首页 > 最新文献

Information Systems Journal最新文献

英文 中文
Reconsidering the implications of formative versus reflective measurement model misspecification 重新考虑形成性测量模型与反思性测量模型失当的影响
IF 6.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-12-27 DOI: 10.1111/isj.12487
Miguel I. Aguirre-Urreta, Mikko Rönkkö, George M. Marakas

The literature on formative modelling (“formative measurement”) in the information systems discipline claims that measurement model misspecification, where a reflective model is used instead of a more appropriate formative model, is widespread. In this research, we argue that this cannot be true because models misspecified in this way would fail the measurement validation procedures used with reflective models and thus would not be publishable. To support this argument, we present two extensive simulation studies. The simulation results show that in most cases where data originates from a formative model, estimating a reflective model would not produce results that satisfy the commonly used measurement validation guidelines. Based on these results, we conclude that widespread publication of models where the direction of measurement is misspecified is unlikely in IS and other disciplines that use similar measurement validation guidelines. Moreover, building on recent discussions on modelling endogenous formatively specified latent variables, we demonstrate that the effects of misspecification are minor in models that do pass the model quality check. Our results address important issues in the literature on the consequences of measurement model misspecification and provide a starting point for new advances in this area.

信息系统学科中有关形成性建模("形成性测量")的文献声称,测量模型的错误定义,即使用反思性模型而不是更合适的形成性模型,是普遍存在的现象。在这项研究中,我们认为这不可能是真的,因为以这种方式错误定义的模型将无法通过反思模型所使用的测量验证程序,因此也就无法发表。为了支持这一论点,我们进行了两项广泛的模拟研究。模拟结果表明,在大多数情况下,如果数据来源于形成性模型,那么对反思性模型的估计结果将无法满足常用的测量验证准则。基于这些结果,我们得出结论,在信息系统和其他使用类似测量验证准则的学科中,不可能广泛发布测量方向错误的模型。此外,根据最近关于内生形式化指定潜变量建模的讨论,我们证明了在通过模型质量检查的模型中,错误指定的影响很小。我们的研究结果解决了文献中关于测量模型错误定义后果的重要问题,并为该领域的新进展提供了一个起点。
{"title":"Reconsidering the implications of formative versus reflective measurement model misspecification","authors":"Miguel I. Aguirre-Urreta,&nbsp;Mikko Rönkkö,&nbsp;George M. Marakas","doi":"10.1111/isj.12487","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12487","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The literature on formative modelling (“formative measurement”) in the information systems discipline claims that measurement model misspecification, where a reflective model is used instead of a more appropriate formative model, is widespread. In this research, we argue that this cannot be true because models misspecified in this way would fail the measurement validation procedures used with reflective models and thus would not be publishable. To support this argument, we present two extensive simulation studies. The simulation results show that in most cases where data originates from a formative model, estimating a reflective model would not produce results that satisfy the commonly used measurement validation guidelines. Based on these results, we conclude that widespread publication of models where the direction of measurement is misspecified is unlikely in IS and other disciplines that use similar measurement validation guidelines. Moreover, building on recent discussions on modelling endogenous formatively specified latent variables, we demonstrate that the effects of misspecification are minor in models that do pass the model quality check. Our results address important issues in the literature on the consequences of measurement model misspecification and provide a starting point for new advances in this area.</p>","PeriodicalId":48049,"journal":{"name":"Information Systems Journal","volume":"34 2","pages":"533-584"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139704637","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Ethics II: Editorial conduct 伦理 II:编辑行为
IF 6.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-12-21 DOI: 10.1111/isj.12499
Andreas Eckhardt, Christoph F. Breidbach
<p>Research misconduct remains a controversial topic and the numbers are staggering. Retractionwatch.com 1 reported that, in 2002, 119 papers were retracted by scientific journals. Some 20 years later, this figure has grown to almost 5000. Put differently, about 8 in 10 000 published papers are retracted from the scientific literature today. The case of Francesca Gino at Harvard University is yet another example. At the time of writing this Editorial, she stands accused of fabricating results across multiple studies, including at least one purporting to show how to elicit honest behaviour (Scheiber, <span>2023</span>). Of course, all this comes at a time when the Information Systems discipline discusses the implications of generative AI in the research process (Davison et al., <span>2023</span>).</p><p>Against this backdrop, we note that our discipline has a solid track-record of addressing ethical <i>research</i> conduct, with Davison and Chatterjee (<span>2024</span>) describing some concerns we should be aware of in a recent Editorial for the <i>Information Systems Journal</i>. In contrast, the debate pertaining to potential misconduct by editors or reviewers is significantly less developed, with just a few examples aimed at mitigating the shortcomings of the peer review process more generally (including, for example, Iivari, <span>2016</span>, Petter, <span>2018</span>, Ralph, <span>2016</span>).</p><p>We here acknowledge that the journey towards publication of any manuscript in any journal does not only involve authors who may act unethically, but also editors and reviewers. While the responsibility for fraudulent studies undoubtedly rests with dishonest authors, editors and reviewers alike share the responsibility for allowing such studies to pass through the peer-review process, for a long time seen as the ‘gold standard’ in preventing such instances from taking place. We therefore firmly believe that the ethical aspects of editorial (mis)conduct should be equally discussed, a task we set out in this Editorial, the second in a series focusing on ethics in IS research in the <i>Information Systems Journal</i>.</p><p>In what follows, we outline key areas where we, in our role as authors, reviewers, and editors, have personally observed behaviour and actions of <i>others</i> we deem questionable. We further augmented our own experiences with anecdotal evidence gathered through conversations with colleagues from within the IS discipline who are distributed around the world. The common denominator across all situations that we outline here is that they took place within the realms of a double-blind peer-review process, meaning reviewers are unaware of the authors' identities, and vice versa, yet that is single-blind for senior editors (SEs) and associate editors (AEs) (editors know the authors' identities, but authors do not know the editors' identities). Nevertheless, it is fair to point out that at some journals, SEs are permitted
2 本著作中介绍的典范案例完全来自于我们自己的经验和与同事的交谈所获得的传闻证据,这表明有必要开展进一步的研究,为信息服务领域的编辑道德行为制定一个更加健全的框架。这可能是为信息服务界的伦理和可持续编辑行为制定全球行为准则的第一步,也是对美国信息学会《研究行为准则》的补充。
{"title":"Ethics II: Editorial conduct","authors":"Andreas Eckhardt,&nbsp;Christoph F. Breidbach","doi":"10.1111/isj.12499","DOIUrl":"10.1111/isj.12499","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Research misconduct remains a controversial topic and the numbers are staggering. Retractionwatch.com\u0000 1 reported that, in 2002, 119 papers were retracted by scientific journals. Some 20 years later, this figure has grown to almost 5000. Put differently, about 8 in 10 000 published papers are retracted from the scientific literature today. The case of Francesca Gino at Harvard University is yet another example. At the time of writing this Editorial, she stands accused of fabricating results across multiple studies, including at least one purporting to show how to elicit honest behaviour (Scheiber, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;). Of course, all this comes at a time when the Information Systems discipline discusses the implications of generative AI in the research process (Davison et al., &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Against this backdrop, we note that our discipline has a solid track-record of addressing ethical &lt;i&gt;research&lt;/i&gt; conduct, with Davison and Chatterjee (&lt;span&gt;2024&lt;/span&gt;) describing some concerns we should be aware of in a recent Editorial for the &lt;i&gt;Information Systems Journal&lt;/i&gt;. In contrast, the debate pertaining to potential misconduct by editors or reviewers is significantly less developed, with just a few examples aimed at mitigating the shortcomings of the peer review process more generally (including, for example, Iivari, &lt;span&gt;2016&lt;/span&gt;, Petter, &lt;span&gt;2018&lt;/span&gt;, Ralph, &lt;span&gt;2016&lt;/span&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;We here acknowledge that the journey towards publication of any manuscript in any journal does not only involve authors who may act unethically, but also editors and reviewers. While the responsibility for fraudulent studies undoubtedly rests with dishonest authors, editors and reviewers alike share the responsibility for allowing such studies to pass through the peer-review process, for a long time seen as the ‘gold standard’ in preventing such instances from taking place. We therefore firmly believe that the ethical aspects of editorial (mis)conduct should be equally discussed, a task we set out in this Editorial, the second in a series focusing on ethics in IS research in the &lt;i&gt;Information Systems Journal&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In what follows, we outline key areas where we, in our role as authors, reviewers, and editors, have personally observed behaviour and actions of &lt;i&gt;others&lt;/i&gt; we deem questionable. We further augmented our own experiences with anecdotal evidence gathered through conversations with colleagues from within the IS discipline who are distributed around the world. The common denominator across all situations that we outline here is that they took place within the realms of a double-blind peer-review process, meaning reviewers are unaware of the authors' identities, and vice versa, yet that is single-blind for senior editors (SEs) and associate editors (AEs) (editors know the authors' identities, but authors do not know the editors' identities). Nevertheless, it is fair to point out that at some journals, SEs are permitted","PeriodicalId":48049,"journal":{"name":"Information Systems Journal","volume":"34 4","pages":"965-969"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/isj.12499","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138952872","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
A typology of disinformation intentionality and impact 虚假信息的意图和影响类型学
IF 6.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-12-20 DOI: 10.1111/isj.12495
Aaron French, Veda C. Storey, Linda Wallace

