Author ORCID Identifier
Cathal Doyle: 0000-0001-5633-3654
Abstract
This editorial examines whether the Information Systems discipline's publication venues create the conditions for two principles central to scientific knowledge: transparency and accessibility. I review the policies of nineteen IS journals and conferences across eight practices, organised through the OPEN framework: Outputs (open access, preprints, open artefacts), Process (open data, open materials), Evaluation (registered reports, open peer review, replication), and Norms, which emerge from the patterns across the other three. The resulting matrix shows that beyond open access, which most venues offer only as a paid option, almost none requires transparency or accessibility as a condition of publication. Closed norms dominate instead: publishing behind paywalls, withholding data, and conducting peer review privately are all practised and expected. A discipline whose findings cannot be reproduced and whose artefacts cannot be accessed cannot expect to be relevant.
DOI
10.17705/1CAIS.05802
Recommended Citation
Doyle, C. (2026). How OPEN Are We?. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 58, 31-38. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05802
When commenting on articles, please be friendly, welcoming, respectful and abide by the AIS eLibrary Discussion Thread Code of Conduct posted here.
