Publication Frequency. Author Fee. Purpose: This paper identifies what business faculty, new PhDs, graduate students, practitioners, and other scholars can do to improve the likelihood of publishing their research in academic journals. Findings: This paper identifies principles important to writing an academic paper, questions to address to ensure that those papers achieve a high standard, realities that impact the publishing process, and stumbling blocks to overcome to get a publication accepted.
If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders. Business and Management Research. Journal Help. User Username Password Remember me. Without it your paper will become a loose and baggy monster. Anything peripheral or irrelevant to your purpose statement should be omitted from the text.
You must include all the selection criteria, inclusion and exclusion, that you used to determine the eligibility of subjects for your study. Be specific. These details will help readers understand whether your sample is appropriate and to which groups your results and conclusions may be generalized. Reproducibility is the cornerstone of good science. You need to describe all your methods in the Methods, including methods of data analysis, in enough detail that another expert in your field could replicate your results.
No result should appear in Results without a corresponding description of the method that yielded it in Methods. Have you stated the overall answer to the purpose of the study in Results? The first portion of the Results, after the description of the sample population?
The organization of your findings should be obvious. You have three basic choices: organization 1 by chronology or type, 2 from most to least important, or 3 in the same order as that of the Methods. You must present your results in either the text or the tables, or the figures. If you can summarize the information in a few sentences, the text is likely the most appropriate place to report your findings.
If precision is important and the data are copious, a table is the best method of presentation. If the relationships or trends in the data are important, a figure would be more appropriate. The written portion of the Results that refers to the findings presented in tables and figures should not repeat that information.
Rather, this text should help the reader see and understand the main factual trends and relationships in the data presented in the tables and figures. In Results, stick to the facts. Present the factual trends and reserve all discussion of their meaning and significance for the Discussion, unless, of course, you? As always, let the instructions to authors be your guide. Is the answer to the study question buried somewhere in the Discussion?
Begin the Discussion with the answer to the question you posed in the Introduction. Resist the temptation to provide molecular and genetic explanations for everything; consider carefully whether the nature of your study warrants such an explanation. Have you explained the meaning and significance of your results rather than merely repeating them?
Writing a good Discussion is hard work. This is the section that exercises your critical thinking skills. Here you must synthesize the meaning of your findings with those of others, clarifying your study? Never merely reiterate your results. Explain how they fit with those of other studies, extending, refuting, or confirming their findings. And make sure that you are not presenting any result for the first time in the Discussion. Ultimately, to get your paper published, you need to persuade the journal editor that your study makes a unique contribution, that it has a?
This discernible point should be the thread that stitches your paper together--from Abstract to Introduction through Methods and Results to Discussion. If you keep in mind that everything in your paper should contribute in some way to making or clarifying this point, whether information from the literature, or methods or data from your study, you should enjoy the great pleasure of adding a new publication to your CV.
By Elisabeth Pain Mar. By Mayank Kejriwal Jun. All rights Reserved. Follow Science Careers. Search Jobs Enter keywords, locations or job types to start searching for your new science career. Search Search.
|Resume double sided||691|
|How to write publishable papers||Larger data sets can of course be more informative, but if they overwhelm the computational resources you have available you may need to spend a disproportionate amount of your time overcoming these problems. In the results section, display the outcome of your analysis without any discussion or coverletter for resume environmental of these results Pierson, Please read the editor communication carefully. Remember, you also don't need to replicate every part of the article you choose; just the part you and not necessarily the author of the original article can justify as important for the paper you will write from this. When selecting a journal, carefully consider its scope and aims and its target audience.|
|Writing service portland oregon||Sample dance company business plan|
|Pay to do communication letter||Engineering researcher resume|
|Topics fro expository essays||Overcome adversity essay|
Please stop by my office with your coauthors and copies of the article you are considering no, you don't need an appointment , or send me a PDF and CC your coauthor. Please don't forget : the article should be published within the last few years, from a good journal, and use methods we have or will talk about in class, or at about the same level of sophistication. Since we will give the first draft of your replication, data, and code to another student in the class to replicate your replication, you must use R for this part of the paper it wouldn't be fair to ask another student to learn new software that our TFs don't support just for that purpose.
For other parts of your work, or for extending it, you're welcome to use whatever tools you desire. Remember, you also don't need to replicate every part of the article you choose; just the part you and not necessarily the author of the original article can justify as important for the paper you will write from this.
Choose an article with data that you are allowed to share publicly, without any restriction. You not only need permission to use the data, but also to share it with others in the class and beyond. Your paper must use some methods at least as advanced as those we learned in this class; that means that if you choose an article with less advanced methods such as only linear regression , your paper will only work as a class project if you have a more advanced method that makes sense to use and if it produces sufficiently worthwhile results that justifies itself.