In contemporary society, the increased reliance on social media as a vital news source has facilitated the spread of disinformation that has potential polarising effects. Disinformation, false information deliberately crafted to deceive recipients, has escalated to the extent that it is now acknowledged as a significant cybersecurity concern. To proactively tackle this issue, and minimise the risk of negative outcomes associated with disinformation, this research presents a typology of disinformation intentionality and impact (DII) to understand the intentionality and impact of disinformation threats. The typology draws upon information manipulation theory and risk management principles to evaluate the potential impact of disinformation campaigns with respect to their virality and polarising impact. The intentionality of disinformation spread is related to its believability among susceptible consumers, who are likely to propagate the disinformation to others if they assess it to be believable. Based on the dimensions of intentionality and impact, the DII typology can be used to categorise disinformation threats and identify strategies to mitigate its risk. To illustrate its utility for evaluating the risk posted by disinformation campaigns, the DII typology is applied to a case study. We propose risk mitigation strategies as well as recommendations for addressing disinformation campaigns spread through social media platforms.

在当代社会,人们越来越依赖作为重要新闻来源的社交媒体,这为具有潜在两极化影响的虚假信息的传播提供了便利。虚假信息是为了欺骗接收者而蓄意炮制的虚假信息,它的传播已经升级到了被公认为重大网络安全问题的程度。为了积极应对这一问题,并最大限度地降低与虚假信息相关的负面结果的风险,本研究提出了虚假信息意向性和影响(DII)类型学,以了解虚假信息威胁的意向性和影响。该类型学借鉴了信息操纵理论和风险管理原则,以评估虚假信息活动在病毒性和极化影响方面的潜在影响。虚假信息传播的意向性与易受影响的消费者对虚假信息的可信度有关,如果易受影响的消费者认为虚假信息可信,他们就有可能向其他人传播虚假信息。基于故意性和影响这两个维度,DII 类型学可用于对虚假信息威胁进行分类,并确定降低其风险的策略。为了说明 DII 类型学在评估虚假信息活动所带来的风险方面的实用性,我们将其应用于一项案例研究。我们提出了风险缓解策略以及应对通过社交媒体平台传播虚假信息的建议。
{"title":"A typology of disinformation intentionality and impact","authors":"Aaron French,&nbsp;Veda C. Storey,&nbsp;Linda Wallace","doi":"10.1111/isj.12495","DOIUrl":"10.1111/isj.12495","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In contemporary society, the increased reliance on social media as a vital news source has facilitated the spread of disinformation that has potential polarising effects. Disinformation, false information deliberately crafted to deceive recipients, has escalated to the extent that it is now acknowledged as a significant cybersecurity concern. To proactively tackle this issue, and minimise the risk of negative outcomes associated with disinformation, this research presents a typology of disinformation intentionality and impact (DII) to understand the intentionality and impact of disinformation threats. The typology draws upon information manipulation theory and risk management principles to evaluate the potential impact of disinformation campaigns with respect to their virality and polarising impact. The intentionality of disinformation spread is related to its believability among susceptible consumers, who are likely to propagate the disinformation to others if they assess it to be believable. Based on the dimensions of intentionality and impact, the DII typology can be used to categorise disinformation threats and identify strategies to mitigate its risk. To illustrate its utility for evaluating the risk posted by disinformation campaigns, the DII typology is applied to a case study. We propose risk mitigation strategies as well as recommendations for addressing disinformation campaigns spread through social media platforms.</p>","PeriodicalId":48049,"journal":{"name":"Information Systems Journal","volume":"34 4","pages":"1324-1354"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138958606","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
A configurational perspective on design elements and user governance engagement in blockchain platforms 从配置角度看区块链平台的设计要素和用户治理参与
IF 6.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-12-20 DOI: 10.1111/isj.12494
Rongen “Sophia” Zhang, Balasubramaniam Ramesh

