On Your Mark, Ready, Search: A Framework for Structuring Literature Search Strategies in Information Systems

Researchers often face challenges already in the early stages of a literature review, and thus, struggle in getting started with the search and in organizing the process. This starting point is however of great relevance because design decisions such as in terms of corpus creation have impacts on the entire results of the review. By following the design science paradigm, we present the ‘Search Canvas’, a generic framework that aims at supporting the (creative) process of exploring, specifying, and visually representing a literature search strategy. In doing this, we contribute to the understanding of what components need to be considered when deriving a search strategy and provide an instrument that enables researchers to iteratively plan and communicate such strategies.

[1]  Björn Niehaves,et al.  Reconstructing the giant: On the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process , 2009, ECIS.

[2]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Contextualist Inquiry into IT-enabled Hospital Revenue Cycle Management: Bridging Research and Practice , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[3]  Pearl Brereton,et al.  Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain , 2007, J. Syst. Softw..

[4]  Sebastian K. Boell,et al.  Debating systematic literature reviews (SLR) and their ramifications for IS: a rejoinder to Mike Chiasson, Briony Oates, Ulrike Schultze, and Richard Watson , 2015, J. Inf. Technol..

[5]  Ken Peffers,et al.  Design Science Research in Information Systems. Advances in Theory and Practice , 2012, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[6]  Mary Tate,et al.  Introduction to the Special Issue: The Literature Review in Information Systems , 2015, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Sebastian K. Boell,et al.  A Hermeneutic Approach for Conducting Literature Reviews and Literature Searches , 2014, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[8]  Guy Paré,et al.  Standalone Literature Reviews in IS Research: What Can Be Learnt From the Past and Other Fields? , 2016, ICIS.

[9]  Barbara Kitchenham,et al.  Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews , 2004 .

[10]  Jens Pöppelbuß,et al.  Modularity Canvas - A Framework for Visualizing Potentials of Service Modularity , 2019, Wirtschaftsinformatik.

[11]  Yves Pigneur,et al.  Business Model Generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers and challengers , 2010 .

[12]  Guilherme Horta Travassos,et al.  Cross versus Within-Company Cost Estimation Studies: A Systematic Review , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[13]  Tuure Tuunanen,et al.  Design Science Research Evaluation , 2012, DESRIST.

[14]  Michael Fellmann,et al.  <> Design Principles for Supporting Rigorous Search Strategies in Literature Reviews , 2018, 2018 IEEE 20th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI).

[15]  Antônio Márcio Tavares Thomé,et al.  Conducting systematic literature review in operations management , 2016 .

[16]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Understanding the Elephant: The Discourse Approach to Boundary Identification and Corpus Construction for Theory Review Articles , 2019, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[17]  Guy Paré,et al.  (Re)considering the Concept of Literature Review Reproducibility , 2020, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[18]  M. W. van Someren,et al.  The think aloud method: a practical approach to modelling cognitive processes , 1994 .

[19]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Number of people required for usability evaluation , 2010, Commun. ACM.

[20]  S. L. Star,et al.  This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept , 2010 .

[21]  Karl Täuscher,et al.  Visual Tools for Business Model Innovation: Recommendations from a Cognitive Perspective , 2017 .

[22]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  POSITIONING AND PRESENTING DESIGN SCIENCE RESEARCH FOR MAXIMUM IMPACT 1 , 2013 .

[23]  Frantz Rowe,et al.  Strategizing information systems-enabled organizational transformation: A transdisciplinary review and new directions , 2012, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[24]  Tilo Böhmann,et al.  Requirements for Representing Data-Driven Business Models - Towards Extending the Business Model Canvas , 2018, AMCIS.

[25]  Sebastian K. Boell,et al.  On being ‘systematic’ in literature reviews in IS , 2015, J. Inf. Technol..

[26]  Yair Levy,et al.  A Systems Approach to Conduct an Effective Literature Review in Support of Information Systems Research , 2006, Informing Sci. Int. J. an Emerg. Transdiscipl..

[27]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  Design Science in Information Systems Research , 2004, MIS Q..

[28]  Monique W. M. Jaspers,et al.  The think aloud method: a guide to user interface design , 2004, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[29]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review , 2002, MIS Q..

[30]  Elena Gorbacheva,et al.  Achieving Rigor in Literature Reviews: Insights from Qualitative Data Analysis and Tool-Support , 2015, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[31]  Guy Paré,et al.  Transparency in literature reviews: an assessment of reporting practices across review types and genres in top IS journals , 2017, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[32]  Janet Marsden,et al.  Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review Booth Andrew Papaioannou Diana and Sutton Anthea Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review 288pp £22.99 Sage 9780857021359 0857021354 , 2014 .

[33]  Yves Pigneur,et al.  A Design Theory for Visual Inquiry Tools , 2020, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[34]  Björn Niehaves,et al.  Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Challenges and Recommendations of Literature Search in Information Systems Research , 2015, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[35]  Chitu Okoli,et al.  A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Information Systems Research , 2010 .

[36]  Daniel Szopinski,et al.  Towards Explaining the Popularity of the Business Model Canvas: A Dual Coding Approach (Research-in-Progress) , 2017 .

[37]  Susan Leigh Star This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept , 2010 .

[38]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[39]  Stefan Seidel,et al.  On emergence and forcing in information systems grounded theory studies: the case of Strauss and Corbin , 2013, J. Inf. Technol..

[40]  Blair Wang,et al.  www.litbaskets.io, an IT Artifact Supporting Exploratory Literature Searches for Information Systems Research , 2019, ACIS.

[41]  Mary Tate,et al.  Contextualizing the twin concepts of systematicity and transparency in information systems literature reviews , 2016, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[42]  Pearl Brereton,et al.  Protocol for a Tertiary study of Systematic Literature Reviews and Evidence-based Guidelines in IT and Software Engineering , 2009 .

[43]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Verbal reports as data. , 1980 .

[44]  Michael Dinger,et al.  Absorptive Capacity and Information Systems Research: Review, Synthesis, and Directions for Future Research , 2012, MIS Q..

[45]  Elfi Furtmueller,et al.  Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature , 2013, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[46]  Thorsten Schoormann,et al.  Sustainability in Business Models - a literature-Review-based Design-Science-Oriented Research Agenda , 2016, ECIS.

[47]  Frantz Rowe,et al.  What literature review is not: diversity, boundaries and recommendations , 2014, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[48]  Guy Paré,et al.  Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews , 2015, Inf. Manag..