An Historically-Grounded Critical Analysis of Research Articles in MIS
In order to explore scientific writing in Information Systems (IS) journals, we adopt a combination of historical and rhetorical approaches. We first investigate the history of universities, business schools, learned societies and scientific articles. This perspective allows us to capture the legacy of scientific writing standards, which emerged in the 18th and 19th centuries. Then, we focus on two leading IS journals (EJIS and MISQ). An historical analysis of both outlets is carried out, based on data related to their creation, evolution of editorial statements, and key epistemological and methodological aspects. We also focus on argumentative strategies found in a sample of 436 abstracts from both journals. Three main logical anchorages (sometimes combined) are identified, and related to three argumentative strategies: 'deepening of knowledge', 'solving an enigma' and 'addressing a practical managerial issue'. We relate these writing norms to historical imprints of management and business studies, in particular: enigmafocused rhetorics, interest in institutionalized literature, neglect for managerially grounded rhetoric and lack of reflexivity in scientific writing. We explain this relation as a quest for academic legitimacy. Lastly, some suggestions are offered to address the discrepancies between these writing norms and more recent epistemological and theoretical stances adopted by IS researchers.
|Date of creation:||2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Published in European Journal of Information Systems, Palgrave Macmillan, 2011, 20 (4), pp.1-23|
|Note:||View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00644398|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- N/A, 1996. "Abstracts," The Journal of Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 5(1), pages 131-151, March.
- Pippa Carter & Norman Jackson, 2004. "For the Sake of Argument: Towards an Understanding of Rhetoric as Process," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 469-491, 05.
- Glenn Ellison, 2002.
"Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 994-1034, October.
- Glenn Ellison, 2000. "Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory," NBER Working Papers 7805, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- N/A, 1996. "Abstracts," The Journal of Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 5(2), pages 291-309, September.
- D. W. Stammer, 1977. "Comment," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 1(53), pages 12-14, 01.
- D. H. Whitehead, 1977. "Comment," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 1(56), pages 35-38, October.
- Vincent Mangematin & Charles Baden-Fuller, 2007. "Global Contests in the Production of Business Knowledge :," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00422658, HAL.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00644398. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.