Blockchain technology offers the potential to create an open, decentralised governance structure that empowers stakeholders to participate in decentralised engagement. However, how blockchain platforms configure their design elements to establish and maintain decentralised systems with high levels of user governance engagement requires further research. This study investigates the key design elements of blockchain platforms and their ideal configurations for promoting user governance engagement. Due to the complex and interdependent nature of the design elements, we adopt a configurational perspective accompanied by a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to uncover complex nonlinear relationships among key conditions that are relevant to decentralised governance. Our research identifies five key design elements that facilitate distributed governance (Access to decision rights, Process visibility, Protocol automation, Incentives for developers/miners, and Incentives for other stakeholders) based on existing blockchain governance literature. We analyse 14 unique blockchain platform cases that adopted on-chain governance. Our fsQCA results reveal three ideal types of blockchain governance configurations that are sufficient for high generative user governance engagement: Centralised incentive model, Impartial incentive model, and Automation-driven model, whereas achieving high evaluative governance engagement requires the presence of all the design elements (Comprehensive model). Also, we found Access to decision rights and Protocol automation are necessary conditions for generative governance engagement, and Access to decision rights together with Process visibility is a combined necessary condition for evaluative governance engagement. Relevant theoretical and practical implications for platform designers as well as methodological implications for applying QCA to emerging IS phenomena are discussed.

区块链技术为创建开放、去中心化的治理结构提供了潜力,使利益相关者能够参与去中心化的参与。然而,区块链平台如何配置其设计元素,以建立和维护具有高水平用户治理参与的去中心化系统,还需要进一步研究。本研究调查了区块链平台的关键设计元素及其促进用户治理参与的理想配置。由于设计要素的复杂性和相互依赖性,我们采用了配置视角,并辅以模糊集定性比较分析(fsQCA),以揭示与去中心化治理相关的关键条件之间的复杂非线性关系。我们的研究以现有的区块链治理文献为基础,确定了促进分布式治理的五个关键设计要素(决策权的获取、流程可见性、协议自动化、对开发者/用户的激励以及对其他利益相关者的激励)。我们分析了 14 个采用链上治理的独特区块链平台案例。我们的 fsQCA 结果揭示了三种理想的区块链治理配置类型,它们足以产生较高的用户治理参与度:中心化激励模式、公正激励模式和自动化驱动模式,而要实现高评价性治理参与度,则需要具备所有设计要素(综合模式)。此外,我们还发现获取决策权和协议自动化是生成性治理参与的必要条件,而获取决策权和流程可见性是评价性治理参与的综合必要条件。我们讨论了对平台设计者的相关理论和实践影响,以及将 QCA 应用于新兴 IS 现象的方法论影响。
{"title":"A configurational perspective on design elements and user governance engagement in blockchain platforms","authors":"Rongen “Sophia” Zhang,&nbsp;Balasubramaniam Ramesh","doi":"10.1111/isj.12494","DOIUrl":"10.1111/isj.12494","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Blockchain technology offers the potential to create an open, decentralised governance structure that empowers stakeholders to participate in decentralised engagement. However, how blockchain platforms configure their design elements to establish and maintain decentralised systems with high levels of user governance engagement requires further research. This study investigates the key design elements of blockchain platforms and their ideal configurations for promoting user governance engagement. Due to the complex and interdependent nature of the design elements, we adopt a configurational perspective accompanied by a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to uncover complex nonlinear relationships among key conditions that are relevant to decentralised governance. Our research identifies five key design elements that facilitate distributed governance (<i>Access to decision rights</i>, <i>Process visibility</i>, <i>Protocol automation</i>, <i>Incentives for developers/miners</i>, and <i>Incentives for other stakeholders</i>) based on existing blockchain governance literature. We analyse 14 unique blockchain platform cases that adopted on-chain governance. Our fsQCA results reveal three ideal types of blockchain governance configurations that are sufficient for high generative user governance engagement: <i>Centralised incentive model</i>, <i>Impartial incentive model</i>, and <i>Automation-driven model</i>, whereas achieving high evaluative governance engagement requires the presence of all the design elements (<i>Comprehensive model</i>). Also, we found <i>Access to decision rights</i> and <i>Protocol automation</i> are necessary conditions for generative governance engagement, and <i>Access to decision right</i>s together with <i>Process visibility</i> is a combined necessary condition for evaluative governance engagement. Relevant theoretical and practical implications for platform designers as well as methodological implications for applying QCA to emerging IS phenomena are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48049,"journal":{"name":"Information Systems Journal","volume":"34 4","pages":"1264-1323"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/isj.12494","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139170503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
From mutualism to commensalism: Assessing the evolving relationship between complementors and digital platforms 从互惠到共生:评估补充者与数字平台之间不断演变的关系
IF 6.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-12-07 DOI: 10.1111/isj.12491
Luca Gastaldi, Francesco Paolo Appio, Daniel Trabucchi, Tommaso Buganza, Mariano Corso

Digital platforms are increasingly dominating markets by bringing together two or more groups of users and facilitating the exchange of value between them. Although several significant issues concerning the dynamics of digital platforms have been addressed, much of the research effort has focused on the platform owner. On the other hand, research on complementors neither takes into account the individual level nor clearly shows what an individual complementor can do to benefit from platform participation. By studying the evolving relationship between YouTube and its ecosystem of complementors (content creators), we shed light on the strategies that complementors use to progressively avoid but still benefit from platform governance. We find that content creators are, first, in a mutual relationship with the YouTube platform, benefiting from direct monetization. Then, they shift to commensalism as the relationship evolves, allowing them to avoid YouTube's governance and take advantage of multi-homing. Our findings illuminate the effects of platform governance, particularly how it shapes the actions of complementors.

