Established theory rejection

The Information Systems Journal (ISJ) receives a large number of submissions that describe the direct or slightly modified application well-established theoretical perspectives in new contexts. Regrettably, senior editors reject many these without sending them out for formal review. This editorial explains why this occurs and describes what might instead constitute sufficient contribution such cases. In 2020, ISJ rendered final decisions on 368 submissions. While deliberately refrains from setting hard target acceptances to allow publication good research, available slots is obviously limited. Equally important as journal capacity constraints limited review team resources. Each paper sent requires editor, an associate editor two three reviewers. When using conservative reviewers per paper, would have required at least 736 Finding with relevant expertise painstaking process, most qualified are times already reviewing other manuscripts and/or journals. Associate often need approach potential order secure well-qualified Beyond this, receiving revise resubmit require significantly longer time commitments. Three rounds can easily take 18 months (90 days process 90 authors manuscript each round). commitments seem painful times, they crucial quality helps publish very best version their work. It likely experienced frustrating multiple review, only realise end work was much improved. What does all do simply apply established theory context? answer is, great deal! As Association (AIS) basket eight journal, significant high-quality Editors must make tough choices about which send directly (i.e., ‘desk reject’). Editorial teams consider factors during process. Will research be interest IS community, and, importantly, readers? Does build previously published ISJ? Is well-motivated? chances eventual acceptance? framework appropriate? Are methods suitable answering question? provide insight existing body knowledge open up area inquiry? A negative last question one primary reasons frequently merely models particularly salient example applied contexts TAM (and its derivatives, TAM2, TAM3, UTAUT UTAUT2). related versions well known; thus, it relatively straightforward researchers when organisations introduce software package users. not say conducting deal effort. cases, does. Nor suggest findings valuable, especially organisation model. fact, should interested applying TAM; learn acceptance technology However, applications scientific beyond model predictive context.11 There always chance may context. case, possible will discover into TAM’s applicability. Whether provides another question. Since repeatedly TAM's properties, studies add little thus unlikely survive rigorous Other attempt integrate additional constructs different TAM. All too often, however, include introduced literature. Sometimes, appear almost arbitrarily. cross-sectional survey designs, perceptual measures share some variance outcomes behavioural intentions. Authors gleefully proclaim variance, therefore, inclusion variable importance. forget motivation included first place. Research involves tradeoff between explanatory power parsimony. Although explain more worth parsimony? Do underpinnings insight? These questions than superficial justification by authors. Given frequency variables models, highly unlikely. So constitutes cases? Carter Bélanger (2005) how several successfully. Setting tone article, offer rich motivational discussion integration trustworthiness, innovation represents step towards better understanding e-government services acceptance. four perspectives, namely, model, diffusion innovations, perceived characteristics innovating finally, concept trustworthiness. Next, compare mechanisms successfully well-justified then validate use regression analysis evaluate relationships among measures. Not surprisingly, lists all-time highest cited articles. According Google Scholar, also top-cited both relies examples, submit uses theories similar fashion. Established either contexts, added proper motivation. Neither case top-tier ISJ. closing, although rejections disappointing, heart company. Close 90% rejected. help decrease odds rejection avoiding submission types typically result rejection. issue ISJ, we present papers. Amon Rapp (2022) examines massively multi-player online role-playing game through social practice understand affect players' engagement. author shows that, video game, unfolds temporalities, curated tuned designers design certain elements, namely basic components game. temporalities elicit temporal experiences stimulate engagement various ways, tying players shared temporality making feel fulfilled over long term automatizing experience play. study contributes proposing novel intentionally designed sustain user Furthermore, suggests ‘time design’ games could inspire engaging designs broader gamification communities crowd working systems. second Eriksson Ågerfalk analyse ontological identity, focussing specifically institutional identity socially constructed objects. An entity language construct ‘spoken existence’. We elaborate changes conceptual modelling produced. show if base property-based conception compared one. Bunge-Wand-Weber principles, embrace view anchor literature point type ontology sidesteps general particular. contribute theoretically providing in-depth notion bring modelling. solid grounding management things digital infrastructures. third Lagna & Ravishankar explore fintech innovations enhance financial reduce poverty. argue while community taking fintech, rarely speaks else perfunctory manner focus pro-poor finance. Building calls impactful encourage scholars ethical turn pay attention inclusion. To end, draw Communication Technologies Development scholarship develop guiding fintech-led highlights entrepreneurial, strategic, technological developmental facets fourth Baham Hirschheim note 20 years after Agile Manifesto developed, agile development (ASD) has become widely adopted engage development. Born practice, ASD received who provided insights phenomenon empirical support. Still, despite unified ASD, core been identified. Thus, ‘agile’ still said unclear. clarifying essential less agility, intention sparking scholarly discussion, implications method tailoring. fifth Randolph et al. evidence information systems (IS) meaningful difference person's life. results science effort people communication ability due severe motor disabilities communicate brain–computer interface design. augmentative alternative (AAC) system incorporates context-aware profiles improve individuals disabilities. They principles substantiated media synchronicity inform those designing rely AAC sixth Kim examine affecting insiders' security breach prosocial rule breaking perspective. including assessment situationally induced personal characteristics. context healthcare, empirically test nursing students South Korea scenario-based experiment. find altruistic egoistic motivations situational empathy, affects subjects' responsibility commit breaking. mediates relationship empathy manage prosocially motivated relationships. seventh Mezazade Mehrizi ways thinking (legacy habits) inhibit transition system, but sometimes create initial trigger discontinuing legacy (detracting role) further act bridge learning replace (bridging role). By comparing role habits play discontinuance contingent configuration socio-technical conditions: technical similarity systems, users' orientation change, extent change move routine activities whether tasks organised collectively individually. focus, examining users adopt ones. Payton employ genre opinion piece convey black discipline. Focussing Black Lives Matter movement, articulate systemic challenges impact professional careers even contributions professors. Though AIS examined diversity members released public statement response recent political events, go offering actionable recommendations transparency, justification, compliance enforcement. challenge field structural barriers within along constraining practices departments colleges environments.