Management

IMPORTANCE Physicians can demonstrate mastery of the knowledge that supports continued clinical competence by passing a maintenance of certification examination (MOCEX). Performance depends on professional learning and development, which may be enhanced by informal routine interactions with colleagues. Some physicians, such as those in solo practice, may have less opportunity for peer interaction, thus negatively influencing their examination performance. OBJECTIVE To determine the relationship among level of peer interaction, group and solo practice, and MOCEX performance. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Longitudinal cohort study of 568 surgeons taking the 2008 MOCEX. Survey responses reporting the level of physicians' peer interactions and their practice type were related to MOCEX scores, controlling for initial qualifying examination scores, practice type, and personal characteristics. EXPOSURES Solo practice and amount of peer interaction. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Scores...

IMPORTANCE Physicians can demonstrate mastery of the knowledge that supports continued clinical competence by passing a maintenance of certification examination (MOCEX). Performance depends on professional learning and development, which may be enhanced by informal routine interactions with colleagues. Some physicians, such as those in solo practice, may have less opportunity for peer interaction, thus negatively influencing their examination performance. OBJECTIVE To determine the relationship among level of peer interaction, group and solo practice, and MOCEX performance. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Longitudinal cohort study of 568 surgeons taking the 2008 MOCEX. Survey responses reporting the level of physicians' peer interactions and their practice type were related to MOCEX scores, controlling for initial qualifying examination scores, practice type, and personal characteristics. EXPOSURES Solo practice and amount of peer interaction. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Scores...

This special issue introduction explores the need to study information systems as symbolic action systems, defines broadly the research domain and related assumptions, notes the origins of this perspective, articulates its key lines of study, and discusses the state of the field in light of published research. The essay also positions the three papers of the special issue in the broader Information Systems (IS) discourse and notes their specific contribution in bridging so far unconnected streams of research and expanding research methods amenable to symbolic action research. This introductory essay furthermore observes some unique challenges in pulling together the special issue that invited the editors to combat against the tendency to approach communicative processes associated with information systems as primarily psychological processes. In closing we note several lines of inquiry that can strengthen future studies of symbolic action including better design theories, more flexible and open use of methods, and attentive use of rich traditions that inform symbolic action research in IS.

Aakhus, M., Ågerfalk, P., Lyytinen, K., & Te’eni, D. (2014). Symbolic Action Research in Information Systems: Introduction to the Special Issue. MIS Quarterly, 38(4), 1187–1200.