Understanding the Role and Methods of Meta-Analysis in IS Research

By William R. King, Jun He. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 2005

328 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems and Management, Management Information Systems, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1538c4777271ae6abb542801dac01423f4d566ad

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems and Management

1. Nripendra P. Rana
2. Kuttimani Tamilmani
3. Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi
4. Arpita Khare
5. Subhro Sarkar
6. Sumedha Chauhan
7. Ali Abdallah Alalwan
8. Marie-Claude Trudel

In Management Information Systems

1. Nripendra P. Rana
2. Subhro Sarkar
3. Marie-Claude Trudel
4. Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi
5. Mirou Jaana
6. Thilo Haamann
7. Arpita Khare
8. Spyros Kitsiou

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Nripendra P. Rana
2. Kuttimani Tamilmani
3. Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi
4. Subhro Sarkar
5. Arpita Khare
6. Sumedha Chauhan
7. Marie-Claude Trudel
8. Mirou Jaana

Citations in the corpus

• Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews (2015, methodology): “Importantly, narrative reviews usually do not provide any explanations of how the review process was conducted [2].”
• A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of trust in mobile commerce (2020, methodology): “Meta-analysis helps in fi nding the common truth by statistically combining all the conceptually similar studies (King & He, 2005; Rana, Dwivedi, & Williams, 2015; Tamilmani, Rana, Prakasam, & Dwivedi, 2019).”
• Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: A Meta-Analytic Evaluation of UTAUT2 (2020, background): “King and He (2005) noticed this problem are not confined only to IS domain but prevalent in many other mature research streams such as social sciences.”
• A Framework for Guiding and Evaluating Literature Reviews (2015, neutral): “…year, research methods, data collection techniques, and direction or strength of final outcomes (e.g., positive, negative, or non-significant) from each study to produce quantitative results in the form of frequency analyses (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Bandara et al., 2011; King & He, 2005).”
• Approaches for Organizational Learning: A Literature Review (2018, background): “Although narrative reviews are common in management research, they have also been criticized for potential bias (Tranfield, Denyer, & Smart, 2003) because “[n]o commonly accepted or standardized procedure for conducting a narrative review exists” (King & He, 2005, p. 667).”