Part I. Experimental Studies: 2. Experiment in psychology 3. Experiments on perceiving III Experiments on imaging 4-8. Experiments on remembering: (a) The method of description (b) The method of repeated reproduction (c) The method of picture writing (d) The method of serial reproduction (e) The method of serial reproduction picture material 9. Perceiving, recognizing, remembering 10. A theory of remembering 11. Images and their functions 12. Meaning Part II. Remembering as a Study in Social Psychology: 13. Social psychology 14. Social psychology and the matter of recall 15. Social psychology and the manner of recall 16. Conventionalism 17. The notion of a collective unconscious 18. The basis of social recall 19. A summary and some conclusions.

Remembering. A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology, Cambridge (University Press) 1964.

Agile software development represents a major departure from traditional, plan-based approaches to software engineering. A systematic review of empirical studies of agile software development up to and including 2005 was conducted. The search strategy identified 1996 studies, of which 36 were identified as empirical studies. The studies were grouped into four themes: introduction and adoption, human and social factors, perceptions on agile methods, and comparative studies. The review investigates what is currently known about the benefits and limitations of, and the strength of evidence for, agile methods. Implications for research and practice are presented. The main implication for research is a need for more and better empirical studies of agile software development within a common research agenda. For the industrial readership, the review provides a map of findings, according to topic, that can be compared for relevance to their own settings and situations.

/pdf/empirical-studies-of-agile-software-development-a-systematic-4kky3l7vnd.pdf

Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review

A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model

Since DeLone and McLean (D&M) developed their model of IS success, there has been much research on the topic of success as well as extensions and tests of their model. Using the technique of a qualitative literature review, this research reviews 180 papers found in the academic literature for the period 1992–2007 dealing with some aspect of IS success. Using the six dimensions of the D&M model – system quality, information quality, service quality, use, user satisfaction, and net benefits – 90 empirical studies were examined and the results summarized. Measures for the six success constructs are described and 15 pairwise associations between the success constructs are analyzed. This work builds on the prior research related to IS success by summarizing the measures applied to the evaluation of IS success and by examining the relationships that comprise the D&M IS success model in both individual and organizational contexts.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057%2Fejis.2008.15.pdf

Measuring information systems success: models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships

Case research has commanded respect in the information systems (IS) discipline for at least a decade Notwithstanding the relevance and potential value of case studies, this methodological approach was once considered to be one of the least systematic Toward the end of the 1980s, the issue of whether IS case research was rigorously conducted was first raised Researchers from our field (eg, Benbasat et al 1987; Lee 1989) and from other disciplines (eg, Eisenhardt 1989; Yin 1994) called for more rigor in case research and, through their recommendations, contributed to the advancement of the case study methodology Considering these contributions, the present study seeks to determine the extent to which the field of IS has advanced in its operational use of case study method Precisely, it investigates the level of methodological rigor in positivist IS case research conducted over the past decade To fulfill this objective, we identified and coded 183 case articles from seven major IS journals Evaluation attributes or criteria considered in the present review focus on three main areas, namely, design issues, data collection, and data analysis While the level of methodological rigor has experienced modest progress with respect to some specific attributes, the overall assessed rigor is somewhat equivocal and there are still significant areas for improvement One of the keys is to include better documentation particularly regarding issues related to the data collection and analysis processes

Rigor in information systems positivist case research: current practices, trends, and recommendations

Mostly fueled by mandates, adoption, and implementation of the RFID, technology in the retail industry is growing rapidly. At these early stages of adoption, one puzzling issue for retailers and suppliers is the compelling business case for RFID. In order to explore the potential business case for RFID, we conducted a case study using actual RFID data collected by a major retailer for the cases shipped by one of its major suppliers. We show the physical layout of the RFID readers on a partial supply-chain covering product movement from distribution centers to retail stores. First, in the analysis phase, we identify several performance metrics that can be computed from the RFID readings. Next, using this RFID data, we compute the values of those performance metrics. These values represent mean time between movements at different locations. Then, we discuss how these measures can assist in improving logistical performance at a micro supply chain level of operations between a distribution center and a retail store. We present how such information can be valuable to both the retail store operator and the supplier. We also discuss the initial lessons learned from actual RFID data collected in the field, in terms of data quality issues.

