Publish or perish: titles, abstracts and introductions

  • 579 views
Uploaded on

Presentation by Starr Roxanne Hiltz for the ISCRAM Doctoral Colloquium

Presentation by Starr Roxanne Hiltz for the ISCRAM Doctoral Colloquium

More in: Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
579
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
20
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. •  Title •  Abstract •  Introduction •  Literature Review •  Research questions/ hypotheses •  Methodology •  Results •  Discussion, including CONTRIBUTIONS and LIMITATIONS •  Conclusion
  • 2. •  Form the first impression for reviewers and readers •  In many forms of publication, e.g., online, browsers see only title, or title and abstract, and then decide whether to download •  They frame the article for the reader
  • 3. •  As for books and movies, the title either intrigues and “sells” or bores and confuses… •  Titles should describe exactly what the paper is about. •  Initial part of title should be relatively short, for a “running head” on top of journal papers •  Frequently, there is a title, then a colon and a subtitle •  Do not have multiple clauses
  • 4. •  For an experimental or other empirical study with a few independent variables: •  “The effects of variables a and b on Y” •  For a theoretical review or paper: something that indicates that it is not an empirical study, such as “meta-analysis” or “theory” in the title
  • 5. •  Mobilizing Informational Social Capital in Cyber Space: Online Social Networks and Knowledge Sharing –  Not clear what will be in paper –  Multiple possibilities presented in title –  Too long •  Rewrite –  Online Social Networks and Knowledge Sharing
  • 6. •  Knowledge Acquisition Through Computer- Mediated Discussions: Potential of Semantic Network Representations and Effect of Conceptual Facilitation Restrictiveness –  Too long –  Tries to say everything that is in paper •  Rewrite –  Semantic Network Representations for Knowledge Acquisition in Computer-Mediated Discussions
  • 7. •  Try to think of something catchy or even witty; in any case, succinct •  Frequent form = A well known idiom: real title that translates it in a new way and describes the study •  BUT: it should not be too “cute” and irrelevant
  • 8. •  To Have and To Hold: Exploring personal archives •  (source= a novel title by Hemingway; but it is not clear WHAT the paper is really about)
  • 9. •  Alan Dennis, master of titling- classic empirical studies: •  A.R. Dennis, A. Pinsonneault, K. M. Hilmer H. Barki, R.B. “Patterns in Gallupe, M. Huber, and F. Bellavance, Electronic Brainstorming : The Effects of Synergy and Social Loafing on Group Idea Generation,” International Journal of e- Collaboration, 1:4, 2005, 38-57.
  • 10. •  M.L. Williams, A.R. Dennis, A. Stam, and J.E. Aronson, “The impact of DSS use and information load on errors and decision quality,” European Journal of Operations Research “Information •  A.R. Dennis and N. J. Taylor, Foraging on the Web: The Effects of “Acceptable” Internet Delays on Multi-page Information Search Behavior,” Decision Support Systems
  • 11. •  Dennis, A.R. Information exchange and use in group decision making: you can lead a group to information but you can’t make it think. MIS Quarterly, 20, 4 1996, 433-455.
  • 12. “Breaking the •  A. R. Dennis, T. A. Carte, and G. Kelly, Rules: Success and Failure in Groupware- Supported Business Process Engineering,” Decision Support Systems, 36:1, 2003, pp. 31-47. “A Meta Analysis of •  A.R. Dennis and M. L. Williams, Group Size Effects in Electronic Brainstorming: More Heads are Better than One,” International Journal of e-Collaboration, 1:1, 2005, pp. 24-42.
  • 13. •  Purpose •  What Should be in an Abstract? •  Common Problems •  Difference between Abstract and Introduction •  Examples –  Good abstracts –  Poor abstracts
  • 14. •  Get paper accepted –  When a reviewer reads your paper they form an image of what it is about from the title and the abstract –  The reviewer uses this impression to interpret the rest of the information in the paper –  If the abstract is disorganized or incomplete, this will leave reviewer with initial impression of paper that may be hard to change
  • 15. •  Get paper cited by others –  Researchers are busy people –  Often they do not read entire papers, only the abstract –  A good abstract will help a busy researcher to skim your paper, and possibly get you cited –  Many search programs do a keyword in context search so that words in abstract help your paper to be found
  • 16. •  Help readers build a good picture of what is in your paper –  Useful for individuals reviewing papers they have read –  Useful for individuals searching for a particular piece of evidence –  Helps with the reading of a complex paper
  • 17. 1.  Opening sentence or two describe the problem or problem domain- perhaps its importance- and your objectives. 2.  Next few sentences explain your concepts/ theories/ approach, perhaps research questions 3.  Your method should be described in 1-2 sentences
  • 18. •  4. Your major findings need to be summarized (related to your research questions) •  5. Conclusions/ contributions need to be summarized in 1-2 sentences •  6. Write the whole thing for the non-expert in your domain.
  • 19. •  Subjective words such as “I” or “we” or “my” •  Anywhere in an article: slang •  Reference citations, since they cannot be included in the abstract •  Do NOT repeat exactly the wording that is also in the opening paragraphs. Body should be less succinct.
  • 20. Go (Con)figure: Subgroups, Imbalance, and Isolates in Geographically Dispersed Teams (O’Leary and Mortensen 2010) Research regarding geographically dispersed teams (GDTs) is increasingly common and has yielded many insights into how spatio-temporal and socio-demographic factors affect GDT functioning and performance. Largely missing, however, is research on the effects of the basic geographic configuration of GDTs. ..
  • 21. In this study, we explore the impact of GDT configuration (i.e., the relative number of team members at different sites, independent of the characteristics of those members or the spatial and temporal distances among them) on individual, subgroup, and team-level dynamics.
  • 22. In a quasi-experimental setting, we examine the effects of configuration using a sample of 62 six-person teams in four different one and two-site configurations. ..