数字平台通过将两个或两个以上的用户群体聚集在一起,并促进他们之间的价值交换,正日益主导市场。尽管有关数字平台动态的几个重要问题已经得到解决,但大部分研究工作都集中在平台所有者身上。另一方面,关于补充者的研究既没有考虑到个人层面,也没有清楚地表明个人补充者可以做些什么来从平台参与中受益。通过研究YouTube与其互补者(内容创造者)生态系统之间不断演变的关系,我们揭示了互补者使用的策略,以逐步避免但仍受益于平台治理。我们发现,首先,内容创作者与YouTube平台建立了相互关系,从直接货币化中获益。然后,随着关系的发展,他们转向评论主义,使他们能够避开YouTube的管理,并利用多主页的优势。我们的发现阐明了平台治理的影响,特别是它如何塑造互补的行为。
{"title":"From mutualism to commensalism: Assessing the evolving relationship between complementors and digital platforms","authors":"Luca Gastaldi,&nbsp;Francesco Paolo Appio,&nbsp;Daniel Trabucchi,&nbsp;Tommaso Buganza,&nbsp;Mariano Corso","doi":"10.1111/isj.12491","DOIUrl":"10.1111/isj.12491","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Digital platforms are increasingly dominating markets by bringing together two or more groups of users and facilitating the exchange of value between them. Although several significant issues concerning the dynamics of digital platforms have been addressed, much of the research effort has focused on the platform owner. On the other hand, research on complementors neither takes into account the individual level nor clearly shows what an individual complementor can do to benefit from platform participation. By studying the evolving relationship between YouTube and its ecosystem of complementors (content creators), we shed light on the strategies that complementors use to progressively avoid but still benefit from platform governance. We find that content creators are, first, in a mutual relationship with the YouTube platform, benefiting from direct monetization. Then, they shift to commensalism as the relationship evolves, allowing them to avoid YouTube's governance and take advantage of multi-homing. Our findings illuminate the effects of platform governance, particularly how it shapes the actions of complementors.</p>","PeriodicalId":48049,"journal":{"name":"Information Systems Journal","volume":"34 4","pages":"1217-1263"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138593869","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The virtue of brevity 简洁的美德
IF 6.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-11-30 DOI: 10.1111/isj.12492
Robert M. Davison, Rens Scheepers, Stefan Henningsson, Stan Karanasios
<p>Before the rise of online-only publishing, journals, including the ISJ, operated with page budgets, which determined the annual limit of pages that could be published. A decade ago, at the ISJ, this amounted to some 576 journal pages. However, with the advent of online-only publishing, the concept of a page budget has disappeared. The total number of pages increased gradually, at first to 666, to 800 and then it jumped to over 1000. Wiley, the publisher of the ISJ, has informed us that there is no limit at all to how many pages (or articles) we can publish a year, so long as quality standards are maintained. In 2023, the ISJ published 43 research articles, 8 editorials and 3 book reviews, a total of 1458 journal pages or 253% of the pre-online-only model. We expect that in future these numbers will continue to rise.</p><p>Not only has the number of accepted articles increased but also has their length. It used to be the case that we requested authors to keep within 8000 words. This was supposed to be an all-inclusive word count from title to references and appendices. With the passing of time, the restrictions of paper length have largely disappeared. Table 1 below presents the guidance given to authors for the AIS Senior Scholars' List of Premier Journals as well as several others. While there is some wiggle room, the general guidance tends to sit within the 8000- to 12 000-word range, or 38–55 pages. This is similar to adjacent fields: the <i>Academy of Management Journal</i> allows 40 double-spaced pages including references, tables, figures and appendices,1 and Organisation Studies permits up to 13 000 words encompassing references, tables, figures and appendices.2 Computer Science journals tend to publish briefer papers. For instance, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence allows 35 double spaced pages3 and IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials charges authors $220 for per page over 30 pages (up to 8 pages).4</p><p>Today it is not unusual for a first-round submission to be in the 12 000-word range and for a finally accepted article to be 15 000. Even 20 000-word epics are by no means unheard of. Why all this verbosity? One reason is that authors and reviewers get trapped in what we call a text-accumulation trap. Authors submit papers with as much information as possible, hoping to instil confidence in the review team as to its completeness, as well as to prepare for both expected and unexpected reviewer demands. Reviewers then read the paper, yet ask for even more detail, and authors feel obliged to respond in kind. Over multiple revision cycles, satisfying all the reviewers requires ever more words. Reviewers should be mindful of the text-accumulation trap. When requesting authors to incorporate large amounts of new material, it is necessary to weigh the value of this extra material against the risk of unnecessarily bloating the manuscript.</p><p>In addition, it is easier to write more than less, easier to i
另一个原因是,审稿人几乎总是会提出一些修改和补充建议,这些建议需要在稿件被接受之前进行。如果稿件已经很长,增加文字意味着可能要删除其他内容,这可能会产生新的问题,让人感觉缺乏进展。随着我们进入生成式人工智能时代,有可能会出现更多的稿件,这些稿件写得很好,语法也很正确,但却淹没在自己的冗长文字中,构成了不必要填充的明显例证。我们中的许多人都经历过这种情况的另一面,即学生借助人工智能工具对论文进行总结。虽然这增加了一些价值,但也凸显了论文过于冗长的弊端:许多读者的最初反应是不愿阅读。最后,我们注意到,现在越来越难找到愿意审阅12000至20000字怪物投稿的人!潜在的审稿人在收到邀请后会说:"是的,我喜欢这个主题,我知道这个方法,所以原则上我愿意审稿,但是......稿子有多长?'当真相大白后,他们发现自己要付出马拉松式的阅读和消化努力,继续审稿的意愿就会明显减弱。也有少数人坚持了下来,但为了得到两份好评,我们可能要邀请 15-20 人,这就不可避免地拖延了整个审稿过程。也许从 6000 字的较短投稿开始,再往上修改到 8000 字会更好,而不是从 12 个字开始往 20 个字进军。俳句或呼吁简洁,都是过犹不及的比喻,但我们应该思考如何将我们的思想集中在真正重要的事情上,并将我们的研究提炼为可消费的部分。也许我们可以借鉴《自然》或《柳叶刀》等期刊的做法,它们涉及复杂的概念和拯救生命的研究,同时将字数控制在 5000 字以内。我们严重怀疑作为读者的从业人员是否有时间、精力和耐心阅读过长的文章。在《国际期刊》上,我们要求从业人员论文的字数不超过 8000 字(包括所有内容)。6 我们还制定了详细的指南,并在最近的一篇社论(Davison et al.从业人员论文应反映正式商业交流中常用的体裁:简明扼要的商业报告和备忘录。摘要应作为执行摘要阅读,侧重于问题的现实背景和关键建议。哈佛商业评论》要求作者提交 800 字的叙述,这并不奇怪。实践者更看重的是简短精炼的文章,省去不必要的文献、方法和分析,尽管这些材料可以保留在附录中。实践者看重的是你在做什么以及为什么:动机、问题和问题。他们需要一些背景资料,但不要过多,只需帮助他们确保情况是否适用于他们的具体情况。他们可能不需要过多的参考资料。他们希望简要了解你做了什么以及如何做的,但更看重的是你有信心提出的规范性(和指令性)建议。这就意味着,对于面临这些现实问题或挑战的实践读者来说,写作风格应侧重于行动。但是,不要误以为要求简洁就意味着放弃了从观察到建议的逻辑推理链。事实上,实践者会希望评估建议的可信度,尤其是当这些建议对他们的组织有实质性甚至是生存性影响时。这种较短版本的研究成果可能与较长的版本并行不悖。使用简洁的表格和翔实的图表来压缩论文正文中的冗长文字。辅助材料可放在在线附录中。几年前,《ACM 通信》规定了严格的字数长度(4000 字)、简短的参考文献列表(最多 10 篇)和表格/图(最多各 4 个)。在第一篇文章中,van Offenbeek 等人(2024 年)指出,当信息系统与人们的工作实践不匹配时,往往会出现变通办法。在复杂的工作环境中,经常需要绕开信息系统来完成任务。许多变通办法是实用的,并可能成为合法的做法。然而,在当前的研究中,作者展示了一些变通方法如何反过来导致后来的用户产生新的或更多的不适应。 作者报告了对两家三级医院使用电子健康记录系统的多年深入定性研究。作者报告了如何通过工作实践的常规性、不适应特征和不合规变通行为之间的相互作用,形成不断升级的不适应和变通模式。在第二篇文章中,Gong 等人(2024 年)提出,社会因素在激励玩家参与和投入在线多人游戏方面起着至关重要的作用。许多流行的移动大型多人在线游戏(MMOG)采用社交网络嵌入(SNE)功能来优化玩家的社交游戏体验。SNE 通过将熟人关系(如 Facebook 好友)从社交网站移植到虚拟游戏世界,改变了传统的网络游戏社交游戏模式。作者借鉴承受能力框架和社会资本文献,提出了一个理论模型,该模型综合了 SNE 技术承受能力(身份透明和信息透明)、玩家社会体验(社会互动、社会支持、共同愿景和社会压力)和承受能力效应(游戏表现和游戏频率)等因素。该模型通过一项纵向实地研究进行了验证,研究中收集了主观和客观数据。在第三篇文章中,Müller 和 Sæbø(2024 年)描述了《斯堪的纳维亚信息系统杂志》如何被网络犯罪分子劫持,这些犯罪分子创建了一个欺诈性网站来诈骗作者。犯罪分子发送虚假的录用信,并向作者收取发表费,而网站看起来是合法的,并与爱思唯尔著名的引文数据库 Scopus 相链接。在一位作者报告说同时收到了录用信和退稿通知后,主编发现了这个骗局。调查显示,有多位作者被骗,而该欺诈网站也出现在网上搜索中。尽管已向多个部门报案,但欺诈网站仍在运行,这凸显了阻止此类网络犯罪的难度。在第四篇文章中,Laumer 等人(2024 年)研究了人事选拔过程中申请人认为算法公平的条件,并为算法公平感建立了理论基础。作者借鉴了有八个实验组(n = 801)的在线申请场景,分析了算法公平感的决定因素以及基于透明度和拟人化的干预措施的影响。作者在 "刺激--组织--反应 "框架内,借鉴组织公正理论,揭示了决定算法公平感的四个公正维度(程序、分配、人际和信息)。结果进一步表明,透明度和拟人化干预主要影响人际公正和信息公正的维度,并强调了算法公平感作为个人选择的关键决定因素的重要性。在第五篇文章中,Durani 等人(2024 年)讲述了历史上守门人(如精英和机构)是如何控制视觉信息以服务于他们的议程的。然而,社交媒体的兴起催生了 "视觉受众把关",即用户决定信息流。这种演变赋予了人们权力,但也并非没有风险,因为视觉内容的说服力可能会被利用来进行说服和操纵。作者以俄乌战争为背景,以与俄罗斯相关的 Reddit 子论坛为重点,对视觉受众把关进行了研究。作为受众把关人,用户传播与其所接受的社会现实相一致的视觉内容。其结果是形成了一个 "视觉回音室",其特点是信息多样性有限,从而证实但很少质疑受众把关人的世界观。在紧张局势加剧的情况下,这种循环愈演愈烈,增加了激进视觉叙事站稳脚跟的可能性。这项研究最终提出了一个新颖的视觉受众把关理论模型,为视觉传播、把关理论和社交媒体平台等领域提供了广泛的启示。在第六篇文章中,Hardin 等人(2024 年)采用理论驱动的演绎法研究了虚拟团队效能的概念。
{"title":"The virtue of brevity","authors":"Robert M. Davison,&nbsp;Rens Scheepers,&nbsp;Stefan Henningsson,&nbsp;Stan Karanasios","doi":"10.1111/isj.12492","DOIUrl":"10.1111/isj.12492","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Before the rise of online-only publishing, journals, including the ISJ, operated with page budgets, which determined the annual limit of pages that could be published. A decade ago, at the ISJ, this amounted to some 576 journal pages. However, with the advent of online-only publishing, the concept of a page budget has disappeared. The total number of pages increased gradually, at first to 666, to 800 and then it jumped to over 1000. Wiley, the publisher of the ISJ, has informed us that there is no limit at all to how many pages (or articles) we can publish a year, so long as quality standards are maintained. In 2023, the ISJ published 43 research articles, 8 editorials and 3 book reviews, a total of 1458 journal pages or 253% of the pre-online-only model. We expect that in future these numbers will continue to rise.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not only has the number of accepted articles increased but also has their length. It used to be the case that we requested authors to keep within 8000 words. This was supposed to be an all-inclusive word count from title to references and appendices. With the passing of time, the restrictions of paper length have largely disappeared. Table 1 below presents the guidance given to authors for the AIS Senior Scholars' List of Premier Journals as well as several others. While there is some wiggle room, the general guidance tends to sit within the 8000- to 12 000-word range, or 38–55 pages. This is similar to adjacent fields: the &lt;i&gt;Academy of Management Journal&lt;/i&gt; allows 40 double-spaced pages including references, tables, figures and appendices,1 and Organisation Studies permits up to 13 000 words encompassing references, tables, figures and appendices.2 Computer Science journals tend to publish briefer papers. For instance, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence allows 35 double spaced pages3 and IEEE Communications Surveys &amp; Tutorials charges authors $220 for per page over 30 pages (up to 8 pages).4&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Today it is not unusual for a first-round submission to be in the 12 000-word range and for a finally accepted article to be 15 000. Even 20 000-word epics are by no means unheard of. Why all this verbosity? One reason is that authors and reviewers get trapped in what we call a text-accumulation trap. Authors submit papers with as much information as possible, hoping to instil confidence in the review team as to its completeness, as well as to prepare for both expected and unexpected reviewer demands. Reviewers then read the paper, yet ask for even more detail, and authors feel obliged to respond in kind. Over multiple revision cycles, satisfying all the reviewers requires ever more words. Reviewers should be mindful of the text-accumulation trap. When requesting authors to incorporate large amounts of new material, it is necessary to weigh the value of this extra material against the risk of unnecessarily bloating the manuscript.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In addition, it is easier to write more than less, easier to i","PeriodicalId":48049,"journal":{"name":"Information Systems Journal","volume":"34 2","pages":"287-292"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/isj.12492","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139207329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
From web forms to chatbots: The roles of consistency and reciprocity for user information disclosure 从网络表单到聊天机器人:一致性和互惠性在用户信息披露中的作用
IF 6.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-11-28 DOI: 10.1111/isj.12490
Martin Adam, Alexander Benlian

