[AISWorld] "IS not capable of coming up with native theories" says its senior scholar
Jose Manuel Mora Tavarez
jose.mora at edu.uaa.mx
Tue Dec 14 23:34:05 EST 2021
Truth? It is a temporal acceptance of the logical congruence among the conceptual statement and the evidence using valid and reliable instruments, but it is temporal while a counterexample is not reported. Even Mathematics are not consistent, decidable and complete:
"Even if no finitary consistency proof of arithmetic can be given, the question of finding consistency proofs is nevertheless of value: the methods used in such proofs, although they must go beyond Hilbert’s original sense of finitism, might provide genuine insight into the constructive content of arithmetic and stronger theories. What Gödel’s result showed was that there can be no absolute consistency proof of all of mathematics; hence work in proof theory after Gödel concentrated on relative results, both: relative to the system for which a consistency proof was given, and relative to the proof methods used"
So absolute theories in Human-based Actvity systems are practically impossible to exist.
Zach, Richard, "Hilbert’s Program", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2019/entries/hilbert-program
------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. Dr. José Manuel Mora Tavarez
Depto. de Sistemas de Información
Centro de Ciencias Básicas
Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes
Ave. Universidad 940
Aguascalientes, AGS. México 20131
Email: jose.mora at edu.uaa.mx
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Manuel_Mora>
ResearchGate Weblink<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Manuel_Mora>
<https://scholar.google.com.mx/citations?user=97rTgbkAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra>
Scholar Google Weblink<https://scholar.google.com.mx/citations?user=97rTgbkAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra>
Linkedin Weblink<https://www.linkedin.com/in/manuel-mora-engd-37b03a1/>
SCOPUS Weblink<https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=25823339800>
------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________
From: AISWorld <aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org> on behalf of Eric Bachura <eric.bachura at utsa.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2021 11:01 AM
To: AISWorld <aisworld at lists.aisnet.org>
Subject: Re: [AISWorld] "IS not capable of coming up with native theories" says its senior scholar
Varun said:
“Good theories explain and predict (not only predict) -- and the question of retrofitting theories from outside the field to explain IS phenomena as we have done for many years vs. expending more energy in developing unique insight about our idiosyncratic digital phenomena is a reasonable one.”
This causes two questions to arise:
1. Why would developing a unique insight require more effort than adapting existing theory to a new context?
2. Why is the implication of “more effort == greater value” assumed to be True?
If “good theories” are ones that explain and predict rather than just predict, then shouldn’t the value of a theory be a function of it’s ability to explain and predict rather than the effort that went into developing it?
Are we really discussing the importance of “good theories” or are we instead discussing the importance of theories that we can clearly call our own (ones not built on understanding developed by our fellow and often older disciplines).
Returning to the original quote given by Nik (attributed to an unnamed senior IS scholar):
"I have been doubtful that the IS discipline can come up with Native Theories. I believe that the IS discipline is simply not ready, not yet sufficiently developed to come up with Native Theories."
It seems to me that the desire to develop “native” IS theories is inherently related to the development of the identity of the IS discipline. If this is in fact what we are concerned about, then it makes sense that the emphasis for Native Theories originates in the top journals of our discipline (as noted by Prashan). Journals have a vested interest in expanding their readership and reach through the presentation of novel information. As a result, novel theories emerging from our discipline both broaden and center our academic spotlight, while those built with the established tools of our sister disciplines force us to share that spotlight.
Thus it seems to me that the construction of Native theory can only be a good thing provided:
* The native theory has emerged naturally in the pursuit of knowledge
* If you’ve set out with the goal of developing native theory for the sake of developing native theory, then you have almost assuredly ignored the utility of meaningful existing theory from outside our discipline
If the unnamed Senior IS Scholar perceives a lack of native theories then it would seem to me that either:
* There are few native theories needed to explain phenomena that would be considered to fall within the purview of our discipline
* As a discipline that many see as being at the intersection of human behavior and technology, perhaps we only need to adapt existing theory to explain the vast majority of phenomena of interest
Or
* The are many native theories necessary to explain phenomenon that would be considered to fall within the purview of our discipline
* Do we not perceive the phenomena that require these native theories?
* Do we perceive the phenomena but there is not interest or value in developing theory to explain and predict it?
I believe there is sufficient phenomena to develop Native IS theories. To name a few:
* Technological change
* How does it happen?
* Is it akin to punctuated equilibrium?
* What are the macro and micro drivers?
i. Which seems to matter more?
