Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

Nadine Amende
Which research designs were used in past empirical studies?
Secondly, we performed a pilot think aloud test and a survey to gain more insight into user seeking
behaviour and requirements and to show relevance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> research objective.
3. Findings <strong>of</strong> structured literature review
To follow <strong>the</strong> rigor and relevance debate in IS research (Hevner et al. 2004) on <strong>the</strong> one hand and a
call <strong>of</strong> Webster and Watson (2002) on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, this research uses <strong>the</strong> structured literature
method as basis for a rigorous foundation. A structured literature review facilitates <strong>the</strong>ory
development, closes areas where plenty research exists and discovers new research areas
(Webster/Watson 2002). It summarizes and integrates prior research and elicits inconsistencies,
relations and gaps in research to help following a research objective.
Conducting a literature search in <strong>the</strong> IS domain is very complex and time consuming. This is caused
by a constantly increasing number <strong>of</strong> IS journals and conferences, e.g. 681 active IS journals are
listed in <strong>the</strong> index <strong>of</strong> Information Systems Journals (Lamp 2009). Therefore, a relatively
comprehensive number <strong>of</strong> relevant and qualitative articles is crucial for an evident literature analysis.
A structured literature review ensures that all relevant sources can be ga<strong>the</strong>red and analysed by
means <strong>of</strong> a scientific method (Fettke 2006). The process <strong>of</strong> review and <strong>the</strong> exclusion <strong>of</strong> sources are
documented. Because <strong>of</strong> this transparency and reliability <strong>of</strong> research, results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se activities can be
understood and reused.
Figure 2: Process <strong>of</strong> structured literature review (Brocke et al. 2009)
Brocke and Riemer recommend a 5-phasing iterative literature review process (see figure 2), which is
<strong>the</strong> basis for this research objective and is described below.
3.1 Definition <strong>of</strong> review scope
The review scope defines <strong>the</strong> degree <strong>of</strong> coverage <strong>of</strong> sources and <strong>the</strong> period covered. The degree <strong>of</strong>
coverage <strong>of</strong> sources is crucial for reviewing. Cooper distinguishes between an exhaustive review, an
exhaustive review describing only a sample, a representative review typifying larger groups <strong>of</strong> articles
and a pivotal review illustrating central articles (Cooper 1988). In keeping with this paper’s objective
<strong>the</strong> state <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> art <strong>of</strong> utility measurement in information visualisation was accomplished by means <strong>of</strong>
an exhaustive review.
The period covered can be restricted as well. A period can be selective, exhaustive or determines an
interval. The spread <strong>of</strong> information visualisation as an area <strong>of</strong> research began with some
developments at XEROX Palo Alto Research Center in <strong>the</strong> early 90’s and first information
visualisation conferences in 1995. IS success resp. utility measurement has been pushed since 1992
when DeLone and McLean published <strong>the</strong>ir IS success measurement model. Thus, an appropriate
interval between 1992 and 2010 was determined to focus on a wide range on relevant publications.
3.2 Literature search
A systematic selection <strong>of</strong> appropriate sources was carried out by means <strong>of</strong> IS journal rankings.
Multiple ranking lists (AIS 2006), (Fisher et al. 2007), (Willcocks et al. 2008), (Henning-Thurau et al.
2004) and (Holsapple 2009) were consolidated to identify top IS journals. Thus, identified top journals
do not represent <strong>the</strong> perception <strong>of</strong> one researcher and one ranking method. Journals were selected, if
1025