Interactive decision aids (IDAs) on websites often require users to disclose relevant information (e.g., preferences, contact information) to help users in making decisions (e.g., product choice). With technological advances in IDAs, websites increasingly switch from static, non-conversational IDAs (e.g., web forms) to conversational ones (e.g., chatbots) to boost user information disclosure that nurtures the websites' economic viability. While this novel form of IDAs is already widely employed in practice, information systems research has yet to examine the defining dialogue design features of conversational IDAs and their effects on eliciting user information. Drawing on persuasion theory and particularly on consistency and reciprocity as influence techniques, we develop a research model around two crucial dialogue design features of conversational IDAs. Specifically, we investigate the distinct and joint effects of conversational style (i.e., absence vs. presence of a conversational presentation of requests) and reciprocation triggers (i.e., absence vs. presence of reciprocity-inducing information) on user information disclosure (i.e., email addresses). By combining the complementary properties of a randomised field experiment (N = 386) and a follow-up online experiment (N = 182), we empirically provide evidence in support of the distinct and joint effects of conversational style and reciprocation triggers of IDAs on user information disclosure. Moreover, we demonstrate that these dialogue design features have indirect effects on information disclosure via perceptions of social presence and privacy concerns. Thus, our paper provides theoretical and practical insights into whether, how, and why critical IDA dialogue design features can better elicit user information for website services.

