MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1526474450

A Ten-Year Odyssey of the 'IS Productivity Paradox' - A Citation Analysis (1996-2006)

2007· article· en· W1526474450 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityCitation analysisCitationField (mathematics)Computer scienceOrder (exchange)Data scienceOperations researchEconomicsEngineeringLibrary scienceMathematicsEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The information systems “productivity paradox” has become an important catalyst for research within the IS field. This study examines how the paradox has impacted IS research through a content analysis of 150 articles published between 1996 and 2006 that cite Brynjolfsson and Hitt’s seminal productivity paradox paper (e.g., Brynjolfsson and Hitt 1996). The results show that the original paradox has largely been resolved due to more sophisticated and refined data sources, a shift in the level of analysis, and a refocus on the management of IS. However, a more complex picture has emerged about the link between IS and outcome variables. This paper explores this complexity in order to identify remaining gaps and propose directions for future research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it