  • 23. As predicted based on social categorization, we find that configuration significantly affects team dynamics – independent of spatio-temporal distance and socio- demographic factors. More specifically, we find that the social categorization in teams with geographically-based subgroups (defined as two or more members per site) triggers significantly weaker identification with the team, less effective transactive memory, more conflict, and more coordination problems. Furthermore, imbalance (i.e., the uneven distribution of members across sites) in the size of subgroups invokes a competitive, coalitional mentality that exacerbates these effects; subgroups with a numerical minority of team members report significantly poorer scores on identification, transactive memory, conflict, and coordination problems.
  • 24. Furthermore, imbalance in the size of subgroups increases problems. ( vs…. Furthermore, imbalance (i.e., the uneven distribution of members across sites) in the size of subgroups invokes a competitive, coalitional mentality that exacerbates these effects; subgroups with a numerical minority of team members report significantly poorer scores on identification, transactive memory, conflict, and coordination problems.)
  • 25. •  Too long •  Too much detail •  Too short •  Failure to include important information –  Objective of research –  Methodology
  • 26. ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION –  Main purpose of abstract is –  Main purpose of to summarize paper introduction is to present context or background for paper –  Abstracts should be short – should only contain –  Introductions are longer – summary information often contain guides to reading paper
  • 27. •  To situate the research in its research field •  To document why the research being presented is important •  To state the research problem the paper will solve •  To present the steps that will be taken to solve the problem
  • 28. •  Introductions create a cognitive structure for the reader which helps this person understand the research being presented – The cognitive structure is then used to store each new item of information presented in the paper •  Introductions let the reader know if the work presented is relevant – what they are looking for
  • 29. •  Context / background for the research •  Rationale for conducting the research •  A description of the problem being solved •  The steps the researcher will take to solve the problem
  • 30. Design is a fundamental part of the product development process. Conceptually, design is viewed as a structured, multi-phased, iterative process which transforms a need into a product. Because modern technology is complex, it is unusual for an individual to tackle a complex product design alone. Often, a small team is gathered at the initial stage of the design process. However, group work often introduces problems of organization, coordination and communication. Communication inadequacies existing among team members is a major impediment to the orderly and effective progression of the design process, especially when they are not meeting face-to-face.
  • 31. Design is a fundamental part of the product development process. Conceptually, design is viewed as a structured, multi-phased, iterative process which transforms a need into a product. Because modern technology is complex, it is unusual for an individual to tackle a complex product design alone. Often, a small team is gathered at the initial stage of the design process. However, group work often introduces problems of organization, coordination and communication. Communication inadequacies existing among team members is a major impediment to the orderly and effective progression of the design process, especially when they are not meeting face-to- face.
  • 32. As more collaboration occurs across geographically distributed locations, applying technology to support synchronous remote collaboration is being explored (Tang and Minneman, 1990,1991; Minneman and Bly, 1990; Greenberg and Bohnet, 1991; Ishii, 1990). The emergence of computer supported synchronous shared drawing tools has made it possible for designers to collaborate on a design when they are not meeting face-to-face. These tools allow users to draw simultaneously on a shared workspace. Although these tools are exceedingly useful, we believe that the management of multiple inputs remains a significant issue in their design.
  • 33. To understand the group idea management behaviors, we studied videotapes of drawing space activities collected by various researchers and reviewed findings on prior research in group design studies, group communication, engineering design studies, and social psychology. Findings from these studies provided valuable insights to shared drawing activities. These insights allowed us to define requirements of shared drawing tools to support the shared drawing activities. We illustrate the requirements in the design of a prototype, CaveDraw and evaluate its usability through user testing.
  • 34. •  The scope of the problem – what the research will not address •  The limitations of the research •  The methods, models, approaches that will be taken in the research (assumptions)
  • 35. Our approach differs in that our goal is to help users navigate to, not detect, recognition errors. This shift in focus is motivated by the following reasons: 1. data confirming that the error detection and navigation can consume as much as one-third of the time experienced users spend creating
  • 36. •  Set the context •  Define the research problem •  Propose a solution
  • 37. •  By claiming centrality – why the field is important –  AND / OR •  By moving from general to specific –  AND / OR •  By reviewing relevant items in prior research
  • 38. •  Minimum safe low temperatures (above freezing) and high humidity control are the most important tools for extending shelf life in vegetables." (Barth et al., 1993) •  “most important tools” indicates that these two factors are crucial
  • 39. The question we address here is how technological change occurs when it is the overall system that needs to be changed. In particular, how can we begin and sustain a technological transition away from hydrocarbon based technologies? (Street and Miles, 1996)
  • 40. •  By outlining the purpose of the work –  AND / OR •  By describing present research and methods that apply –  AND •  By describing principal findings, results –  AND •  By indicating the structure of the research
  • 41. •  This paper is organized as follows. Alternative representations of demand and supply are discussed in sections 2 and 3 respectively. The model is described in section 4. Section 5 presents an application of the tool to a gas reserves development timing problem in Indonesia. The final section presents conclusions, limitations, and contributions. The full set of equations is given in the appendix and is referred to throughout the text. (Boucher and Smeers, 1996)