THE HOLE IN THE WHOLE: A RESPONSE TO ALLEN AND MARCH.

Author List: Shanks, Graeme; Weber, Ron;

MIS Quarterly, 2012, Volume 36, Issue 3, Page 965-980.

Allen and March provide a critique of one of our papers in which we argue composites should be represented as entities/objects in a conceptual model rather than relationships/associations (Shanks et al. 2008). They contend we have addressed a non-issue. Furthermore, they argue our theoretical rationale and empirical evidence have flaws. In this paper, we provide a response to their arguments. We show that the issue we address is substantive. We show, also, that our theoretical analysis and empirical results are robust. We find, instead, that Allen and March's theoretical arguments and empirical evidence have flaws.

Keywords: aggregation; composition; Conceptual modeling; empirical research; entity-relationship model; information systems development; ontology; UML

Algorithm:

List of Topics

#17	0.525	empirical model relationships causal framework theoretical construct results models terms paper relationship based argue proposed literature issues assumptions provide suggest
#216	0.152	conceptual model modeling object-oriented domain models entities representation understanding diagrams schema semantic attributes represented representing object relationships concepts classes entity-relationship
#39	0.126	article response editor presents issue letter presented management university december issues davis march articles conference authors needs september smis past