* Can it be consistently modeled over a long period of time, regardless of context?
i. Does the technological change for all technologies approximate the technological change of any given technology?
* Information System Primitives
* Every framework of information has primitives, how can we identify them?
* Math is an information system for understanding the relationship of quantities in a consistent manner
i. How do you identify math primitives?
* Language is an information system for communicating and transmitting ideas
i. How do you identify language primitives?
* Can a theory of information system primitives identify the primitives of any specific information framework?
* Technology Induced Segregation
* Knowledge Advances -> Technology Advances -> Information to learn grows !=(?) Human ability to grow
i. Specialization increases
ii. Specialization initiates earlier in life
* Consequence for economy? (Model & Predict here)
* Consequence for society? (Model & Predict here)
I believe that if any given IS scholar can spitball such a list (I think they can), and if for every third scholar maybe one of those items is wholly unique to IS as a discipline, then we likely have many potential phenomena to explore that would result in native theory.
If that is true, then perhaps the reason we do not see these being developed is because the system of scholarship is not currently set up in a way to facilitate this. Are we too focused on tenure (which often necessitates publication in a basket of recognized top journals) to play cavalier with our careers? Is it simpler to tread near to the ruts of those senior scholars, who also tread in the ruts of scholars senior to them?
Maybe. But that seems boring to me.
Mikko’s comments seem to echo the last chapter of book 2 of Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics in that ultimately, knowledge must be derived from what we perceive.
Perhaps we should orient our focus and thus our perception on those things that interest us rather than what is most likely to be published given the current fads?
Easier said than done I suppose.
Cheers,
Eric Bachura, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor UTSA
Sent from Mail<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgo.microsoft.com%2Ffwlink%2F%3FLinkId%3D550986&data=04%7C01%7Cjose.mora%40edu.uaa.mx%7Cfa78250972d34bc56f6008d9bf28dc22%7Ce1e2e29221d64849b7104d47d9578ad0%7C0%7C0%7C637751004497094461%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=LLdWHCDJACJwzZLp5yjssG5l7IVL7T12%2FhJlphbbWtU%3D&reserved=0> for Windows
From: Land,F<mailto:F.Land at lse.ac.uk>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 2:33 PM
To: Nik Rushdi Hassan<mailto:nhassan at d.umn.edu>; Shailendra Palvia<mailto:Shailendra.Palvia at liu.edu>
Cc: AISWorld<mailto:aisworld at lists.aisnet.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [AISWorld] [External] Re: "IS not capable of coming up with native theories" says its senior scholar
**EXTERNAL EMAIL**
This email originated outside of The University of Texas at San Antonio.
Please exercise caution when clicking on links or opening attachments.
Just one more word:
A theory is just a well founded conjecture and has no validity until it can be turned into a law by the requisite evidence for its truth can be found.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: AISWorld <aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org> On Behalf Of Nik Rushdi Hassan
Sent: 13 December 2021 19:33
To: Shailendra Palvia <Shailendra.Palvia at liu.edu>
Cc: AISWorld <aisworld at lists.aisnet.org>
Subject: Re: [AISWorld] [External] Re: "IS not capable of coming up with native theories" says its senior scholar
In response to Shailendra's question, here's a definition of theory from Shirley Gregor that I like: "abstract entities that aim to describe, explain, and enhance understanding of the world and, in some cases, to provide predictions of what will happen in the future and to give a basis for intervention and action.” What's nice about this one is that if you can describe something that others are not able to describe well, we have a theory. E.g. in 1953 the theory about the structure of the DNA was published and fast forward 70 years, we are able to develop vaccines in 11 months compared to decades in the past because of that theory (umm...
knowledge).
Best wishes
Nik
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:34 AM Shailendra Palvia < Shailendra.Palvia at liu.edu> wrote:
> Somebody said - "My 5 cents."
>
> I will say -- my 2 cents.
>
> Will somebody, once for all define, what is theory? Why are we so
> obsessed with theory creation and that too native theory creation?
>
> Let us continue to advance knowledge in our discipline as we have been
> doing. Interdisciplinary or Native theories will emerge for sure.
>
> Sincerely
>
> ...Shailendra
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AISWorld <aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org> On Behalf Of
> Prashant Palvia
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2021 9:57 AM
> To: AISWorld <aisworld at lists.aisnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [AISWorld] [External] Re: "IS not capable of coming up
> with native theories" says its senior scholar
>
> WARNING: This email originated from outside of Long Island University.
> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender
> and know the content is safe. - LIU Information Technology
>
> The overreliance on or the "fetish" for theories in the IS discipline
> is doing more harm than good to the IS discipline. I will put the
> blame where it belongs. It is on the top journals in the field.
> Everyone knows what they are and I don't need to name these journals.
> Sadly, other journals are beginning to copy them. The focus should
> always be on "knowledge" creation and there are multiple ways of doing it.
>
> I know I will be attacked. But someone has to speak up. I hope others
> will join my call to bring the focus back on knowledge creation and
> move away from any single paradigm.
>
> With best wishes for the holiday season,
>
> Prashant
>
> *Prashant Palvia, Ph.D.*
>
> *Joe Rosenthal Excellence Professor*
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 8:35 PM Varun Grover <VGrover at walton.uark.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree with Nik and Kalle. Good theories explain and predict (not
> > only
> > predict) -- and the question of retrofitting theories from outside
> > the field to explain IS phenomena as we have done for many years vs.
> > expending more energy in developing unique insight about our
> > idiosyncratic digital phenomena is a reasonable one. Perhaps for
> > our socio-technical bridging there is a place for both -- but I
> > suspect that we are going through critical phase that demands deeper
> > thinking
> > - frameworks, models, theories about digital.... I'm encouraged by
> > the
> way the field is responding.
> > Varun
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: AISWorld <aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org> On Behalf Of Nik
> > Rushdi Hassan
> > Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2021 6:24 PM
> > To: Kalle Lyytinen <kjl13 at case.edu>
> > Cc: AISWorld <aisworld at lists.aisnet.org>
> > Subject: Re: [AISWorld] [External] Re: "IS not capable of coming up
> > with native theories" says its senior scholar
> >
> > Dear all,
> > Interesting discussions folks. Quite revealing!
> > My two cents (even cheaper than Kalle's 5 cents) opinion revolves
> > around the notion of "native" theory, which is the same thing as
> > saying
> "original"
> > theories from the IS field, as opposed to derivative, borrowed
> > theories that are rather prevalent. We want native theories because
> > we think we have the unique training and capabilities to bridge the
> > technical and the social (see Supra's sociotechnical axes of
> > cohesion article in MISQ) and therefore offer solutions (Mikko's
> > empirical
> > successes) that other disciplines might not be able to address. The
> > division of labor of expertise has always worked that way since time
> > immemorial. The question is, if we are in an interdisciplinary team
> > with other disciplines, how do we articulate what we bring to the
> > plate by way of expertise? That's where native theories come into
> picture.
> > Nik
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 2:59 PM Kalle Lyytinen <kjl13 at case.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > My five cents on this which we have elaborated in our 2015 piece
> > > with Varun and forthcoming piece in JIT. The reason for ‘inviting’
> > > native theory is not the reason to have just one ( though you can
> > > make institutional and political claims why this matters) but that
> > > they have poor accuracy in explaining and or predicting Digital
> phenomena.
> > > Whether we call them IS specific is secondary- most of the
> > > argument about native theory is not so much about owning it but
> > > explain understand and predict new types of digital phenomena.
> > >
> > > — Kalle
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > > On Dec 12, 2021, at 2:49 PM, Jeet Gupta <guptaj at uah.edu> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello Mikko and Nik:
> > > >
> > > > Are you suggesting that empirical success cannot be "native" theory?
> > > > Consider for example, some of the work of the early philosophers
> > > > whose concepts and theories were based on empirical observations.
> > > > Would their theories won't be considered "native"? Even
> > > > Newton's theory of
> > > gravitation
> > > > was based on his empirical observation of the falling apple from
> > > > a
> > tree.
