An analysis of evaluations of prior scholarships in research articles of two sub-fields of Information Systems

One key part of a research article (RA) is its literature review (LR)[1] in which the writer is expected to critically evaluate the existing literature to justify his/her research or to develop the conceptual/theoretical framework of the study. This is a challenging task to many novice writers not least because of its tacit nature which is seldom made explicit in writing instruction or research writing manuals. Where the task is explained, it tends to be glossed over, and how it may be practised in a specific discipline is rarely addressed. A parallel gap also exists in the empirical work on LRs which primarily focuses on the schematic patterns of the genre-part in theses. As a response to the gaps in both types of literature, the study presented in this paper was conducted to examine how critical evaluations of prior scholarships are realized in the LRs found in 80 RAs drawn from four journals of Information Systems. The journals represent two distinct epistemologies characteristic of the interdisciplinary nature of IS, two of which have a soft orientation (Becher, 1989; Biglan, 1973) and publish work on IS management. The other two are hard journals publishing work relating to algorithms and computing techniques for IS. The CARS model (Swales, 1999, 2004) found adaptable for use in studies of LRs in postgraduate theses was employed as a starting framework to identify the move patterns of the LRs. It was found that the model could be aptly applied to characterize the moves of the LRs. With the move analysis completed, all segments of Move 2 where the majority of evaluative statements were located were subjected to a fine-grained multidimensional analysis of their rhetorical purposes in relation to the writers’ own work, their propositional contents, and their use of rhetorical devices in achieving the purposes. The features were further subjected to a cross-field analysis. Findings reveal marked differences across the two groups of journals. Pedagogical implications will be discussed. [1] LR refers to the section that comes between the Introduction and the Methodology section of a research article.