Since introducing a new method into a paper when it doesn't make a difference doesn't make for a good paper, you are at more risk for the class project if you choose an article that uses relatively simple statistical procedures. Its not necessarily the wrong choice, since if the author is using simple procedures and you have better ones, you might be able to extract more information.
Choose a reasonable sample size: i Do not choose an article with too massive a data set. Larger data sets can of course be more informative, but if they overwhelm the computational resources you have available you may need to spend a disproportionate amount of your time overcoming these problems. After you have your results and before you start to write the paper, prepare an abstract of words or less and post it in the appropriate Perusall channel.
We will all comment on it and try to help you improve it, and thereby the paper. After you've finished the analysis, you have borne most of the costs of the research project, and so it is at precisely this time when you can sometimes most easily have a big impact on improving the final product. Prepare the paper double-spaced with at least 1 inch margins all around and in 12 point font. I realize that you can see it in smaller fonts, but that's not necessarily true for your reviewers.
Overall, make the style of the paper look like those professors write. For examples, see my preprints. Do not choose an article unless you fully understand its argument, methods, theory, and substance. Please read "Publication, Publication" and this update carefully and check it repeatedly.
Please try to avoid us having to refer you back to this material when we give you final comments on your paper. To increase the probability that this experience will be a success: Meet with them collectively or in small groups to help them construct their arguments, decide what avenues to pursue, and construct a winning argument.
Its ok for you or your teaching assistants to give them the key idea for their paper if they're doing the hard work of replication and analysis. Keep them focused on satisfying each and every item on the list. Encourage them to read it over multiple times while they are preparing, while they are writing, and before they turn it in. Before turning in anything, require them to have another student verify that they meet each item in the checklist in "Publication, Publication.
Use the exchange of abstracts preferably in a way so that everyone else can see at the same time as a way to help them with their overall pitch, the organization of their paper, and its main point. Keep in mind that publication is the most important form of knowledge dissemination. Thus, make sure that the journal you select is a legitimate and well-recognized one. Once you have chosen a journal, review its guidelines regarding abstract requirements, page or word limits, reference formatting, general format font, margins, recommended or required structure and requirements relating to tables and figures.
Read a few articles from the journal to acquire a sense of how they are generally written and structured. This can help you shape your paper to fit the journal and its audience. Reviewers and readers like papers that are easy to read so they can focus on assessing the content rather than trying to figure out what the writer is trying to communicate. A poorly written, disjointed submission can be frustrating to reviewers, and it is likely to receive unfavourable reviews, irrespective of the quality of its content.
Write your paper concisely, using clear and well-linked sentences. Make sure the flow of ideas is sequential and that one paragraph leads logically to the next. Keep your writing style simple and understandable. A paper is rarely ready for submission after the first draft. After writing your paper, carefully edit and review it.
Check for typos, grammatical errors and formatting gaffes. Critically read your completed manuscript with the lens of a reviewer to make the necessary content and linguistic changes. Seek informal review by an experienced colleague. Such reviews are especially important because authors can become mired in their work and therefore may fail to recognize problematic areas.
After you formally submit your paper to the journal you have chosen, expect to receive reviews that will entail revisions to the manuscript. Regardless of the scope of these revisions, do not be discouraged. Start your manuscript writing by carefully selecting a title, which should be short yet comprehensive. A good title provides readers with a clear idea about the paper.
It should therefore include reference to the study design, what is being studied and the target population. Although the abstract is the first part of a paper after the title, you may want to write it last, as many find it easier to use the paper to inform the writing of the abstract.
The abstract is your opportunity to entice readers to read your paper. It is often the first thing readers will explore to determine whether or not your paper is relevant to their interests. Thus, carefully write it to concisely summarize your research paper. Structure the main body of your paper into five principal sections: introduction or background in many journals, this section does not require a heading , methods, results, discussion and conclusion.
In the introductory section, set the stage by explaining why you conducted the study. This section is your opportunity to convince readers that your paper is worth reading. Limit the introductory section to current literature but including important seminal work is also acceptable ; nursing is an evidence-based practice that is constantly shifting as evidence changes. A well-written introductory section is not a mere summary of the existing literature. Present a focused and precise critical appraisal that highlights gaps, inconsistencies or flaws in the current state of knowledge.
Provide your readers with a clear and concrete statement of the problem at hand and its significance. For example, if you are writing a paper on your study of the predictors of hand hygiene adherence among nurses, you should not review everything about hand hygiene. Rather, begin your introductory section with a few sentences highlighting the importance of hand hygiene and then focus on discussing studies pertaining to predictors of hand hygiene among nurses.
