Epistemological Advances Through Qualitative Literature Reviews in Information Systems Research (EPIQUALIS)

定性文献综述是许多学科（包括信息系统（IS）学科）的既定研究类型。从认识论的角度来看，定性文献综述可以从累积和革命的角度促进信息系统的科学进步，甚至为信息系统的研究提供基础。自2000年以来，IS作者在39种顶级IS期刊上发表了超过173篇定性IS文献综述，并在这些期刊上发表的2，300多篇研究论文中引用了这些文献综述。对IS文献的分析表明，尽管文献综述在引用方面具有很大的文献计量学影响，而且文献综述具有很大的潜力，但IS学科是否以及在多大程度上利用了文献综述的潜力，通过认识论贡献来增强知识，例如，知识体系的综合，研究差距的识别，或新理论的命题或测试。了解这个认识论问题是很重要的是学科的原因有三个，该项目的主要目标是链接：（1）从分析的角度来看，它提供了关于什么时候以及如何是文献综述（联合国）成功地促进了认识论的增强见解。特别是，它可以将已实现的捐款与潜在捐款进行比较，并确定经验教训。这些经验教训涵盖了文献综述如何创造知识（直接认识论影响）以及如何使其他研究人员能够根据文献综述所取得的成果（间接认识论影响）产生知识的例子。该研究项目的一个目标是识别直接和间接的认识论的贡献是文献综述（目标1：认识论的增强，通过是文献综述）。(2)从规范的角度来看，这些教训学习可以用来获得建议，为两个i）作者的前瞻性是文献综述，以增加他们的认识论的影响和引用的数量和ii）所有的研究人员谁想要利用文献综述的认识论的进步，以产生自己的知识。提供这些建议是该项目的第二个目标（目标2：为信息系统学科的作者提供认识论指导）。(3)从科学哲学的角度来看，没有认识论/知识理论基础的体裁的文学评论存在。该项目的第三个目标是促进发展这样一个理论基础（目标3：信息系统文献审查的认识论理论）。

The qualitative literature review is an established research genre in many academic disciplines, including the information systems (IS) discipline. From an epistemological perspective, qualitative literature reviews can contribute to scientific progress in IS from both the cumulative and the revolutionary perspective and even provide the foundation for research in IS. IS authors have acknowledged the importance of literature reviews by publishing more than 173 qualitative IS literature reviews in the 39 top IS journals since 2000, and these literature reviews have been cited in more than 2,300 research papers published in these journals. The analysis of the IS literature shows that, despite the large bibliometric impact of literature reviews in terms of citations and the large potential of literature reviews, it is still unexplored whether and to what extent the IS discipline has exploited the potential of literature reviews to enhance knowledge through epistemological contributions, e.g., the synthesis of the body of knowledge, the identification of research gaps, or the proposition or test of new theories. Understanding this epistemological issue is important for the IS discipline for three reasons, to which the key objectives of the project are linked: (1) From an analytical perspective, it provides insights with regard to when and how IS literature reviews have (un)successfully contributed to epistemological enhancement. In particular, it allows the comparison of realized contributions with potential contributions as well as the identification of lessons learned. These lessons learned cover examples of how literature reviews have created knowledge (direct epistemological impact) and of how they have enabled other researchers to generate knowledge based on what the literature reviews have achieved (indirect epistemological impact). One objective of the research project is the identification of both the direct and indirect epistemological contributions of IS literature reviews (objective 1: epistemological enhancements through IS literature reviews). (2) From a prescriptive perspective, these lesson leaned can be used to derive recommendations for both i) authors of prospective IS literature reviews in order to increase their epistemological impact and the number of citations and ii) all IS researchers who want to exploit the epistemological advances of literature reviews in order to generate knowledge on their own. The provision of these recommendations is the second objective of the project (objective 2: epistemological guidelines for authors in the IS discipline). (3) From a philosophy of science perspective, no epistemological/knowledge-theoretical basis for the genre of literature reviews exists. A third objective of the project is to contribute to the development of such a theoretical foundation (objective 3: epistemological theory for IS literature reviews).