网站上的交互式辅助决策工具(IDA)通常要求用户披露相关信息(如偏好、联系信息),以帮助用户做出决策(如产品选择)。随着 IDA 技术的进步,网站越来越多地从静态、非对话式 IDA(如网络表单)转向对话式 IDA(如聊天机器人),以促进用户信息披露,从而提高网站的经济效益。虽然这种新形式的国际开发协会已在实践中得到广泛应用,但信息系统研究尚未对对话式国际开发协会的对话设计特点及其对获取用户信息的影响进行研究。借鉴说服理论,特别是作为影响技术的一致性和互惠性,我们围绕会话式 IDA 的两个关键对话设计特征建立了一个研究模型。具体来说,我们研究了会话风格(即没有与有会话请求)和互惠触发器(即没有与有互惠诱导信息)对用户信息披露(即电子邮件地址)的独特和共同影响。通过结合随机现场实验(N = 386)和后续在线实验(N = 182)的互补特性,我们从经验上提供了证据,证明了 IDA 的对话风格和互惠触发器对用户信息披露的独特和共同影响。此外,我们还证明了这些对话设计特征会通过社会存在感和隐私问题对信息披露产生间接影响。因此,我们的论文为关键的 IDA 对话设计特征是否、如何以及为何能更好地为网站服务获取用户信息提供了理论和实践见解。
{"title":"From web forms to chatbots: The roles of consistency and reciprocity for user information disclosure","authors":"Martin Adam,&nbsp;Alexander Benlian","doi":"10.1111/isj.12490","DOIUrl":"10.1111/isj.12490","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Interactive decision aids (IDAs) on websites often require users to disclose relevant information (e.g., preferences, contact information) to help users in making decisions (e.g., product choice). With technological advances in IDAs, websites increasingly switch from static, non-conversational IDAs (e.g., web forms) to conversational ones (e.g., chatbots) to boost user information disclosure that nurtures the websites' economic viability. While this novel form of IDAs is already widely employed in practice, information systems research has yet to examine the defining dialogue design features of conversational IDAs and their effects on eliciting user information. Drawing on persuasion theory and particularly on consistency and reciprocity as influence techniques, we develop a research model around two crucial dialogue design features of conversational IDAs. Specifically, we investigate the distinct and joint effects of conversational style (i.e., absence vs. presence of a conversational presentation of requests) and reciprocation triggers (i.e., absence vs. presence of reciprocity-inducing information) on user information disclosure (i.e., email addresses). By combining the complementary properties of a randomised field experiment (<i>N</i> = 386) and a follow-up online experiment (<i>N</i> = 182), we empirically provide evidence in support of the distinct and joint effects of conversational style and reciprocation triggers of IDAs on user information disclosure. Moreover, we demonstrate that these dialogue design features have indirect effects on information disclosure via perceptions of social presence and privacy concerns. Thus, our paper provides theoretical and practical insights into whether, how, and why critical IDA dialogue design features can better elicit user information for website services.</p>","PeriodicalId":48049,"journal":{"name":"Information Systems Journal","volume":"34 4","pages":"1175-1216"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/isj.12490","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139226418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The antecedents of employees' proactive information security behaviour: The perspective of proactive motivation 员工主动信息安全行为的前因:主动动机的视角
IF 6.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-11-22 DOI: 10.1111/isj.12488
Feng Xu, Carol Hsu, Tawei (David) Wang, Paul Benjamin Lowry

