Anything relating to digitalization is certainly in vogue these days, and academic research is in fast pursuit. Currently, much of the research in this area is explanatory or conceptual, and not empirical, and exists in case studies that are spread across different disciplines (for example, strategy, management, innovation, and informatics). An initial search on Google Scholar reveals an overwhelming amount of suggested articles for search terms, such as: "digitalization" with 58,100 links, "digital disruption" with 5,570 links, or "digital transformation" with 25,500 links. In addition to this abundance of published research, much attention is now on digital technology developments driven by technology vendors. Reports describe new types of digital technologies such as: Internet of Things (IoT), machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI), virtual and augmented reality (VR and AR), or blockchain, to mention a few. A number of reports, for instance by consultancy firms, also give speculative estimates of the numbers of workers that will be affected by these technologies. In short, the accelerating emergent field of research that addresses “digitalization” and related topics is complex, unstructured and hyped. Consequently, both research and practice lack a rigorous foundation of prior published research to underpin and direct future exploration into the new digital technologies. A prerequisite condition to obtain a clearer picture of the contemporary phenomenon of digitalization is to achieve an overview of it, that goes beyond the current hype. There is a need to extend prior research that attempted to provide conceptual clarifications (e.g. Nambisan et al, 2017; Yoo et al., 2012; Yoo et al., 2010) and a uniform definition and taxonomy of the multiple and interrelated terms used in current digitalization research. The ambition of this paper is therefore to address the following research question: How can the concept of digitalization be framed into a rigorous conceptual foundation that can support research and practice alike?

中文翻译：

---

超越炒作：数字化的文献计量分析解构研究

如今，任何与数字化相关的事物肯定都很流行，而且学术研究也在快速推进。目前，该领域的大部分研究都是解释性或概念性的，而非实证性的，并且存在于跨越不同学科（例如，战略、管理、创新和信息学）的案例研究中。在 Google Scholar 上的初步搜索显示了大量建议搜索词的文章，例如：“数字化”有 58,100 个链接，“数字破坏”有 5,570 个链接，或“数字化转型”有 25,500 个链接。除了大量已发表的研究之外，现在很多注意力都集中在技术供应商推动的数字技术发展上。报告描述了新型数字技术，例如：物联网 (IoT)、机器学习 (ML) 和人工智能 (AI)、虚拟和增强现实（VR 和 AR）或区块链，仅举几例。一些报告，例如咨询公司的报告，也对受这些技术影响的工人数量进行了推测性估计。简而言之，处理“数字化”和相关主题的新兴研究领域是复杂、非结构化和炒作的。因此，研究和实践都缺乏先前发表的研究的严格基础来支持和指导未来对新数字技术的探索。对当代数字化现象有更清晰的了解的先决条件是对它进行概述，这超出了当前的炒作。有必要扩展先前试图提供概念澄清的研究（例如 Nambisan 等人，2017 年；Yoo 等人，2012 年；Yoo 等人，2010 年）以及对 中使用的多个和相互关联的术语的统一定义和分类法。当前的数字化研究。因此，本文的目标是解决以下研究问题：如何将数字化概念构建为一个可以同时支持研究和实践的严格概念基础？