misq-tables-figures

Tables & Figures (misq-tables-figures)

When to trigger

• Exhibits are cluttered, off-style, or not self-explanatory
• Tables and figures are eating the page budget (the limit counts them)
• A reviewer cannot reconstruct your model, identification, or artifact from the exhibits
• You are at the polish stage with a settled contribution

Every exhibit costs page budget

Unlike journals that exclude exhibits from the limit, MISQ page limits count text, tables, figures, references, and appendices together, and supplementary materials are discouraged. So each exhibit must earn its space: consolidate, remove decorative figures, and keep only what carries the argument. Plan the exhibit set against the category budget (e.g., 50 pp for a Research Article).

Choose exhibits by tradition

| Tradition | Core exhibits |

|-----------|---------------|

| Behavioral | Construct correlation table (reliabilities on the diagonal), measurement-model table (loadings, AVE, CR), structural-model figure with path coefficients, simple-slopes plot for moderation |

| Economics of IS | Descriptives/balance table, main regression table, robustness table, an event-study/parallel-trends figure |

| Design science | Artifact architecture/process figure, design-principles-to-requirements table, evaluation table (artifact vs. baselines), ablation table |

| Organizational / qualitative | Gioia-style data structure (first-order codes → second-order themes → aggregate dimensions), a process model figure, a table of representative quotations |

Make each exhibit self-contained

A reviewer should understand a table or figure without hunting through the text: complete titles, defined variables/constructs, units, sample size, and notes for estimator, SE clustering, and significance. For design-science evaluation tables, name the baselines and the metric. Follow the MISQ Style Guide for table/figure presentation and APA 7th conventions.

Figures that carry the contribution

• A clean structural/path model or theoretical-model figure for behavioral/organizational papers.
• An event-study/coefficient plot for economics-of-IS identification.
• An architecture or build-and-evaluate cycle diagram for design science.

Avoid 3-D effects, chartjunk, and figures that merely restate a table.

Execution bridge (StatsPAI / Stata MCP)

Generate exhibits from the fitted result, not by retyping numbers (the usual source of

body-vs-appendix drift). Full map: [execution-with-mcp](../../../shared-resources/empirical-methods/execution-with-mcp.md). MISQ is empirical IS — surveys, econometric panels, experiments, and design science; the chain below serves the causal / econometric lane, while design-science artifacts use their own evaluation standards.

• Tables: etable (multi-model columns) or did_summary_to_latex straight from the

result_id.

• Figures: plot_from_result / enhanced_event_study_plot / event_study_table —

axis units and the SE/clustering note baked in.

• Every note names the estimator + clustering and states the effect size in

interpretable units.

See a full fitted-result → exhibit chain in the [JF execution walkthrough](../../../Journal-of-Finance-Skills/resources/worked-examples/02-execution-walkthrough.md).

Checklist

• [ ] Exhibit set fits the category page budget (tables/figures count)
• [ ] Each table/figure is self-explanatory with full notes
• [ ] Behavioral: correlation/measurement tables and a structural-model figure included
• [ ] Economics: main + robustness tables and an identification figure
• [ ] Design science: architecture figure, design-principles table, evaluation/ablation tables
• [ ] Qualitative: a Gioia-style data structure exhibit
• [ ] APA 7 / MISQ Style Guide formatting

Anti-patterns

• Padding the manuscript with figures that restate tables — wasting scarce page budget.
• Tables with undefined variables or missing SE/clustering notes.
• A design-science evaluation table with no baseline column.
• Beautifying exhibits before the model, identification, or evaluation is final.

Exhibit pass for MIS Quarterly

Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock the IS phenomenon, artifact/platform, theory mechanism, design or empirical warrant, and managerial implication; then test whether the manuscript addresses information-systems reviewers who expect strong IS theory, digital artifact or platform grounding, and evidence with organizational consequence.

• Primary move: For every table or figure, state the object, sample/case base, uncertainty display, and one sentence the exhibit proves for this venue.
• Decision ledger: return claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.
• Neighbor test: compare against Information Systems Research for quantitative IS, Journal of Management Information Systems for applied systems, Management Science for broader OR/MS; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
• Verification floor: before submission-ready advice, re-open resources/official-source-map.md for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.

Output format

【Exhibit set】tables + figures, by tradition
【Page-budget impact】fits / trim N exhibits
【Self-contained?】notes/baselines/units present
【Style】APA 7 / MISQ Style Guide compliant
【Next step】misq-writing-style