Organisational information security (ISec) protection is undergoing a turbulent shift in the workplace environment. In an environment of ever-increasing risks of insider threats and external cyberattacks, individual employees are often expected to take the initiative to solve organisational security problems. This study therefore focuses on employees' proactive information security behaviours (ISBs)—behaviours that are self-initiated, change-oriented, and future-focused—and the motivations that compel employees to protect organisational assets. We ground our study in Parker et al. (2010) proactive motivation theory (ProMT) and develop an integrated multilevel model to examine the respective effects of proactive motivational states, that is, can-do, reason-to, and energised-to motivations, on employees' proactive ISBs. We also explore the roles of individual differences and contextual factors—namely, proactive personality and supervisory ISec support—and their influences on proactive motivational states. Data were collected from 210 employees situated in 55 departments distributed among multiple organisations located in China. The results show that supervisory ISec support positively influences employees' proactive motivational states and thereby boosts employees' proactive ISBs. Proactive personality negatively moderates the effect of supervisory ISec support on flexible security role orientation (reason-to motivation). By identifying the antecedents of employees' proactive ISBs, we make key theoretical contributions to ISec research and valuable practical contributions to organisational ISec management.

在工作环境中,组织信息安全(ISec)保护正在经历一场动荡的变革。在内部威胁和外部网络攻击风险不断增加的环境中,员工个人往往被期望主动解决组织的安全问题。因此,本研究重点关注员工的主动信息安全行为(ISBs)--即自我发起、以变化为导向、着眼于未来的行为,以及迫使员工保护组织资产的动机。我们的研究以 Parker 等人(2010 年)的积极主动动机理论(ProMT)为基础,建立了一个综合的多层次模型,以研究积极主动的动机状态(即 "能做"、"有理由做 "和 "有活力做 "的动机)对员工积极主动的 ISB 的影响。我们还探讨了个体差异和情境因素(即积极主动的个性和上司的 ISec 支持)的作用及其对积极主动动机状态的影响。我们收集了中国多家企业 55 个部门 210 名员工的数据。结果表明,上司的 ISec 支持会对员工的积极主动动机状态产生积极影响,从而促进员工的积极主动 ISBs。积极主动的人格对上级 ISec 支持对灵活的安全角色定位(理由到动机)的影响具有负向调节作用。通过确定员工积极主动的 ISBs 的前因,我们为 ISec 研究做出了重要的理论贡献,并为组织的 ISec 管理做出了宝贵的实践贡献。
{"title":"The antecedents of employees' proactive information security behaviour: The perspective of proactive motivation","authors":"Feng Xu,&nbsp;Carol Hsu,&nbsp;Tawei (David) Wang,&nbsp;Paul Benjamin Lowry","doi":"10.1111/isj.12488","DOIUrl":"10.1111/isj.12488","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Organisational information security (ISec) protection is undergoing a turbulent shift in the workplace environment. In an environment of ever-increasing risks of insider threats and external cyberattacks, individual employees are often expected to take the initiative to solve organisational security problems. This study therefore focuses on employees' proactive <i>information security behaviours</i> (ISBs)—behaviours that are self-initiated, change-oriented, and future-focused—and the motivations that compel employees to protect organisational assets. We ground our study in Parker et al. (2010) proactive motivation theory (ProMT) and develop an integrated multilevel model to examine the respective effects of proactive motivational states, that is, <i>can-do</i>, <i>reason-to</i>, and <i>energised-to</i> motivations, on employees' proactive ISBs. We also explore the roles of individual differences and contextual factors—namely, proactive personality and supervisory ISec support—and their influences on proactive motivational states. Data were collected from 210 employees situated in 55 departments distributed among multiple organisations located in China. The results show that supervisory ISec support positively influences employees' proactive motivational states and thereby boosts employees' proactive ISBs. Proactive personality negatively moderates the effect of supervisory ISec support on flexible security role orientation (reason-to motivation). By identifying the antecedents of employees' proactive ISBs, we make key theoretical contributions to ISec research and valuable practical contributions to organisational ISec management.</p>","PeriodicalId":48049,"journal":{"name":"Information Systems Journal","volume":"34 4","pages":"1144-1174"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/isj.12488","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139249660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
An empirical investigation of social comparison and open source community health 社会比较与开源社区健康的实证调查
IF 6.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-11-15 DOI: 10.1111/isj.12485
Kevin Lumbard, Matt Germonprez, Sean Goggins

It is well known that corporations rely on open source software as part of their product development lifecycle. Given these commitments, understanding the health of open source communities is a central concern in today's business setting. Our research uses social comparison theory as a framework for understanding how open source communities consider community health beyond any single metric within any single open source community—including a broader view of how others are using these health indicators in practice. Using methods from engaged field research, including 38 interviews, we examine practices of social comparison as an advancement in understanding open source community health—and subsequently engagement with open source communities. The results of this study show that open source community health is not a single set of discrete metrics but is an ongoing social construction. Through our study, we advance theoretical and applied knowledge regarding issues of open source community health, open source community engagement, and social comparison.

