KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / International Journal of Computers in Education / 2026 / Volume: 9 Issue: 1

The Academic Structure of Management Information Systems in Türkiye: A Descriptive Analysis of Institutional Distribution and Co-Authorship Pattern

Mehmethan Erduran(İZMİR DEMOKRASİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1620-2523
Kadir Demir(İZMİR DEMOKRASİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9568-9450
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2026-06-30
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Because YÖK Academic profiles are dynamic and self-updated, the findings should be read as an April 2026 descriptive baseline.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study maps the academic structure of Management Information Systems (MIS) in Türkiye using cleaned YÖK Academic profile data compiled in April 2026.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The dataset covers academics and universities in Türkiye and identifies 705 academics whose current department is MIS across 94 universities, 42 cities, and seven regions.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Because YÖK Academic profiles are dynamic and self-updated, the findings should be read as an April 2026 descriptive baseline.
🔬Tür:Research Article
📍Kapsam:2026 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:management information systems · academic mapping · interdisciplinary collaboration

Abstract

This study maps the academic structure of Management Information Systems (MIS) in Türkiye using cleaned YÖK Academic profile data compiled in April 2026. The dataset covers academics and universities in Türkiye and identifies 705 academics whose current department is MIS across 94 universities, 42 cities, and seven regions. Descriptive statistics are combined with a conservative co-authorship analysis based only on YÖK-resolved profile records for publications, books, and proceedings. Results show concentration in Marmara and Central Anatolia, a rank profile led by assistant professors and research assistants, and institutional placement mainly in economics-administrative sciences, business, and applied sciences faculties. Co-authorship is most frequent with business, computer engineering, industrial engineering, education, economics, and software engineering. Because YÖK Academic profiles are dynamic and self-updated, the findings should be read as an April 2026 descriptive baseline.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Erduran, M., Demir, K. (2026). The Academic Structure of Management Information Systems in Türkiye: A Descriptive Analysis of Institutional Distribution and Co-Authorship Pattern. International Journal of Computers in Education, Volume: 9 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.64693/ijce.1963593

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (15)

  1. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959-975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
  2. Baskerville, R. L., & Myers, M. D. (2002). Information systems as a reference discipline. MIS Quarterly, 26(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/4132338
  3. Benbasat, I., & Weber, R. (1996). Research commentary: Rethinking diversity in information systems research. Information Systems Research, 7(4), 389-399. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.7.4.389
  4. Benbasat, I., & Zmud, R. W. (2003). The identity crisis within the IS discipline: Defining and communicating the discipline's core properties. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 183-194. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036527
  5. Council of Higher Education. (n.d.). YÖK Academic Search. Retrieved June 1, 2026, from https://akademik.yok.gov.tr/AkademikArama/indexEn.jsp
  6. Culnan, M. J. (1986). The intellectual development of management information systems, 1972-1982: A co-citation analysis. Management Science, 32(2), 156-172. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.2.156
  7. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
  8. Grover, V., & Lyytinen, K. (2015). New state of play in information systems research: The push to the edges. MIS Quarterly, 39(2), 271-296. https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2015/39.2.01
  9. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00917-1
  10. Newman, M. E. J. (2001). Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. Physical Review E, 64(1), Article 016131. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.64.016131
  11. Taylor, H., Dillon, S., & Van Wingen, M. (2010). Focus and diversity in information systems research: Meeting the dual demands of a healthy applied discipline. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 647-667. https://doi.org/10.2307/25750699
  12. Vessey, I., Ramesh, V., & Glass, R. L. (2002). Research in information systems: An empirical study of diversity in the discipline and its journals. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(2), 129-174. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2002.11045721
  13. Wagner, C. S., Roessner, J. D., Bobb, K., Klein, J. T., Boyack, K. W., Keyton, J., Rafols, I., & Börner, K. (2011). Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 14-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.06.004
  14. Yegros-Yegros, A., Rafols, I., & D'Este, P. (2015). Does interdisciplinary research lead to higher citation impact? The different effect of proximal and distal interdisciplinarity. PLOS ONE, 10(8), Article e0135095. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0135095
  15. Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629