Platforms · Quantitative archival study

Complementors’ relative standing and performance in mobile apps

Long Range Planning · 2019

M. Mahdi Tavalaei, Carmelo Cennamo

Original paper ↗

Summary

A complementor’s relative standing in the ecosystem is associated with performance.

For your marketing

Possible founder application

Benchmark partners against ecosystem peers, not only internal KPIs.

Reported result

What the study found

A complementor’s relative standing in the ecosystem is associated with performance.

Research question

What the authors investigated

How does the study’s stated design explain its reported outcome in this setting?

Design

Quantitative archival study

Sample and setting

Mobile app complementors

Scope and transfer

Limitations to keep in view

Observational mobile-app setting.

Research sources

abstract_only

Study strength

3.5/5 Abstract-level evidence is useful for framing questions; verify full methods before transfer.

How this was assessed

The 1–5 evidence-check score is a practical reading aid, not a formal peer review or a probability that a conclusion is true. It combines design strength (2 points), sample reporting (1), comparison/control clarity (1), and how much of the paper could be checked (1). Access affects how confidently this directory can assess a study, not the study's underlying quality. Blinding is reported separately because it is not relevant to every design.

Design transparency · 2/2

Based on the reported study design in the retrieved source.

Sample and setting · 1/1

The sample context is stated; a numerical count is preserved only when reported.

Outcome clarity · 1/1

The finding is summarized from publisher or article metadata.

Access for checking · 0.5/1

Only abstract or bibliographic access was confirmed.

Double-blind? The retrieved publisher record does not establish whether participants or outcome assessors were blinded.

Read the paper