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).
| 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 |
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.
Generate exhibits from the fitted result, not by retyping numbers (the usual source of
body-vs-appendix drift). Full map: execution-with-mcp. 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.
etable (multi-model columns) or did_summary_to_latex straight from the
result_id.plot_from_result / enhanced_event_study_plot / event_study_table —
axis units and the SE/clustering note baked in.See a full fitted-result → exhibit chain in the JF execution walkthrough.
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.
claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.resources/official-source-map.md for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.【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