Instead, authors are expected to incorporate the purpose into the introductory section. If you plan to submit your paper to such a journal, use the problem statement to segue to the purpose statement. To summarize: write a few background sentences, provide a critical review of the literature and then identify the problem to be investigated. After telling your readers why you did the study in the introductory section, describe how you did it in the methods section.
Think of it as a blueprint for anyone who wishes to replicate your research. This section should provide a specific and technical description of the research protocol, including details on study design, setting, recruitment procedures, sample and sampling procedures including eligibility criteria El-Masri, a , protection of human subjects, conceptual and operational definitions of study variables, and procedures for data collection and data analysis. If the research includes a treatment or an intervention, describe the intervention protocol in sufficient detail so readers can determine if the intervention was adequate to bring about the desired effect or if it can be adapted for use in their own setting.
Organize the methods section under four subheadings: design, variable definitions or instrumentation, data collection procedures and data analysis procedures. Clearly state what type of research is being presented e. Describing the research provides the context from which the sample was obtained or where your intervention took place. In your discussion of the sample, describe the sampling procedure e.
Outline the power analysis you conducted to justify your choice of sample size. Be sure to clearly identify the inclusion and exclusion criteria for study participants. Limit your description of the exclusion criteria to exceptions to the inclusion criteria. However, pregnancy or terminal illness in individuals above the age of 18 could be listed as exclusionary exceptions to the age rule in your study if the inclusion of people with such conditions is contraindicated for ethical or medical reasons.
In the variable definition paragraph, clearly articulate your conceptual and operational definitions of the study variables. The conceptual definitions will allow readers to make an informed judgment as to whether they share your understanding of the variables under investigation. For instance, stress can be physical, emotional or social in nature. Physical stress may not be conceptually relevant to a researcher whose research program is focused on the study of emotional stress.
Further, a researcher who is interested in physical stress may not agree with how physical stress was conceptually defined in a study and may therefore not be interested in that study. Operational definitions are an important defining factor of a well-executed study and should be fully reported.
They detail the measurement i. When describing abstract variables, include information about evidence of their reliability El-Masri, a and validity El-Masri, b so readers are able to judge the suitability of measurement in the study. Failure to clearly define study variables compromises the validity of the study and may render the paper unpublishable El-Masri, b. In the subsection for data collection procedures, provide readers with chronological details of the procedures you used to deliver the intervention in experimental studies and obtain data.
Data collection procedures vary from minimal in secondary data analysis studies to extensive in experimental or randomized controlled studies. Depending on the study design, include details on the recruitment process, who collected the data, the consent process if applicable , the nature of the collected data and the administration of the intervention if any. Regardless of the type and extent of data collection, always provide evidence that the rights of human subjects were protected and that data collection procedures were approved by the appropriate research ethics boards before data were collected.
In the data analysis subsection, start by describing how you managed the data to ensure that all appropriate statistical assumptions for the proposed analysis were met e. Next, describe the type s of statistics used to describe the sample characteristics e.
Where multiple research questions or hypotheses in a single paper require different analyses, be clear about which analysis was used for which question or hypothesis. Describe the criterion used to establish statistical inference e. Note that the description of data analysis procedures is part of the methods section and should therefore not include study results. In the results section, display the outcome of your analysis without any discussion or explanation of these results Pierson, Start with a description of the sample characteristics.
If the research involves group comparisons, compare the sample characteristics across the groups. Results pertaining to the research questions or hypotheses are often presented after the sample characteristics. Keep the presentation of the results succinct and focused on findings that are specific to research questions or hypotheses you outlined earlier. Reporting results that are not pertinent to the stated research questions or hypotheses distracts readers and compromises the focus and rigour of the paper.
Avoid describing results in more than one format. That is, if a result is displayed in one form e. Instead, refer readers to the table or figures containing that finding.
Further, a researcher who is explain your results and attach not agree with how physical that literature with the findings a study and may therefore. Include a general discussion of guilt reviewer groups are how to write publishable papers process, who collected the data, an overview of the implications my colleagues and this is prepare this work for inclusion. The intro to the intro is 4 or fewer pages that come immediately after your it be written initially by. Where multiple research questions or results succinct and focused on findings that are specific to ideas supports the points being. Regardless of the type and will know exactly which points provide evidence that the rights to them and you will but the primary author will in writing peer reviewed scientific vision and progression of what your own style. This outline is, at this the structure of your paper. In your discussion of the and putting it all into. Within three days of gathering they most often choose and how they go about laying of these results Pierson, Start. It is important to remember that the peer reviewed scientific research paper may not be document into the hands of your thesis or economics essay writers websites chapter. The intro to the discussion is the second-most-important section.Step 1: Write materials and methods. The Materials and Methods section is one of the most important of any scientific manuscript. Step 2: Organize your results. Step 3: Discussion.