Beyond the Hype: Robotic Process Automation's Public Perception Over Time

References

• 2020 ieee 24th international enterprise distributed object computing workshop: Edocw. 2020. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Ågerfalk, P. J., K. Conboy, and M. D. Myers. 2020. Information systems in the age of pandemics: Covid-19 and beyond. European Journal of Information Systems 29 (3):203–07. doi:10.1080/0960085X.2020.1771968.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agrawal, A., W. Fu, and T. Menzies. 2018. What is wrong with topic modeling? And how to fix it using search-based software engineering. Information and Software Technology 98:74–88. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2018.02.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aizawa, A. 2003. An information-theoretic perspective of tf–idf measures. Information Processing & Management 39 (1):45–65. doi:10.1016/S0306-4573(02)00021-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albert, T., M. G. Moehrle, and S. Meyer. 2015. Technology maturity assessment based on blog analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 92:196–209. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2014.08.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alkemade, F., and R. A. Suurs. 2012. Patterns of expectations for emerging sustainable technologies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 79 (3):448–56. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2011.08.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andriole, S. 2018. Ai and rpa will absolutely, positively threaten your job. Last modified July 23, 2018. Accessed February 1, 2021. https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveandriole/2018/07/23/ai-rpa-will-absolutely-positively-threaten-your-job/#649f863b712b.
   Google Scholar
• Asatiani, A., and E. Penttinen. 2016. Turning robotic process automation into commercial success – Case opuscapita. Journal of Information Technology Teaching Cases 6 (2):67–74. doi:10.1057/jittc.2016.5.
   Google Scholar
• Association for Information Systems,ed. 2020. Ecis 2020 proceedings.
   Google Scholar
• Baccianella, S., A. Esuli, and F. Sebastiani. 2010. Sentiwordnet 3.0: An enhanced lexical resource for sentiment analysis and opinion mining. In Lrec’10 proceedings, ed.. N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, J. Odijk, S. Piperidis, M. Rosner, and D. Tapias. Valletta, Malta.
   Google Scholar
• Baroni, M., G. Dinu, and G. Kruszewski. 2014. Don’t count, predict! A systematic comparison of context-counting vs. Context-predicting semantic vectors. In Proceedings of the 52nd annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, ed. K. Toutanova, and H. Wu, 238–47. Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Bass, F. M. 1969. A new product growth for model consumer durables. Management Science 15 (5):215–27. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1040.0264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blei, D. M. 2012. Probabilistic topic models. Communications of the ACM 55 (4):77–84. doi:10.1145/2133806.2133826.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blei, D. M., A. Y. Ng, and M. I. Jordan. 2003. Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3:993–1022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosco, C., V. Patti, and A. Bolioli. 2013. Developing corpora for sentiment analysis: The case of irony and senti-tut. IEEE Intelligent Systems 28 (2):55–63. doi:10.1109/MIS.2013.28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, S. A., and V. Venkatesh. 2005. Model of adoption of technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS Quarterly 29 (3):399–426. doi:10.2307/25148690.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cambria, E., B. Schuller, Y. Xia, and C. Havasi. 2013. New avenues in opinion mining and sentiment analysis. IEEE Intelligent Systems 28 (2):15–21. doi:10.1109/MIS.2013.30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cambria, E., S. Poria, A. Gelbukh, and M. Thelwall. 2017. Sentiment analysis is a big suitcase. IEEE Intelligent Systems 32 (6):74–80. doi:10.1109/MIS.2017.4531228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dedehayir, O., and M. Steinert. 2016. The hype cycle model: A review and future directions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 108:28–41. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.04.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denecke, K. 2008. Using sentiwordnet for multilingual sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of the ieee 24th international conference on data engineering workshops, 507–12. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Service Center.
   Google Scholar
• Fenn, J., and M. Blosch. 2018. Understanding gartner’s hype cycles. Last modified August 20, 2018. Accessed February 1, 2021. https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/3887767/understanding-gartner-s-hype-cycles.
   Google Scholar
• Foster, R. N. 1986. Working the s-curve: Assessing technological threats. Research Management 29 (4):17–20. doi:10.1080/00345334.1986.11756976.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fung, H. P. 2014. Criteria, use cases and effects of information technology process automation (itpa). Advances in Robotics & Automation 3:3. doi:10.4172/2168-9695.1000124.
