B & Z’s article asserts that the information system researchers come from diverse backgrounds, and the main Journals of IS field published works lead to making the identity of IS unclear. However, B&Z’s main claim is that the proposed nonmagical net of IT artifact includes the capabilities and practices that lead to it, its usage, and its impact. B&Z argue that some of the areas that have not been well handled by the researchers in the IS field, as expressed in the article, include the following:
The error of exclusion, the studies, and findings published in the information system area have not fully addressed IS discipline’s basic elements (the core set of proposing properties that define the IS field). Several IS researchers and studies have committed the error of exclusion for IT Artifacts and the involved nomological net.
The error of inclusion has as well been committed in the various IS research aspects. The study concepts that are not part of the Information system constructs have been included in the various studies as relevant to IS. The inclusion of irrelevant details in the IS studies.
Takeda’s article claims that students’ amount of time spent in exam rooms during tests is inversely proportional to the score they are likely to get. This information is somehow not related to the information presented by B & Z in the article about IT artifact and the elements of the nomological net. The article might be based on knowledge from another field of studies such as behavior analysis and psychology. Even though the study involves an Introductory to Computer Information Systems Course, it could apply information to other courses. Additionally, using the regression analysis method is not limited to the IS field of study; such a method can be used in other study fields. Moreover, the article has not covered IT-related artifacts as it is supposed to be; neither does it involve facts on the nomological net. This is a clear demonstration of how the error of inclusion has been presented in the research work when the information presented in the Association for Information System journal is not affiliated to the IS field. The faults identified about Takeda’s article make me assume that Takeda’s article wouldn’t be accepted in a journal or conference committed to B&Z guidelines.