众所周知,企业依赖开源软件作为其产品开发生命周期的一部分。鉴于这些承诺,了解开源社区的健康状况是当今商业环境的核心问题。我们的研究以社会比较理论为框架,了解开源社区是如何考虑社区健康的,而不是单一开源社区内的任何单一指标--包括更广泛地了解其他社区是如何在实践中使用这些健康指标的。利用参与式实地研究(包括 38 次访谈)的方法,我们研究了社会比较的实践,将其作为理解开源社区健康--以及随后参与开源社区--的一个进步。这项研究的结果表明,开源社区的健康并不是一套单一的离散指标,而是一种持续的社会建构。通过我们的研究,我们推进了有关开源社区健康、开源社区参与和社会比较等问题的理论和应用知识。
{"title":"An empirical investigation of social comparison and open source community health","authors":"Kevin Lumbard,&nbsp;Matt Germonprez,&nbsp;Sean Goggins","doi":"10.1111/isj.12485","DOIUrl":"10.1111/isj.12485","url":null,"abstract":"<p>It is well known that corporations rely on open source software as part of their product development lifecycle. Given these commitments, understanding the health of open source communities is a central concern in today's business setting. Our research uses social comparison theory as a framework for understanding how open source communities consider community health beyond any single metric within any single open source community—including a broader view of how others are using these health indicators in practice. Using methods from engaged field research, including 38 interviews, we examine practices of social comparison as an advancement in understanding open source community health—and subsequently engagement with open source communities. The results of this study show that open source community health is not a single set of discrete metrics but is an ongoing social construction. Through our study, we advance theoretical and applied knowledge regarding issues of open source community health, open source community engagement, and social comparison.</p>","PeriodicalId":48049,"journal":{"name":"Information Systems Journal","volume":"34 2","pages":"499-532"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139274666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Accountability mobilization, guanxi and social media-induced polarization: Understanding the bystander's prosocial punishment to misinformation spreader 责任动员、关系和社交媒体引发的两极分化:理解旁观者对错误信息传播者的亲社会惩罚
IF 6.4 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Pub Date : 2023-11-12 DOI: 10.1111/isj.12486
Zhe Zhu, Nan Zhang, Meiwen Ding, Lei Chen

Prosocial punishments by social media bystanders could block the path from misinformation spread to social media-induced polarization (SMIP). However, prosocial punishments are inadequate for SMIP management because of the personal costs, and few studies propose effective ways to mobilize bystanders. The Chinese government implemented a regulation in 2017 to mobilize bystanders on social media through allocating accountability to act as misinformation supervisors. In China's guanxi culture, prosocial punishments are less observed considering the additional personal costs caused by breaking guanxi. Therefore, assessing the effectiveness of China's cyberspace accountability mobilization can help identify an effective tool for other governments to mitigate SMIP. We used a vignette survey experiment to collect data from WeChat users and applied a random regression model to analyse the data. Accountability mobilization significantly promotes bystanders' prosocial punishment to block the misinformation-spread-to-SMIP path. Guanxi negatively moderates the relationship between accountability mobilization and prosocial punishment to the above path. The government could encourage the public to actively take prosocial punishments by using the new tool of accountability mobilization. Guanxi culture reduces the effectiveness of the tool.

社交媒体旁观者的亲社会惩罚可以阻断从错误信息传播到社交媒体引发的两极分化(SMIP)的路径。然而,由于个人成本的原因,亲社会的惩罚不足以管理SMIP,也很少有研究提出动员旁观者的有效方法。中国政府在 2017 年实施了一项规定,通过分配责任制来动员社交媒体上的旁观者充当不实信息的监督者。在中国的 "关公文化 "中,考虑到破坏 "关公 "所带来的额外个人成本,亲社会惩罚较少被遵守。因此,评估中国网络空间问责动员的有效性,有助于为其他国家政府找到缓解 SMIP 的有效工具。我们采用小故事调查实验收集微信用户的数据,并运用随机回归模型对数据进行分析。责任动员极大地促进了旁观者的亲社会惩罚,从而阻断了错误信息传播到 SMIP 的路径。关西负向调节了问责动员和亲社会惩罚与上述路径的关系。政府可以通过问责动员这一新工具鼓励公众积极采取亲社会惩罚。关西文化降低了这一工具的有效性。
{"title":"Accountability mobilization, guanxi and social media-induced polarization: Understanding the bystander's prosocial punishment to misinformation spreader","authors":"Zhe Zhu,&nbsp;Nan Zhang,&nbsp;Meiwen Ding,&nbsp;Lei Chen","doi":"10.1111/isj.12486","DOIUrl":"10.1111/isj.12486","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Prosocial punishments by social media bystanders could block the path from misinformation spread to social media-induced polarization (SMIP). However, prosocial punishments are inadequate for SMIP management because of the personal costs, and few studies propose effective ways to mobilize bystanders. The Chinese government implemented a regulation in 2017 to mobilize bystanders on social media through allocating accountability to act as misinformation supervisors. In China's guanxi culture, prosocial punishments are less observed considering the additional personal costs caused by breaking guanxi. Therefore, assessing the effectiveness of China's cyberspace accountability mobilization can help identify an effective tool for other governments to mitigate SMIP. We used a vignette survey experiment to collect data from WeChat users and applied a random regression model to analyse the data. Accountability mobilization significantly promotes bystanders' prosocial punishment to block the misinformation-spread-to-SMIP path. Guanxi negatively moderates the relationship between accountability mobilization and prosocial punishment to the above path. The government could encourage the public to actively take prosocial punishments by using the new tool of accountability mobilization. Guanxi culture reduces the effectiveness of the tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":48049,"journal":{"name":"Information Systems Journal","volume":"34 4","pages":"1116-1143"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135038492","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Information Systems Journal
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1