   Google Scholar
• Ghiassi, M., D. Zimbra, and S. Lee. 2016. Targeted twitter sentiment analysis for brands using supervised feature engineering and the dynamic architecture for artificial neural networks. Journal of Management Information Systems 33 (4):1034–58. doi:10.1080/07421222.2016.1267526.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goasduff, L. 2019. Top trends on the gartner hype cycle for artificial intelligence, 2019. Last modified September 12, 2019. Accessed February 1, 2021. https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/top-trends-on-the-gartner-hype-cycle-for-artificial-intelligence-2019/.
   Google Scholar
• Huysman, M. 2020. Information systems research on artificial intelligence and work: A commentary on “robo-apocalypse cancelled? Reframing the automation and future of work debate”. Journal of Information Technology 35 (4):307–09. doi:10.1177/0268396220926511.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Järvenpää, H. M., and S. J. Mäkinen. 2008a. An empirical study of the existence of the hype cycle: A case of dvd technology. In Managing engineering, technology and innovation for growth: Ieee international engineering management conference, europe, iemc-europe, 1–5. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Operations Center.
   Google Scholar
• Järvenpää, H. M., and S. J. Mäkinen. 2008b. Empirically detecting the hype cycle with the life cycle indicators: An exploratory analysis of three technologies. In Ieem 2008: The ieee international conference on industrial engineering and engineering management; 8 to 11 december, singapore, 12–16. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Jelodar, H., Y. Wang, C. Yuan, X. Feng, X. Jiang, Y. Li, and L. Zhao. 2019. Latent dirichlet allocation (lda) and topic modeling: Models, applications, a survey. Multimedia Tools and Applications 78 (11):15169–211. doi:10.1007/s11042-018-6894-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jun, S.-P. 2012. A comparative study of hype cycles among actors within the socio-technical system: With a focus on the case study of hybrid cars. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 79 (8):1413–30. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2012.04.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jun, S.-P., H. S. Yoo, and S. Choi. 2018. Ten years of research change using Google trends: From the perspective of big data utilizations and applications. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 130:69–87. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.11.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kayser, V., and K. Blind. 2017. Extending the knowledge base of foresight: The contribution of text mining. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 116:208–15. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.10.017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kayser, V., K. Goluchowicz, and A. Bierwisch. 2014. Text mining for technology roadmapping — The strategic value of information. International Journal of Innovation Management 18 (3):1440004. doi:10.1142/S1363919614400040.
   Google Scholar
• Knutt, E. 2020. Take out the tedious: Robotic automation in government. Last modified October 14, 2020. Accessed February 1, 2021. https://www.globalgovernmentforum.com/take-out-the-tedious-robotic-automation-in-government/.
   Google Scholar
• Koch, J., M. Trampler, I. Kregel, and A. Coners. 2020. ‘mirror, mirror, on the wall’: Robotic process automation in the public sector using a digital twin. In Ecis 2020 proceedings, ed. Association for Information Systems. Marrakech, Morocco.
   Google Scholar
• Konrad, K., J. Markard, A. Ruef, and B. Truffer. 2012. Strategic responses to fuel cell hype and disappointment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 79 (6):1084–98. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2011.09.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kriechbaum, M., J. López Prol, and A. Posch. 2018. Looking back at the future: Dynamics of collective expectations about photovoltaic technology in Germany & Spain. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 129:76–87. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.12.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, S., and M. B Watson-Manheim. 2020. Robo-apocalypse cancelled?. Journal of Information Technology 35(4):305–306–87. doi:10.1177/0268396220925096.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lacity, M. C., and L. P. Willcocks. 2016a. Robotic process automation at telefónica o2. MIS Quarterly Executive 15 (1):21–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lacity, M. C., and L. P. Willcocks. 2016b. A new approach to automating services. MIT Sloan Management Review 58 (1):40–49.
   Google Scholar
• Linden, A., and J. Fenn. 2003. Understanding gartner’s hype cycles. Accessed February 1, 2021. https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/396330/understanding-gartner-s-hype-cycles.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, B. 2010. Sentiment analysis and subjectivity. In Handbook of natural language processing, ed. N. Indurkhya, and F. J. Damerau, 627–66. 2nd ed ed. Boca Raton, Fla: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, B., and L. Zhang. 2012. A survey of opinion mining and sentiment analysis. In Mining text data, ed. C. C. Aggarwal, and C. Zhai, 415–63. 2012nd ed ed. Boston, MA: Springer US.