RFID for Better Supply-Chain Management through Enhanced Information Visibility

Many organizations attempt to deploy methodologies intended to improve software development processes. However, resistance by individual software developers against using such methodologies often obstructs their successful deployment. To better explain why individual developers accept or resist methodologies, five theoretical models of individual intentions to accept information technology tools were examined. In a field study of 128 developers in a large organization that implemented a methodology, each model explained significant variance in developers' intentions to use the methodology. Similar to findings from the tool adoption context, we found that, if a methodology is not regarded as useful by developers, its prospects for successful deployment may be severely undermined. In contrast to the typical pattern of findings in a tool context, however, we found that methodology adoption intentions are driven by: 1) the presence of an organizational mandate to use the methodology, 2) the compatibility of the methodology with how developers perform their work, and 3) the opinions of developers' coworkers and supervisors toward using the methodology. Collectively, these results provide surprising new insights into why software developers accept or resist methodologies and suggest what software engineering managers might do to overcome developer resistance.

Explaining software developer acceptance of methodologies: a comparison of five theoretical models

Seeking to improve software development, many organizations attempt to deploy formalized methodologies. This typically entails substantial behavioral change by software developers away from previous informal practices toward conformance with the methodology. Developers' resistance to such change often results in failure to fully deploy and realize the benefits of the methodology. The present research draws upon theories of intention formation and innovation diffusion to advance knowledge about why developers accept or resist following methodologies. Results from a field study within a large organization indicate that developers' intentions are directly influenced by their perceptions of usefulness, social pressure, compatibility, and organizational mandate. This pattern of intention determinants is quite different from that typically observed in studies of information technology tool adoption, revealing several key differences between the domains of tool versus methodology adoption. Specifically, although organizational mandate had a significant effect on intentions, the strength of its direct influence was the lowest among the four significant constructs, and usefulness, compatibility, and social pressure all influenced intentions directly, above and beyond the effects of organizational mandate. The findings suggest, contrary to popular belief, that an organizational mandate is not sufficient to guarantee use of the methodology in a sustained manner.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/info/40398619

Investigating Determinants of Software Developers' Intentions to Follow Methodologies

Realizing the benefits of continuous software process improvement.

Software process improvement: it's a journey, not a destination

W here should I publish my scholarly research? is a question often heard in academic circles. On the surface this appears to be a trivial question. However, when one considers the vast number of journals available, the pressure on faculty to publish, and the impact of publishing on promotion and tenure, the question no longer seems trivial. As early as 1983, Hamilton and Ives [6] noted that the abundance of journals and long publication lead times made it important to identify journal quality so researchers know where to submit their work. Many parties other than MIS faculty have an interest in the quality ratings of MIS publication outlets: (1) selection, promotion, and tenure committees seeking to secure and retain the best faculty [3, 7]; (2) journal editors and associates seeking to raise the quality of their journals [12]; (3) students of the discipline seeking to gain an understanding of the field [6, 11]; (4) members of the MIS field as it continues to mature as a discipline [6, 11]; and (5) librarians seeking to invest wisely their ever-decreasing funds [12]. Overall, the determination of journal quality helps to further the MIS discipline. Several studies have evaluated the quality of MIS publication outlets. However, as Gillenson and Stutz [5] note: “earlier studies addressed the issue of MIS journals in a variety of ways, no two quite the same.” An assortment of methods has been used to assess journal quality. Some have used a numeric scale to assign ratings to various journals [5, 6, 12]. Others have asked respondents to rank the journals in some fashion [3, 7]. Most of the studies asked a crosssection of MIS faculty to evaluate the journals [3, 6, 7, 12]; although at least one polled specific members of the MIS faculty such as department chairs or senior faculty [5]. The only thing these studies have in common is that they all attempt to do the same thing—identify the quality of journals. The study described in this article is a follow-up and update to the 1991 study by Walstrom et al. [12], using the same population and data collection instrument; thus allowing a direct comparison to be made between the findings in this study and those of the 1991 study. MIS faculty in the U.S. and Canada were asked to rate 53 journals according to their appropriateness as publication outlets and 11 conferences according to their value to the MIS field. Over 350 responses were received—by far the largest sample for this type of

Bill C. Hardgrave

Papers

RFID for Better Supply-Chain Management through Enhanced Information Visibility

Explaining software developer acceptance of methodologies: a comparison of five theoretical models

Investigating Determinants of Software Developers' Intentions to Follow Methodologies

Software process improvement: it's a journey, not a destination

Forums for MIS scholars