IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sek/ibmpro/8511148.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

There's a Google Scholar Alert for that: An integrative review methodology exploring mobile app features through Leximancer

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Potgieter

    (University of Johannesburg)

  • Chris Rensleigh

    (University of Johannesburg)

Abstract

Mobile application (app) usage has become a universal trend. Paramount in most app designers' focus, is what mobile app users want in terms of features offered by an app. Forming part of a larger study which aims to determine the most desirable app features for a mobile blood donation app, this paper reports on one section of that study's exploratory sequential mixed method research strategy.The paper illustrates how the use of Google Scholar alerts, over a period of six months, was systematically employed to inform the researchers of the most current research on app features. Abstracts and keywords from 47 academic articles which were included in the alert emails, were analysed through the natural language analysis software Leximancer. The findings aimed at highlighting prominent concepts and themes related to the development, selection, and application of mobile app features. Findings showed a prevalence of research articles focused on mobile health apps, specifically apps that support self-management of various illnesses.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Potgieter & Chris Rensleigh, 2019. "There's a Google Scholar Alert for that: An integrative review methodology exploring mobile app features through Leximancer," Proceedings of Business and Management Conferences 8511148, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    • Handle: RePEc:sek:ibmpro:8511148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://iises.net/proceedings/9th-business-management-conference-prague/table-of-content/detail?cid=85&iid=005&rid=11148
    File Function: First version, 2019
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin-Martin, Alberto & Orduna-Malea, Enrique & Harzing, Anne-Wil & Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio, 2017. "Can we use Google Scholar to identify highly-cited documents?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 152-163.
    2. Anne-Wil Harzing & Satu Alakangas, 2016. "Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 787-804, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vivek Kumar Singh & Satya Swarup Srichandan & Hiran H. Lathabai, 2022. "ResearchGate and Google Scholar: how much do they differ in publications, citations and different metrics and why?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1515-1542, March.
    2. de Carvalho, Gustavo Dambiski Gomes & Sokulski, Carla Cristiane & da Silva, Wesley Vieira & de Carvalho, Hélio Gomes & de Moura, Rafael Vignoli & de Francisco, Antonio Carlos & da Veiga, Claudimar Per, 2020. "Bibliometrics and systematic reviews: A comparison between the Proknow-C and the Methodi Ordinatio," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3).
    3. Alberto Martín-Martín & Mike Thelwall & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2021. "Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 871-906, January.
    4. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    5. Bruno Michel Roman Pais Seles & Janaina Mascarenhas & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour & Adriana Hoffman Trevisan, 2022. "Smoothing the circular economy transition: The role of resources and capabilities enablers," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1814-1837, May.
    6. Cristina López-Duarte & Jane F. Maley & Marta M. Vidal-Suárez, 2021. "Main challenges to international student mobility in the European arena," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8957-8980, November.
    7. de Camargo Fiorini, Paula & Roman Pais Seles, Bruno Michel & Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel Jose & Barberio Mariano, Enzo & de Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz Lopes, 2018. "Management theory and big data literature: From a review to a research agenda," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 112-129.
    8. Vivek Kumar Singh & Prashasti Singh & Mousumi Karmakar & Jacqueline Leta & Philipp Mayr, 2021. "The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5113-5142, June.
    9. Kuckertz, Andreas & Scheu, Maximilian, 2024. "From chalkboard to boardroom: Unveiling the role of entrepreneurship in bolstering academic achievement among professors," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    10. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.
    11. Ignacio Rodríguez-Rodríguez & José-Víctor Rodríguez & Niloofar Shirvanizadeh & Andrés Ortiz & Domingo-Javier Pardo-Quiles, 2021. "Applications of Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Big Data and the Internet of Things to the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scientometric Review Using Text Mining," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-29, August.
    12. Ahmed Tlili & Daniel Burgos & Ronghuai Huang & Sanjaya Mishra & Ramesh Chander Sharma & Aras Bozkurt, 2021. "An Analysis of Peer-Reviewed Publications on Open Educational Practices (OEP) from 2007 to 2020: A Bibliometric Mapping Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, September.
    13. Mehdi Rhaiem & Nabil Amara, 2020. "Determinants of research efficiency in Canadian business schools: evidence from scholar-level data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 53-99, October.
    14. Gunasekara, Lahiru & Robb, David J. & Zhang, Abraham, 2023. "Used product acquisition, sorting and disposition for circular supply chains: Literature review and research directions," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    15. Thelwall, Mike, 2018. "Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 430-435.
    16. Ana Batlles-delaFuente & Luis Jesús Belmonte-Ureña & José Antonio Plaza-Úbeda & Emilio Abad-Segura, 2021. "Sustainable Business Model in the Product-Service System: Analysis of Global Research and Associated EU Legislation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-33, September.
    17. Claudiu Herteliu & Marcel Ausloos & Bogdan Vasile Ileanu & Giulia Rotundo & Tudorel Andrei, 2017. "Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Editor Behavior through Potentially Coercive Citations," Publications, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-16, June.
    18. João Carlos Gonçalves dos Reis, 2021. "Politics, Power, and Influence: Defense Industries in the Post-Cold War," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, January.
    19. Anne-Wil Harzing & Satu Alakangas, 2017. "Microsoft Academic is one year old: the Phoenix is ready to leave the nest," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1887-1894, September.
    20. Gutiérrez-Nieto, Begoña & Serrano-Cinca, Carlos, 2019. "20 years of research in microfinance: An information management approach," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 183-197.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Google Scholar; Leximancer; mobile app features; research trends;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L31 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Nonprofit Institutions; NGOs; Social Entrepreneurship
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sek:ibmpro:8511148. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klara Cermakova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://iises.net/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.