> > > >
> > > > Thus, I think we do need to think about these aspects. Of
> > > > course it
> > > still
> > > > is an open question if the IS discipline is ready for a formal
> > > > theory, native or not; but to success that empirical theory
> > > > building cannot be
> > > based
> > > > on or lead to "native" theories seems far fetched.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > Jatinder (Jeet) N. D. Gupta, PhD, CFPIM Director, Integrated
> > > > Enterprise Lab Eminent Scholar and Professor College of Business
> > > > The University of Alabama in Huntsville
> > > > 301 Sparkman Drive
> > > > Huntsville, AL 35899
> > > > Phone: 256-824-6593 (office)
> > > > 256-520-0175 (cell)
> > > > FAX: 256-824-6328
> > > > E-mail: guptaj at uah.edu
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: AISWorld <aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org> On Behalf Of
> > > > Siponen, Mikko
> > > > Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2021 2:23 PM
> > > > To: Nik Rushdi Hassan <nhassan at d.umn.edu>
> > > > Cc: AISWorld <aisworld at lists.aisnet.org>
> > > > Subject: [External] Re: [AISWorld] "IS not capable of coming up
> > > > with
> > > native
> > > > theories" says its senior scholar
> > > >
> > > > Hi Nik
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for asking. To quickly make a long story very short:
> > > >
> > > > 1) The role of “native” theories is overplayed in Organizational
> > > > and Management Research as well as in IS. The philosophy of
> > > > science does not suggest that the success of sciences or
> > > > disciplines (in
> > > > general) is
> > > related
> > > > to the “native” theories. Lets give a simple example familiar
> > > > with most
> > > > people:
> > > > - e.g. for Covid vaccines: Which one of you asked, when taking
> > > > the
> > > vaccine,
> > > > if it was based on a “native theory”? I bet you did not ask this.
> > > >
> > > > For Covid vaccines, the issue is not to ask "did anyone develop
> > > > a
> > > ‘native’”
> > > > theory, but to ask the degree of EMPIRICAL SUCCESS, i.e., how
> > > successfully
> > > > are these vaccines. In this specific case, you may want to have
> > > > high
> > > Average
> > > > Treatment Effect (ATF; usually presented as statistical
> > > > generalisation of the predictive effect, e.g., 60% effect),
> > > > minimal side effects, long time effect window, etc. Further, you
> > > > would like to know the empirical
> > > success of
> > > > each vaccine against different virus variants. These matters -
> > > > not
> > > whether
> > > > there was (or was not) a “native theory”.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2) usually (in the philosophy of science) fundamental scientific
> > > > goals relate to “understanding”, OR “explanation” OR “prediction”.
> > > > E.g. again,
> > > we
> > > > want to know the empirical success of a CoVid vaccine as
> > > > illustrated
> > > above,
> > > > which is predictive success. IF e.g. predictive success is the
> > > fundamental
> > > > scientific goal, as it is often the case in applied sciences,
> > > > then (to
> > > > simplify) this is what matters. If a “non-native” theory offers
> > > > a better track record of EMPIRICAL SUCCESS for some phenomenon,
> > > > then we go with
> > > it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > By and large, e.g. medical research did not became successful by
> > > developing
> > > > native theories, but with a track record of empirical success.
> > > >
> > > > IS community has a lot of competence. But is the search for
> > > > “native theories” the best way to use this competence? If IS is
> > > > an applied field, perhaps we should put our key focus on
> > > > empirical
> success.
> > > > Later we will
> > > see
> > > > if “native” theories offer better empirical success in different
> > > > IS cases than non-native theory.
> > > >
> > > > This is the short story, from a less senior IS scholar....
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Mikko Siponen
> > > > D. Soc. Sc., Ph.D.
> > > > Member of the Finnish Academy of Science and Letters Professor
> > > > of Information Systems University of Jyväskylä Tel. +358
> > > > 505588128
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 12. Dec 2021, at 17.43, Nik Rushdi Hassan
> > > > <nhassan at d.umn.edu<mailto:nhassan at d.umn.edu>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dear colleagues,
> > > > A very distinguished senior IS scholar who has a long string of
> > > > accomplishments including chief editorship of top IS journals
> > > > shared
> > > with me
> > > > that "I have been doubtful that the IS discipline can come up
> > > > with Native Theories. I believe that the IS discipline is simply
> > > > not ready, not yet sufficiently developed to come up with Native
> Theories."
> > > > Today, the SIGPHIL at ICIS workshop that starts at 1pm CST
> > > > virtually on Zoom addresses that claim, one way or another. Will
> > > > the list of work-in-progress papers, mostly by younger
> > > > researchers, vying for a place in the Journal of Information
> > > > Technology Special Issue on Products of Theorizing:
> > > > Towards Native Theories of
> > > Emerging
> > > > IT
> > > > show that we just don't have what it takes?
