References
- Atkinson, C., & Kühne, T. (2015). In defence of deep modelling. Information and Software Technology, 64, 36–51.
- Baron, R. A. (1988). Negative effects of destructive criticism: Impact on conflict, self-efficacy, and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(2), 199–207.
- Bee, R., & Bee, F. (1998). Constructive feedback. London: CIPD Publishing.
- Eriksson, O., Henderson-Sellers, B., & Ågerfalk, P. J. (2013). Ontological and linguistic metamodelling revisited: A language use approach. Information and Software Technology, 55(12), 2099–2124.
- Foucault, M. (2002). The archaeology of knowledge. London: Routledge.
- Iivari, J. (2015). Distinguishing and contrasting two strategies for design science research. European Journal of Information Systems, 24(1), 107–115. doi:10.1057/ejis.2013.35
- Mullarkey, M. T., & Hevner, A. R. (2018). An elaborated action design research process model. European Journal of Information Systems, 28(1), 6–20.
- Overholser, J. C. (1993). Elements of the socratic method: I. Systematic questioning. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 30(1), 67.
- Paltridge, B. (2017). The discourse of peer review. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77.
- Ross-Hellauer, T., Deppe, A., & Schmidt, B. (2017). Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers. PloS one, 12(12), e0189311.
- Rowe, F. (2018). Being critical is good, but better with philosophy! From digital transformation and values to the future of IS research. European Journal of Information Systems, 27, 380–393.
- Rowe, F., & Markus, M. L. (2018). Taking on sacred cows: Openness, fair critique, and retaining value when revising classics. European Journal of Information Systems, 27(6), 623–628.
- Saar-Tsechansky, M. (2015). Editor’s comments: The business of business data science in IS journals. MIS Quarterly, 39(4), iii–vi.
- Sein, M. K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., & Lindgren, R. (2011). Action design research. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 37–56.
- Sein, M. K., & Rossi, M. (2018). Elaborating ADR while drifting away from its essence: A commentary on Mullarkey and Hevner. European Journal of Information Systems, 28(1), 21–25.
- Swales, J. M. (1996). Occluded genres in the academy: The case of the submission letter. In E. Ventola & A. Mauranen (Eds.), Academic writing: Intercultural and textual issues (pp. 45–58). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Te’eni, D. (2012). What’s communication got to do with IT? European Journal of Information Systems, 21(4), 341–344.
- Te’eni, D., Rowe, F., Ågerfalk, P. J., & Lee, J. S. (2015). Publishing and getting published in EJIS: Marshaling contributions for a diversity of genres. European Journal of Information Systems, 24(6), 559–568.
- Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument. New York: Cambridge university press.