   Google Scholar
• Loper, E., and S. Bird. 2002. Nltk: The natural language toolkit. In Proceedings of the acl-02 workshop on effective tools and methodologies for teaching natural language processing and computational linguistics, ed.. D. Radev, C. Brew, and M. Rosner, 63–70. Morristown, NJ, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
   Google Scholar
• Loria, S. 2020. Textblob: Simplified text processing. Last modified April 26, 2020. Accessed February 1, 2021. https://textblob.readthedocs.io.
   Google Scholar
• Mäntylä, M. V., D. Graziotin, and M. Kuutila. 2018. The evolution of sentiment analysis—A review of research topics, venues, and top cited papers. Computer Science Review 27:16–32. doi:10.1016/j.cosrev.2017.10.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mardani, A., M. K. Saraji, A. R. Mishra, and P. Rani. 2020. A novel extended approach under hesitant fuzzy sets to design a framework for assessing the key challenges of digital health interventions adoption during the covid-19 outbreak. Applied Soft Computing 96:106613. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mejia, C., and Y. Kajikawa. 2017. Assessing the sentiment of social expectations of robotic technologies. In Technology management for the interconnected world: Picmet, ed. D. F. Kocaoglu, 1–7. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Melton, N., J. Axsen, and D. Sperling. 2016. Moving beyond alternative fuel hype to decarbonize transportation. Nature Energy 1 (3):3. doi:10.1038/nenergy.2016.13.
   Google Scholar
• Mikova, N. 2016. Recent trends in technology mining approaches: Quantitative analysis of gtm conference proceedings. In Anticipating future innovation pathways through large data analysis, ed.. T. U. Daim, D. Chiavetta, A. L. Porter, and O. Saritas, Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Mimno, D., H. M. Wallach, E. Talley, M. Leenders, and A. McCallum. 2011. Optimizing semantic coherence in topic models. In Proceedings of the 2011 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, ed. R. Barzilay, and M. Johnson. Edinburgh, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Mousavi, R., M. Johar, and V. S. Mookerjee. 2020. The voice of the customer: Managing customer care in twitter. Information Systems Research 31 (2):297–652. doi:10.1287/isre.2019.0889.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Navigli, R. 2009. Word sense disambiguation: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys 41 (2):1–69. doi:10.1145/1459352.1459355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Leary, D. E. 2008. Gartner’s hype cycle and information system research issues. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 9 (4):240–52. doi:10.1016/j.accinf.2008.09.001.
   Google Scholar
• O’Leary, D. E. 2020. Evolving information systems and technology research issues for covid-19 and other pandemics. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 30 (1):1–8. doi:10.1080/10919392.2020.1755790.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olteanu, A., C. Castillo, F. Diaz, and E. Kıcıman. 2019. Social data: Biases, methodological pitfalls, and ethical boundaries. Frontiers in Big Data 2:2. doi:10.3389/fdata.2019.00013.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pang, B., and L. Lee. 2008. Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. FNT in Information Retrieval (Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval) 2 (1–2):1–135. doi:10.1561/1500000011.