> > > >
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Nik Rushdi Hassan, PhD and Assoc. Professor of MIS Labovitz
> > > > School of Business and Economics University of Minnesota Duluth
> > > > 1318 Kirby Drive, LSBE 385A
> > > > Duluth MN 55812
> > > > Office Phone: (218) 726-7453
> > > > Fax: (218) 726-7578
> > > > Home Page:
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Nik Rushdi Hassan, PhD and Assoc. Professor of MIS Labovitz School
> > of Business and Economics University of Minnesota Duluth
> > 1318 Kirby Drive, LSBE 385A
> > Duluth MN 55812
> > Office Phone: (218) 726-7453
> > Fax: (218) 726-7578
> > Home Page:
> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2F%2Fnam11.safelinks.protection.outlo&data=04%7C01%7Cjose.mora%40edu.uaa.mx%7Cfa78250972d34bc56f6008d9bf28dc22%7Ce1e2e29221d64849b7104d47d9578ad0%7C0%7C0%7C637751004497094461%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=LMb7jpMYB8T8hd240wALV66ywDS5p44SwIQQ7HLmPbY%3D&reserved=0
> > ok
> > .com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Fwww.d.umn.edu*2F*nhassan&data=04*7C01*7CV
> > Gr
> > over*40walton.uark.edu*7Cd89375457d0947302e4008d9bdcf2127*7C79c742c4
> > e6
> > 1c4fa5be89a3cb566a80d1*7C0*7C0*7C637749519581850014*7CUnknown*7CTWFp
> > bG
> > Zsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn
> > 0*
> > 3D*7C3000&sdata=DeE3MW7mqaPWy2XFAiHJZkAixh5EoIHvxmzTZ2KTt3c*3D&a
> > mp
> > ;reserved=0__;JSUlJX4lJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!DeIc-uvKXH9G!tw0eb_51N4bzw5J
> > My tYeBcjdx6_Eu93iTk9IQqCNsH1AygOMAozIng4RoimQTEA$
> > Email: nhassan at d.umn.edu
> > LinkedIn:
> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2F%2Fnam11.safelinks.protection.outlo&data=04%7C01%7Cjose.mora%40edu.uaa.mx%7Cfa78250972d34bc56f6008d9bf28dc22%7Ce1e2e29221d64849b7104d47d9578ad0%7C0%7C0%7C637751004497094461%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=LMb7jpMYB8T8hd240wALV66ywDS5p44SwIQQ7HLmPbY%3D&reserved=0
> > ok
> > .com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Fwww.linkedin.com*2Fin*2Fnikrushdi*2F&data
> > =0
> > 4*7C01*7CVGrover*40walton.uark.edu*7Cd89375457d0947302e4008d9bdcf212
> > 7*
> > 7C79c742c4e61c4fa5be89a3cb566a80d1*7C0*7C0*7C637749519581850014*7CUn
> > kn
> > own*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haW
> > wi
> > LCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C3000&sdata=OOjAZ3CqrAB4CG3hwoOI9YHb0y8cZi2cn6ej
> > 3X
> > 60VKs*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!DeIc-uvKXH9G!t
> > w0 eb_51N4bzw5JMytYeBcjdx6_Eu93iTk9IQqCNsH1AygOMAozIng4Rp7nCMBs$
> > _______________________________________________
> > AISWorld mailing list
> > AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > AISWorld mailing list
> > AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> AISWorld mailing list
> AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
> _______________________________________________
> AISWorld mailing list
> AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
>
--
Nik Rushdi Hassan, PhD and Assoc. Professor of MIS Labovitz School of Business and Economics University of Minnesota Duluth
1318 Kirby Drive, LSBE 385A
Duluth MN 55812
Office Phone: (218) 726-7453
Fax: (218) 726-7578
Home Page: https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.d.umn.edu%2F~nhassan&data=04%7C01%7Cjose.mora%40edu.uaa.mx%7Cfa78250972d34bc56f6008d9bf28dc22%7Ce1e2e29221d64849b7104d47d9578ad0%7C0%7C0%7C637751004497094461%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=KbqfF6PYhAJXJUUvhSLEGLnJ3ubrVCXFbU6%2BIrrxhHc%3D&reserved=0
Email: nhassan at d.umn.edu
LinkedIn: https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fnikrushdi%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cjose.mora%40edu.uaa.mx%7Cfa78250972d34bc56f6008d9bf28dc22%7Ce1e2e29221d64849b7104d47d9578ad0%7C0%7C0%7C637751004497094461%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=S7jBcxOD2u0%2F00F66WvYq2W2o1nX3HTwfd0ptUkDPE4%3D&reserved=0 _______________________________________________
AISWorld mailing list
AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
_______________________________________________
AISWorld mailing list
AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
_______________________________________________
AISWorld mailing list
AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
More information about the AISWorld
mailing list