arbiter
JournalsAccount

Editor’s Comments

Heshan Sun et al.

MIS Quarterly2025https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2025/493e1article
FT50UTD24AJG 4*ABDC A*
Weight
0.44

Abstract

This editorial is inspired by a growing concern within the information systems (IS) community that novelty has become a dominant criterion for publication, despite being unevenly interpreted and poorly specified. In our editorial experience, when authors are told that their papers lack novelty, they often receive little concrete guidance on what precisely counts as novelty, how it varies across paradigms, or how it should be balanced with rigor and relevance.

3 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2025/493e1

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{heshan2025,
  title        = {{Editor’s Comments}},
  author       = {Heshan Sun et al.},
  journal      = {MIS Quarterly},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2025/493e1},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Editor’s Comments

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.44

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.32 × 0.4 = 0.13
M · momentum0.57 × 0.15 = 0.09
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.