berente, N., Recker, J. (2023). Wat’s been done, what’s been found, and what it means. This IS Research podcast episode, 19 April 2023. http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/whats-been-done-whats-been-found-and-what-it-means-19-april-2023/
  • Burton-Jones, A., Recker, J., Indulska, M., Green, P., & Weber, R. (2017). Assessing Representation Theory with a Framework for Pursuing Success and Failure. MIS Quarterly, 41(4), 1307-1333.
  • Recker, J., Indulska, M., Green, P., Burton-Jones, A., & Weber, R. (2019). Information Systems as Representations: A Review of the Theory and Evidence. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 20(6), 735-786.
  • Wasserstein, R. L., & Lazar, N. A. (2016). The ASA’s Statement on P-values: Context, Process, and Purpose.The American Statistician, 70(2), 129-133.

The Home Page of Professor Jan Recker