Standardliteratur

Webster, J. & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 26(2), S. xiii–xxiii. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2017160.2017162
Vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B. B., Riemer, K., Plattfaut, R., & Cleven, A. (2009). Reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. In S. Newell, E. A. Whitley, N. Pouloudi, J. Wareham, & L. Mathiassen (Eds.), 17th European Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1–13). Verona, Italy: Hampton Press. http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2009/161
Fettke, P. (2006). State-of-the-Art des State-of-the-Art – Eine Untersuchung der Forschungsmethode „Review “ innerhalb der Wirtschaftsinformatik. WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, 48(4), S. 257–266. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11576-006-0057-3
Levy, Y. & Ellis, T. J. (2006). A systems approach to conduct an effective literature review in support of information systems research. Informing Science: International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 9, S. 181–212. http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol9/V9p181-212Levy99.pdf
Kornmeier, M. (2007). Wissenschaftstheorie und wissenschaftliches Arbeiten: Eine Einführung für Wirtschaftswissenschaftler. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag. http://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-7908-1919-9/page/1.

Rankings

Gerade bei Literatur-Reviews, aber auch bei der Suche nach Literatur für andere Themen stehen gute Fachzeitschriften und Konferenzen im Fokus. Um diese zu identifizieren, können Sie sich an diversen Ranking-Listen orientieren. Wir empfehlen

National: Verband der Hochschullehrer für Betriebswirtschaftslehre e.V. (2011). VHB-JOURQUAL 2.1. http://vhbonline.org/service/jourqual/vhb-jourqual-21-2011/.
International: Association for Information Systems (AIS). MIS Journal Rankings http://aisnet.org/general/custom.asp?page=JournalRankings

Stichpunkte zum Ansatz nach vom Brocke et al. 2009

BETA: Deutsch/Englisch-Mix

Quelle: Vom Brocke et al. (2009)^[1]

Motivation

aufbauend auf Webster and Watson (2002)^[2] eine Methode finden, Vorgehen und Ergebnisse von Literaturreviews so transparent wie möglich zu machen.

Definition Literaturreview

übernehmen (p. 4) Definition von Rowley and Slack 2004, p. 31^[3]: "a summary of a subject field that supports the identification of specific research questions"

Guideline

Figure 3^[4] (aus urheberrechtlichen Gründen nicht abgebildet)

Phase I: Definition of review scope

"critical, interpretive, speculative, state of the art, and historical"
"vary referring to subject matter, period covered, and degree of coverage of sources (Manten 1973^[5]; Woodward 1972^[6]; as cited in Garfield 1987, p. 114^[7])"
"serve a wide range of, sometimes very different, purposes, reaching from gaining new and synthesising existing research outcomes to identifying research methodologies or techniques commonly used in a field (cf. Hart 1998, pp. 27ff.^[8])"
to define the Scope -> Taxonomy by Cooper 1988, pp. 109ff^[9]

Fig.4^[10] (aus urheberrechtlichen Gründen nicht abgebildet)

Phase II: Conceptualisation of topic

working definitions of key terms
key terms in "seminal textbooks, encyclopedias, or handbooks"
maybe concept mapping "to uncover relevant search terms (in particular related concepts or synonyms and homonyms)"

Fig.5^[11] (aus urheberrechtlichen Gründen nicht abgebildet)

Phase III: Literature search

Identify ressources
- focus on review articles of high quality (Rowley and Slack 2004, p. 32) | Rowley, J. and Slack, F. (2004). Conducting a literature review. Management Research News, 27 (6), 31-39.
- Rankings heranziehen -> hier nach zusammengeführtem AIS-Ranking vorgegangen, nicht Peer-Review Journals herausgelassen.
- Journals besser als Konferenzen --> bei beiden Rankings beachten
keyword search: "recommended to use a precise (set of) search phrase(s)" -> document it
backward search: "reviewing older literature cited in th articles"
forward search: "reviewing additional sources that have cited the articel"
Auswahl der Journals in einer Tabelle^[12]:

Journal	Database	Search	Coverage	Hits	Reviewed
Beispiel	Beispiel	Beispiel	Beispiel	Beispiel	Beispiel

Phase IV: Literature analysis and synthesis

z.B. in concepot matrix by Salipante et al. (1982)^[13]

Phase V: Research agenda

als Ziel des ganzen, vor allem der nicht ausgefüllten Teile der Concept Matrix etc.

Referenzen

↑ vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B., Riemer, K., Plattfaut, R., & Cleven, A. (2009). Reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. In S. Newell, E. A. Whitley, N. Pouloudi, J. Wareham, & L. Mathiassen (Eds.), 17th European Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1–13). Verona, Italy: Hampton Press. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2009/161
↑ Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii.
↑ Rowley, J., & Slack, F. (2004). Conducting a literature review. Management Research News, 27(6), 31–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01409170410784185
↑ vgl. Vom Brocke et al. (2009), p. 8
↑ Manten, A.A. (1973). Scientific literature review. Scholarly Publishing, 5, 75-89.
↑ Woodward, A.M. (1972). Review literature: characteristics, sources and output in 1972. Aslib Pro- ceedings, 26 (9), 367-376.
↑ Garfield, E. (1987). Reviewing Review Literature. Part 1. Definitions and Uses of Reviews. Essays of an Information Scientist, 10, 113-116.
↑ Hart, C. (1998). Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination, Sage Pub- lications, London.
↑ Cooper, H.M. (1988). Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowledge in Society, 1, 104-126.
↑ vgl. Vom Brocke et al. (2009), p. 8
↑ vgl. Vom Brocke et al. (2009), p. 9
↑ vgl. Vom Brocke et al. (2009), p. 5
↑ Salipante, P., Notz, W. and Bigelow, J. (1982). A Matrix Approach to Literature Reviews. Research in Organizational Behavior, 4, 321-348.

[1] vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B., Riemer, K., Plattfaut, R., & Cleven, A. (2009). Reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. In S. Newell, E. A. Whitley, N. Pouloudi, J. Wareham, & L. Mathiassen (Eds.), 17th European Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1–13). Verona, Italy: Hampton Press. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2009/161

[2] Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii.

[3] Rowley, J., & Slack, F. (2004). Conducting a literature review. Management Research News, 27(6), 31–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01409170410784185

[4] vgl. Vom Brocke et al. (2009), p. 8

[5] Manten, A.A. (1973). Scientific literature review. Scholarly Publishing, 5, 75-89.

[6] Woodward, A.M. (1972). Review literature: characteristics, sources and output in 1972. Aslib Pro- ceedings, 26 (9), 367-376.

[7] Garfield, E. (1987). Reviewing Review Literature. Part 1. Definitions and Uses of Reviews. Essays of an Information Scientist, 10, 113-116.

[8] Hart, C. (1998). Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination, Sage Pub- lications, London.

[9] Cooper, H.M. (1988). Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowledge in Society, 1, 104-126.

[10] vgl. Vom Brocke et al. (2009), p. 8

[11] vgl. Vom Brocke et al. (2009), p. 9

[12] vgl. Vom Brocke et al. (2009), p. 5

[13] Salipante, P., Notz, W. and Bigelow, J. (1982). A Matrix Approach to Literature Reviews. Research in Organizational Behavior, 4, 321-348.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]