   Google Scholar
• Penttinen, E., H. Kasslin, and A. Asatiani. 2018. How to choose between robotic process automation and back-end system automation? In Ecis 2018 proceedings, ed.. P. M. Bednar, U. Frank, and K. Kautz. Portsmouth, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, M., M. Schneider, T. Griesshaber, and V. H. Hoffmann. 2012. The impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies on technical change – Does the locus of policies matter? Research Policy 41 (8):1296–308. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plattfaut, R. 2019. Robotic process automation – Process optimization on steroids? In Icis 2019 proceedings, ed.. H. Krcmar, J. Fedorowicz, W. F. Boh, J. M. Leimeister, and S. Wattal. Munich, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Ravi, K., and V. Ravi. 2015. A survey on opinion mining and sentiment analysis: Tasks, approaches and applications. Knowledge-Based Systems 89:14–46. doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2015.06.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reyes, A., P. Rosso, and D. Buscaldi. 2012. From humor recognition to irony detection: The figurative language of social media. Data & Knowledge Engineering 74:1–12. doi:10.1016/j.datak.2012.02.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riemer, K., and S. Peter. 2020. The robo-apocalypse plays out in the quality, not in the quantity of work. Journal of Information Technology 35 (4):310–15. doi:10.1177/0268396220923677.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Röder, M., A. Both, and A. Hinneburg. 2015. Exploring the space of topic coherence measures. In Proceedings of the eighth acm international conference on web search and data mining - wsdm ‘15, ed. X. Cheng, H. Li, E. Gabrilovich, and J. Tang, 399–408. New York, USA: ACM Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. M. 2003. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed ed. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Routley, M., R. Phaal, and D. Probert. 2013. Exploring industry dynamics and interactions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 80 (6):1147–61. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2012.04.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruef, A., and J. Markard. 2010. What happens after a hype? How changing expectations affected innovation activities in the case of stationary fuel cells. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 22 (3):317–38. doi:10.1080/09537321003647354.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmoch, U. 2007. Double-boom cycles and the comeback of science-push and market-pull. Research Policy 36 (7):1000–15. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2006.11.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro, A. H., M. Sudhof, and D. J. Wilson. 2020. Measuring news sentiment. Journal of Econometrics Aheadof Print. doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.07.053.
   Google Scholar
• Sohangir, S., N. Petty, and D. Wang. 2018. Financial sentiment lexicon analysis. In Proceedings of the ieee 12th international conference on semantic computing, 286–89. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Song, Y., S. Pan, S. Liu, M. X. Zhou, and W. Qian. 2009. Topic and keyword re-ranking for lda-based topic modeling. In Proceedings of the 18th acm conference on information and knowledge management, ed.. D. Cheung, 1757–60. New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Straub, E. T. 2009. Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research 79 (2):625–49. doi:10.3102/0034654308325896.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Syed, R., S. Suriadi, M. Adams, W. Bandara, S. J. Leemans, C. Ouyang, I. A. H. Ter Hofstede, V. D. Weerd, M. T. Wynn, and H. A. Reijers. 2020. Robotic process automation: Contemporary themes and challenges. Computers in Industry 115:103162. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2019.103162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thyagarajan, J. 2020. Hype cycle for business process services, 2020. Last modified July 20, 2020. Accessed February 1, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Van Der Aalst, W., M. Bichler, and A. Heinzl. 2018. Robotic process automation. Business & Information Systems Engineering 60 (4):269–72. doi:10.1007/s12599-018-0542-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Meulen, R. 2020. 4 key trends in the gartner hype cycle for legal and compliance technologies, 2020. Last modified September 21, 2020. Accessed February 1, 2021. https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/4-key-trends-in-the-gartner-hype-cycle-for-legal-and-compliance-technologies-2020/.
   Google Scholar
• Van Lente, H., C. Spitters, and A. Peine. 2013. Comparing technological hype cycles: Towards a theory. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 80 (8):1615–28. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2012.12.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinodhini, G., and R. M. Chandrasekaran. 2012. Sentiment analysis and opinion mining: A survey. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, 2 (6):282–92.
   Google Scholar
• Wallach, H. M., I. Murray, R. Salakhutdinov, and D. Mimno. 2009. Evaluation methods for topic models. In Proceedings of the 26th annual international conference on machine learning, ed.. A. Danyluk, 1–8. New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Watts, R. J., and A. L. Porter. 1997. Innovation forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 56 (1):25–47. doi:10.1016/S0040-1625(97)00050-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wewerka, J., and M. Reichert. 2020. Towards quantifying the effects of robotic process automation. In 2020 ieee 24th international enterprise distributed object computing workshop: Edocw, ed. IEEE Computer Society, 11–19. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Willcocks, L. 2020. Robo-apocalypse cancelled? Reframing the automation and future of work debate. Journal of Information Technology 35 (4):286–302. doi:10.1177/0268396220925830.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willcocks, L., M. Lacity, and A. Craig. 2017. Robotic process automation: Strategic transformation lever for global business services? Journal of Information Technology Teaching Cases 7 (1):17–28. doi:10.1057/s41266-016-0016-9.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, L., S. Wang, and B. Liu. 2018. Deep learning for sentiment analysis: A survey. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 8 (4):e1253. doi:10.1002/widm.1253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar