Transcript How to Publish in Journals - Orfalea College of Business

Experience in Publishing SSCI
Journal Articles
Eldon Y. Li
University Chair Professor
Department of MIS
National Chengchi University
http://www.calpoly.edu/~eli
*** All right reserved. Video or audio recording is prohibited. Reference to this
document should be made as follows: Li, E.Y. “Experience in Publishing SSCI
Journal Articles,” unpublished lecture, National Chengchi University, 2015. ***
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
1
2015/7/17
Agenda
• SSCI journals and impact factor
• The types of research projects
• What makes a good paper?
• The structure of a good paper
• The workflow of publishing
• The common mistakes
• The recommendations
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
2
2015/7/17
SSCI and SCI Journals
• ISI (Institute for Scientific Information)
• Thomson’s www.isinet.com
• SSCI:
– Began in 1956
– includes 3016 journals (2013)
• SCI:
– Began in 1945
– SCI includes 3748 journals (2013)
– SCIE includes 8411 journals (2013)
• AHCI:
– Began in 1975
– includes 1727 journals (2013)
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
3
2015/7/17
SSCI Journals and Impact
Factor
• Impact Factor (e.g., MISQ)
–
–
–
–
Cites in 2007 to articles published in 2006 = 122
Cites in 2007 to articles published in 2005 = 124
Number of articles published in 2006 = 28
Number of articles published in 2005 = 24
I-Factor =
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
Cites to recent articles
Number of recent articles
4
=
246
52
= 4.731
2015/7/17
SSCI Journals and Impact
Factor
• Immediacy Index (e.g., MISQ)
– Cites in 2007 to articles published in 2007 = 25
– Number of articles published in 2007 = 41
I-Index =
Cites to current articles
Number of current articles
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
5
=
25
= 0.610
41
2015/7/17
SSCI Journals and Impact
Factor
• The cited half-life is a measure of the
rate of decline of the citation curve. It is
the number of years that the number of
current citations takes to decline to 50% of
its initial value (the cited half-life is 6 years
in the example given in the Figure 1). It is a
measure of how long articles in a journal
continue to be cited after publication.
MISQ Year
# Cites from 2006
Cumulative %
2006
2005
2004
25
122
124
317
120
206
227
223
162
141
1519
0.78
4.61
8.51
18.46
22.22
28.69
35.81
42.81
47.90
52.32
100
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
2003
2002
2001
6
2000
1999
1998
1997
2015/7/17
1996-all
SSCI Journals and Impact Factor
Source: M. Amin & M. Mabe, “Impact Factors: Use and Abuse,” Perspectives in Publishing, No. 1, October 2000, pp. 1-6.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
7
2015/7/17
http://portal.isiknowledge.com/portal.cgi/jcr/?Init=Yes&SID=2FGAlfGHkjhEiM8gmk4
Impact factor values
Journals
ACM Transactions on Database Systems
ACM Transactions on Information
Systems
Communications of the ACM
Data & Knowledge Engineering
Decision Support Systems
Expert Systems with Applications
IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management
IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and
Data Engineering
INFOR
Information Processing Letters
Information Retrieval
Information Science
Information and Software Technology
Information Systems
Information Systems Frontiers
Information Systems Management
Journal of Intelligent Information
Systems
Journal of Organizational Computing and
Electronic Commerce
Electronic Commerce Research and
Applications
European Journal of Information Systems
Government Information Quarterly
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.613
1.245
1.216
1.000
0.887
1.472
1.667
1.085
1.077
1.070
2.646
1.480
1.873
2.596
2.346
1.745
2.622
2.908
2.353
1.722
2.135
1.924
1.919
1.422
1.687
2.203
2.511
1.519
2.201
1.854
1.156
1.248
1.344
0.958
0.893
2.236
2.285
1.847
1.657
1.892
0.324
0.706
0.696
3.095
1.200
1.660
0.706
1.242
0.738
0.764
1.841
3.291
1.821
1.966
1.309
0.765
0.318
0.612
1.327
2.836
1.527
1.595
1.596
1.029
0.295
0.455
0.914
2.833
1.250
1.198
0.912
0.578
0.395
0.488
0.630
3.643
1.522
1.768
0.851
0.352
1.075
0.980
0.875
0.618
0.833
0.531
0.552
0.793
0.344
0.429
1.130
1.042
1.946
1.472
1.480
1.202
1.910
1.200
2.098
1.767
1.878
1.500
1.425
1.558
1.910
13
2015/7/17
http://portal.isiknowledge.com/portal.cgi/jcr/?Init=Yes&SID=2FGAlfGHkjhEiM8gmk4
Impact factor values
Journals
Information & Management
Information Processing & Management
Information Society
Information Systems Journal
Information Systems Research
International Journal of Electronic
Commerce
International Journal of Information
Management
Internet Research
Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology
Journal of the Association for Information
Systems
Journal of Global Information
Management
Journal of Information Science
Journal of Information Technology
Journal of Management Information
Systems
Journal of Strategic Information Systems
MIS Quarterly
Online Information Review
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2.358
1.852
1.042
2.375
2.261
2.282
1.783
1.111
1.419
1.792
2.627
1.673
1.240
2.184
3.358
2.214
1.119
1.235
2.067
2.146
1.663
0.817
1.114
1.381
2.010
1.366
1.600
0.850
1.550
1.425
1.043
0.723
1.554
1.532
1.843
0.800
0.844
1.150
1.115
1.500
1.954
2.300
2.137
2.081
2.005
1.836
2.246
2.217
1.667
1.048
1.387
0.706
1.222
0.514
0.452
1.648
1.966
1.706
2.049
1.406
2.907
1.299
2.321
1.238
3.532
2.358
2.098
2.662
1.423
1.262
1.484
5.183
1.103
2.212
4.485
1.423
2.900
5.041
0.991
1.457
4.447
0.939
1.500
4.659
0.939
14
2015/7/17
http://portal.isiknowledge.com/portal.cgi/jcr/?Init=Yes&SID=2FGAlfGHkjhEiM8gmk4
Rank
Abbreviated Journal Title
(linked to journal information)
ISSN
1
MIS QUART
0276-7783
6186
2
J INFORMETR
1751-1577
3
ANNU REV INFORM SCI
4
2009
Impact
Factor
Immediacy
Index
Articles
4.485
0.579
38
>10.0
253
3.379
0.909
33
2.1
0066-4200
563
2.929
1.200
10
6.9
J AM SOC INF SCI TEC
1532-2882
5167
2.300
0.379
203
8.0
5
INFORM MANAGE-AMSTER
0378-7206
3276
2.282
0.268
56
6.6
6
J ASSOC INF SYST
1536-9323
430
2.246
0.097
31
4.4
7
SCIENTOMETRICS
0138-9130
3508
2.167
0.328
189
6.2
8
GOV INFORM Q
0740-624X
598
2.098
0.293
58
4.5
9
J MANAGE INFORM SYST
0742-1222
2650
2.098
0.000
38
8.7
10
J INF TECHNOL
0268-3962
879
2.049
0.321
28
6.9
11
INFORM SYST RES
1047-7047
3037
1.792
0.679
28
9.5
12
INFORM PROCESS MANAG
0306-4573
2412
1.783
0.264
53
8.5
13
J INF SCI
0165-5515
939
1.706
0.149
47
6.0
14
ONLINE INFORM REV
1468-4527
324
1.423
0.094
64
3.4
15
INFORM SYST J
1350-1917
598
1.419
0.583
24
7.2
16
INFORM TECHNOL MANAG
1385-951X
73
1.222
0.000
16
17
INFORM SOC
0197-2243
603
1.111
0.125
24
6.9
18
INT J INFORM MANAGE
0268-4012
575
0.723
0.000
43
6.8
19
J GLOB INF MANAG
1062-7375
227
0.706
0.053
19
5.3
20
INFORM RES
1368-1613
501
0.490
0.121
33
5.5
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
Total
Cites
15
2015/7/17
Cited
Half-life
http://portal.isiknowledge.com/portal.cgi/jcr/?Init=Yes&SID=2FGAlfGHkjhEiM8gmk4
Rank
Abbreviated Journal Title
(linked to journal information)
ISSN
Total
Cites
2010
Impact
Factor
Immediacy
Index
Articles
Cited
Half-life
1
MIS QUART
0276-7783
7418
5.041
0.737
38
9.8
2
INFORM SYST RES
1047-7047
3517
3.358
0.241
54
9.5
3
J AM MED INFORM ASSN
1067-5027
3604
3.078
0.591
115
5.8
4
J INF TECHNOL
0268-3962
1083
2.907
0.786
28
6.7
5
J MANAGE INFORM SYST
0742-1222
3079
2.662
0.633
30
9.0
6
INFORM MANAGE-AMSTER
0378-7206
3273
2.627
0.238
42
6.9
7
J ASSOC INF SYST
1536-9323
579
2.217
0.062
32
4.2
8
INFORM SYST J
1350-1917
695
2.184
0.857
21
6.5
9
J AM SOC INF SCI TEC
1532-2882
4200
2.137
0.354
178
7.4
10
DECIS SUPPORT SYST
0167-9236
3225
2.135
0.252
111
5.6
11
ELECTRON COMMER R A
1567-4223
420
1.946
0.244
45
4.6
12
SCIENTOMETRICS
0138-9130
3602
1.905
0.173
226
6.4
13
GOV INFORM Q
0740-624X
650
1.878
0.312
48
4.2
14
EUR J INFORM SYST
0960-085X
1070
1.767
0.326
43
5.7
15
INFORM PROCESS MANAG
0306-4573
1934
1.673
0.411
56
7.2
16
INFORM SYST FRONT
1387-3326
461
1.596
0.130
46
4.6
17
INFORM SYST
0306-4379
865
1.595
0.380
50
6.6
18
INT J INFORM MANAGE
0268-4012
859
1.554
0.220
59
6.7
19
J INF SCI
0165-5515
921
1.406
0.180
50
6.2
20
INFORM SOC
0197-2243
615
1.240
0.000
27
7.4
21
SOC SCI COMPUT REV
0894-4393
550
0.913
0.194
31
7.3
22
INFORM RES
1368-1613
429
0.822
0.125
56
5.2
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
16
2015/7/17
http://portal.isiknowledge.com/portal.cgi/jcr/?Init=Yes&SID=2FGAlfGHkjhEiM8gmk4
Rank
Abbreviated Journal Title
(linked to journal information)
ISSN
Total Cites
2011
Impact
Factor
5-year
Impact
Factor
Immediac
y Index
Articles
Cited
Half-life
1
MIS QUART
0276-7783
6761
4.447
7.497
0.7
50
>10.0
2
J INFORMETR
1751-1577
709
4.229
3.944
1.098
61
2
3
J AM MED INFORM ASSN
1067-5027
4071
3.609
4.329
0.706
153
5.5
4
ANNU REV INFORM SCI
0066-4200
462
2.955
2.984
1.182
11
7.9
5
J INF TECHNOL
0268-3962
967
2.321
3
0.789
19
7
6
INT J COMP-SUPP COLL
1556-1607
302
2.243
3
0.571
28
3.8
7
INFORM MANAGE-AMSTER
0378-7206
3282
2.214
3.796
0.114
44
7.5
8
INFORM SYST RES
1047-7047
3286
2.146
4.131
0.234
47
9.9
9
J AM SOC INF SCI TEC
1532-2882
4295
2.081
2.113
0.425
186
6.9
10
INFORM SYST J
1350-1917
694
2.067
2.775
1.143
21
6.5
11
SCIENTOMETRICS
0138-9130
4048
1.966
2.443
0.378
217
5.9
12
MIS Q EXEC
1540-1960
234
1.743
0.125
16
4.5
13
J ASSOC INF SYST
1536-9323
620
1.667
2.654
0.071
28
4.8
14
INT J INFORM MANAGE
0268-4012
862
1.532
1.764
0.21
62
6.3
15
EUR J INFORM SYST
0960-085X
972
1.5
2.218
0.093
43
5.7
16
J STRATEGIC INF SYST
0963-8687
652
1.457
2
0.207
29
9.1
17
GOV INFORM Q
0740-624X
585
1.425
1.662
0.327
52
4.7
18
J MANAGE INFORM SYST
0742-1222
2530
1.423
2.945
0.05
40
9.4
19
J INF SCI
0165-5515
807
1.299
1.686
0.157
51
5.9
20
J KNOWL MANAG
1367-3270
1072
1.248
0.158
57
7.1
21
INFORM SOC
0197-2243
623
1.235
1.576
0
17
8
22
INFORM PROCESS MANAG
0306-4573
1647
1.119
1.443
0.25
64
7.8
23
SOC SCI COMPUT REV
0894-4393
560
1.075
1.166
0.257
35
7.6
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
17
2015/7/17
http://portal.isiknowledge.com/portal.cgi/jcr/?Init=Yes&SID=2FGAlfGHkjhEiM8gmk4
Rank
Abbreviated Journal Title
(linked to journal information)
ISSN
Total
Cites
2012
Impact
Factor
5-year
Impact
Factor
Immediac
y Index
Articles
Cited
Half-life
1
MIS QUART
0276-7783
7277
4.659
7.474
0.705
61
9.9
2
J INFORMETR
1751-1577
943
4.153
3.987
0.771
70
2.6
3
J AM MED INFORM ASSN
1067-5027
5012
3.571
3.959
0.925
186
6.2
4
J INF TECHNOL
0268-3962
1165
3.532
3.801
1.263
19
6.5
5
INFORM TECHNOL MANAG
1385-951X
247
3.025
2.261
0.226
31
2.1
6
ANNU REV INFORM SCI
0066-4200
380
2.174
2.590
7
SCIENTOMETRICS
0138-9130
4555
2.133
2.207
0.449
254
6.5
8
INFORM SYST RES
1047-7047
3443
2.010
3.638
0.446
74
>10.0
9
J AM SOC INF SCI TEC
1532-2882
4613
2.005
2.159
0.321
184
6.8
10
GOV INFORM Q
0740-624X
835
1.910
2.263
0.493
71
4.5
11
INT J INFORM MANAGE
0268-4012
970
1.843
1.898
0.086
58
6.0
12
INFORM MANAGE-AMSTER
0378-7206
3091
1.663
3.178
0.083
36
8.3
13
EUR J INFORM SYST
0960-085X
1268
1.558
2.422
0.421
38
6.3
14
J STRATEGIC INF SYST
0963-8687
743
1.500
2.433
0.550
20
8.9
15
J KNOWL MANAG
1367-3270
1392
1.474
0.179
56
7.3
16
INFORM SYST J
1350-1917
696
1.381
2.376
1.238
21
7.2
17
J MANAGE INFORM SYST
0742-1222
2645
1.262
2.780
0.033
30
9.8
18
INFORM SOC
0197-2243
561
1.114
1.389
0.211
19
8.5
19
J ASSOC INF SYST
1536-9323
751
1.048
2.766
0.292
24
5.7
20
J GLOB INF TECH MAN
1097-198X
117
0.917
0.000
12
6.4
21
INFORM PROCESS MANAG
0306-4573
1681
0.817
1.388
0.210
81
8.1
22
INFORM RES
1368-1613
400
0.520
0.677
23
J GLOB INF MANAG
1062-7375
335
0.452
1.179
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
18
8.0
6.1
0.071
2015/7/17
14
7.6
The Types of Research Projects
by Paradigm
• Positivist research (實證性研究) –
•
•
Test theory to increase the predictive
understanding of phenomena. (ref. Confirmatory
research)
Interpretive research (詮釋性研究) –
Understand phenomena through the meanings
that people assign to them and does not
predefine dependent and independent variables
(ref. Exploratory research)
Critical research (批判性研究) –
Focuses on the oppositions, conflicts and
contradictions in contemporary society, and
seeks to think outside the box.
Source: http://www.qual.auckland.ac.nz/
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
19
2015/7/17
The Types of Research Projects
by Process
• Inductive research (歸納性研究) – derive
from a posteriori specific facts or
instances into general principles
• Deductive research (演繹性研究) –
reason from a priori general premises
into specific facts or instances
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
20
2015/7/17
The Types of Research Projects
by Output
• System research
• Design research
• Theory (Concept) building research
• Model building research
• Methodological research
• Informational (descriptive) research
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
21
2015/7/17
Theory Building Models and
Wheel of Science
I
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
e
l
o
g
i
c
E
v
Functional
i theory building
d
e
Empirical
n
generalizations
c
e
b
Inductive
a theory building
s
e
d
Theories
Concepts
Deductive
theory building
Hypotheses
Model-based
theory building
Observations
Source: Marx, Melvin H. “The General Nature of Theory Construction,” in Melvin H. Marx,
Ed., Theories in Contemporary Psychology, New York: Macmillan , 1965, pp. 10-19.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
22
2015/7/17
T
h
e
o
r
y
b
a
s
e
d
D
e
d
u
c
t
i
v
e
l
o
g
i
c
The Types of Research Projects
by Method
• Qualitative methods
•
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Quantitative methods –
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
Literature reviews
Case studies
Action research method
Focus group
Delphi method
Ethnographic method
Grounded theory
Meta research
Interviews/Critical incident analysis/Content analysis
Empirical method
•Survey / Statistics
•Database (CRSP, COMPUSTAT)
•Informetrics
– Experimental method •Experiment
•Simulation / Prototype
•Neural network
– Analytical method
•Stochastic methods
•Mathematical solution
•Optimization
•Proof
23
2015/7/17
The Types of Research Projects
by Output and Process
System
Research
Design
Research
Theory Building
Research
•Observations
•Design needs
•Phenomena
•Problems
•Propose
•Literature reviews
•Propose systems
•Construct
systems
•Validate systems
designs
•Build designs
•Validate
designs
•Evaluate
•Evaluate systems designs
•Conclusions
•Conclusions
•Propose
theory/concept
•Propose models
D
e
•Problems
d
u
•Literature reviews c
t
i
•Propose model
o
n
•Propose
hypotheses
•Propose
•Collect and
•Justify
•Test hypotheses
propositions
propositions
•Conclusions
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
Model Building
Research
24
validate data
•Conclusions
2015/7/17
I
n
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
The Types of Research Projects
by Scholarship
• Discovery research (exploratory)
• Application research (confirmatory)
• Integration research
• Teaching research
Source: Boyer, Ernest L., Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the
Professoriate, by San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1990. (1981-1997
President of The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching,
51 Vista Lane, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
25
2015/7/17
The Types of Research Projects
by Analysis
• Independent analysis
• Comparative analysis
• Longitudinal analysis
• Meta analysis
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
26
2015/7/17
Independent CMM Practice
Assessment
100.0%
Percent of Achievement
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Company I.D.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
27
2015/7/17
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
Japan tutorials (191 projects)
U.S. SEI-assisted (55 projects)
28
Level-2 Question I.D.
U.S. tutorials (113 projects)
Taiwan tutorials (138 companies)
2015/7/17
2.4.17.
2.4.9.
2.4.7.
2.4.1.
17%
9%
17%
27%
42%
42%
35%
50%
43%
39%
32%
32%
59%
83%
85%
83%
76%
78%
70%
63%
88%
82%
79%
73%
73%
68%
63%
58%
51%
51%
55%
54%
59%
44%
37%
33%
26%
34%
34%
30%
22%
36%
16%
12%
15%
8%
0.1
2.2.4.2.
2.2.4.1.
2.2.2.m.
2.1.16.
2.1.15.
2.1.14.
0.2
30%
0.4
46%
0.6
2.1.3.
0.3
25%
0.5
40%
0.7
70%
0.8
17%
0.9
1.1.6.
1.1.3.
Percent of Achievement
Comparative CMM Practice
Assessment
1.0
0.0
Longitudinal CMM Practice
Assessment
Percent of Achievement
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Company I.D.
1996 (N = 138; Mean = 35.4%; S.D.= 19.99%.)
This study (N = 101; Mean = 43.7%; S.D.= 22.31%.)
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
29
2015/7/17
Meta-Analysis of Recall Rate,
1957
Weiss-Margolius 1954
100
Percent of Recall
90
Gibson 1942
Belmon-Birch 1951
Underwood-Richarson 1955
80
Williams 1950
70
Williams 1950
60
Johnson 1939
50
Underwood 1953
40
Lester 1932
30
Krueger 1929
Cheng 1929
Hovland 1940
Luh 1922
20
Youtz 1941
10
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Number of Previous Lists
18
20
22
Source: Underwood, B.J. “Interference and Forgetting,” Psychological Review, 64, 1957, pp. 49-60.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
30
2015/7/17
Meta-Analysis of Average
Importance Ratings
IS Personnel's
Avg.
Importance
Ratings
Ite
m
No.
Description of Item
1
Top management involvement
2
Competition between CBIS and non-CBIS units
3
Allocation priorities for CBIS resources
4
Chargeback method of payment for services
User
Personnel's
Avg.
Importance
Ratings
Pooled Average
Importance
Ratingsa
Staff
Mgr.
Staff
Mgr.
IS
Per.
User Per.
(N=3
7)
(N=109)
(N=4
0)
(N=29)
(N=1
46)
(N=69)
2.35
1.96
2.50
1.38
2.06
2.03
=
0.29
=
0.31
0.29
0.31
0.97
1.55
1.50
1.59
1.40
1.54
=
-0.46
=
0.14
-0.46
0.14
a The ratings are from the IS staff in Montazemi's [13, p. 248] study using 35 ISS items.
b The ratings are from the IS managers in this study using 39 of the 46 ISS items.
c The ratings of are from the user staff in Montazemi's [13, p. 248] study using 35 ISS items.
d The ratings are from the middle managers of IS users in Pearson's [16, p. 174] study using 39 ISS items.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
31
2015/7/17
What Makes a Good Paper?
• Novel problem
• New perspective
• Innovative model
• Disciplined methods
• Rich data
• Rigorous effort
• Eloquent writing style
How to write a good paper?
• Problems and contexts - write what the
readers see
• Research contributions - write what the
journal likes
• Writing style - write in the journal style
• Validity - write to justify
• Rigor - write to show your effort and know how
• Generalizability - write for the real world
Common
Mistakes
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
33
2015/7/17
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
34
2015/7/17
Writing a good paper
Management Field (25)*
• Abstract (1)
• Introduction and research
questions (3)
• Research purpose (1)
• Research model (2)
• Literature reviews (4)
• Methodology (2)
• Analysis and results (3)
• Discussion and
implications (4)
• Conclusions and
recommendations (3)
• Limitations and future
research (2)
Science & Engineering
• Introduction
• Research purpose
• Research model and
method
• Analysis and results
• Conclusions
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
35
* Excluding figures and tables.
2015/7/17
The Workflow of Publishing
• The research project process
• The publication process
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
36
2015/7/17
The research project process
• Observation
• Identify weakness
• Innovation/Idea
• Dormancy
• Evaluation
• Execution
• Composition
• Revisions
• Publishing
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
• Intelligence
• Design
• Choice
• Implementation
• Reviews
• Feedback
37
2015/7/17
1-3+ years
The publication process
• Identify reviewers (0-1 mo)
• Submit paper for reviews (3-12 mo)
• Respond to reviewers’ comments (1-6 mo)
• Revise the paper (1-3 mo)
• Resubmit the paper for reviews (1-3 mo)
• Format the paper (0-1 mo)
• Typeset the paper (1-3 mo)
• Proofread the galley pages (0-1 mo)
• See the paper in print (6-18 mo)
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
38
2015/7/17
The Common Mistakes
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Title – catchy and capturing essence
Abstract – persuasive and concise
Paper body – size, structure, and flow
Copycat or problem is too trivial
Citations look like a laundry list, e.g., [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
No theoretical or conceptual foundation
Analysis – no data validation, wrong methods
Managerial implications – practitioner sense, not academics
Grammatical and spelling errors – use a technical editor to edit
your paper
Procrastinate revisions – lost the timeliness
Small sample size – impossible to revise
Responses to reviewers’ comments – respect the reviewers
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
39
2015/7/17
Dimensions of Contribution
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Problem
Context
Unit
Paradigm / Theory / Concept
Model
•
•
Construct
Ontology
6. Method
7. Data (number / text)
8. Time
2015/7/17
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
40
Abstract
• What is the problem?
• Why it is important?
• How did you solve it?
• What have you found?
• What do you recommend?
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
41
2015/7/17
Introduction
• What is the current “worldwide”
condition related to your topic?
• What are the problems/research gaps?
• Why it is important to overcome the
problems/research gaps?
• What do you plan to do?
• What is the organization of your paper?
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
42
2015/7/17
Research Purposes
• Define the scope of your paper
• E.g., This paper attempts to
investigate ….
• Itemize the purposes of your
research.
• E.g., The purposes of this paper are
to: (1) survey …., (2) report …., (3)
compare ….
Research Model
Linkage
Between
Constructs
(Ontology)
Core Concepts (Constructs)
Reinforced
Changed
Same
Incremental Innovation
• Replicate results for the focal
relationship(s) in a new context
• Extend by adding peripheral
construct(s)
Modular Innovation
Define, measure, or
analyze one or more core
constructs in a new way
Different
Architectural Innovation
• Examine a new situation or context
in which the nature of the focal
relationship(s) may be different
• Examine the role of a new construct
that may moderate the nature of the
focal relationship(s)
Radical Innovation
Introduce a new
conceptualization that
replaces and changes how
we think of the old
construct(s) and
relationship(s)
Source: Voss, G.B. Formulating interesting research questions. Academy of Marketing Science. Journal, 31(3), Summer 2003, pp. 356-359.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
44
2015/7/17
Architectural Innovation
Behavioral
beliefs
Attitude
toward the
behavior
Normative
beliefs
Subjective
norm
Control
beliefs
Perceived
behavioral
control
Intention
Source: http://www.people.umass.edu/aizen/tpb.html
Behavior
Actual
behavioral
control
Radical Innovation
Information
dissemination
Information
responsiveness
IT knowledge
Information
synergy
IT operations
H1
H2
Shared
interpretation
IT
capability
IT objects
H3
Innovativeness
Product
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
Process
Personnel
46
Service
2015/7/17
Literature Reviews
Top
journal
articles
Research Purpose
Construct
A
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
Construct
B
Construct
C
47
Construct
D
2015/7/17
Literature Reviews
• Describe
–Which citation? What method? What
data? What major findings?
–Example
–IS success:
Li (1997) surveyed 400 IS managers and
collected 123 usable samples. He revealed
that ……, and that …….
DeLone and McLean (2003) ………………
–Behavioral intention:
Davis (1989) ………………………
Ajzen (1991) …………….
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
48
2015/7/17
Literature Reviews
• Summarize
– citations, purpose, subjects, constructs, findings
Citation
Sample
OCB dimensions
Effectiveness operationalized
Findings (direction
of significant
correlation)a
Dunlop & Lee
[19]
36 fast food
restaurants
in Australia
OCB directed
toward
organization
(OCBO)
Supervisor rating of business unit
performance (BP)
Counter service time (CT)
Drive through service time (DT)
Unexplained food figures (UF)
OCBOBP (+)
OCBOCT (ns)
OCBODT (ns)
OCBOUF (ns)
Ehrhart, Bliese,
& Thomas [20]
2403
soldiers in
31 military
units
Helping behavior at
unit-level
Combat readiness (CR)
Physical fitness (PF)
Award rate (AR)
M16 range scores (MR)
HelpingCR (ns)
HelpingPF (+)
HelpingAR (+)
HelpingMR (+)
Koys [35]
28 stores in
regional
restaurant
chain
Aggregated OCB
Customer satisfaction (CS)
Profitability after controllable
expenses (PF)
OCBCS (+)
OCBPF (+)
Podsakoff &
MacKenzie [55]
116
insurance
agency units
Helping
Civic virtue (CV)
Sportsmanship
(Sport)
A: Index of sales performance
(SP)
HelpingSP (-)
CVSP (+)
SportSP (+)
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
49
2015/7/17
Literature Reviews
• Synthesize - Constructs
Research variable
IT
IT knowledge
competency**
IT operations
IT objects
Information
Information
synergy*
dissemination
Innovativeness*
No. of items
15
Sources
Tippins and Sohi, 2003 [62]
3
Tippins and Sohi, 2003 [62];
Information
responsiveness
4
Gefen and Ridings, 2002 [25]
Ridings, 2002 [45]
Shared
interpretation
2
Tippins and Sohi, 2003 [62]
Product
3
Process
5
Garcia and Calantone, 2002[24]
Subramanian and Nilakanta, 1996[57]
Totterdell, et al., 2002[63]
Garcia and Calantone, 2002[24]
Subramanian and Nilakanta, 1996[57]
Personnel
5
Totterdell, et al., 2002[63]
Service
3
Garcia and Calantone, 2002[24]
*Components are newly constructed and questionnaire items are adapted from different sources.
**Questionnaire items are mainly adopted from Tippins and Sohi [42]
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
50
2015/7/17
Literature Reviews
• Synthesize - Linkages
Source: DeLone, W.H. and McLean, E. R. “The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A
Ten-Year Update,” Journal of Management Information Systems, Spring 2003, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 9–30..
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
51
2015/7/17
Methodology
• Subjects
– What are your sample subjects? Why do you choose
these subjects? How did you collect the data? Why do
you choose the way you do it? What is the profile of
your population and samples?
• Measurement/questionnaire
– What is your measurement instrument? How did you
design it? What are the sources of your measurement?
• Pilot study
– How do you conduct pilot test? How do you modify
your instrument? How do you know it is reliable and
valid.
• Procedure
– How will you analyze the data? Why did you choose
these methods? What is the sequence of analyses?
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
52
2015/7/17
Quantitative Analysis (1)
• Data representativeness
–Survey data
•Removal of outliers
•Handling missing values
•Population representation
•Non-response bias
•Common method bias
•Reliability
•Validities
–Simulation data
•Steady state
•Randomness
•Probability distributions
•Program/model correctness
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
53
2015/7/17
Quantitative Analysis (2)
• Popular Statistical methods
– Parametric methods
•Correlation analysis; Regression analysis
•Independent t-tests
•Paired t-tests
•ANOVA
•MANOVA
•Exploratory and confirmatory Factor analyses
•Cluster analysis
•Structural equation model (SEM)/LISREL/AMOS
•Hierarchical linear model (HLM)
– Non-parametric methods (N<30)
•Spearman Rho; Kendall Tau; Chi-square test
•Man-Whitney test; Wilcoxon’s rank sum test
•Wilcoxon’s sign rank test; McNemar's Chi-square test
•Kruskal-Wallis analysis of ranks; Median test
•Friedman's two-way analysis of variance
•Partial least square (PLS)
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
54
2015/7/17
Quantitative Analysis (3)
Commonly Used Statistical Tests
Purpose of test
Compares two independent
samples
Examines a set of differences
Normal-distribution-based
test
Corresponding nonparametric
test
t test for independent samples
Mann-Whitney U test;
Wilcoxon rank-sum test
Paired t test
Wilcoxon matched pairs
signed-rank test
Assesses the linear association
Pearson correlation coefficient
between two variables.
Spearman rank correlation
coefficient; Kendall Tau; Chisquare test
Compares three or more
groups
One way analysis of variance
(F test)
Kruskal-Wallis analysis of
variance by ranks; Median test
Compares groups classified by
two different factors
Two way analysis of variance
Friedman Two Way analysis of
variance
Source: Adapted from Dallal, G.E. (2000) “Nonparametric Statistics,” http://www.jerrydallal.com/LHSP/npar.htm
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
55
2015/7/17
Presenting Results
• Summarize your results in a
table.
• Do not put too much data in a
diagram; put them in a table.
• Let the table or figure worth a
thousand words.
• Be brilliant in creating a table or
figure.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
56
2015/7/17
Discussion and Implications
• Discuss each finding, be it positive
or negative.
•Compare it to the existing literature.
• What does the finding imply?
•Explain the finding as a phenomenon in
our life.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
57
2015/7/17
Conclusions & Recommendations
• Re-iterate the importance of your
study.
• Synthesize your findings.
• Based on your findings and
implications, what would you
recommend for both researchers
and practitioners to do in the future?
• If possible, describe a “best practice
scenario”.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
58
2015/7/17
Limitations & Future Research
• Sample bias.
• Self-reporting bias.
• Common method bias.
• Cultural differences.
• Gender and age differences.
• Time dependency (cross-sectional).
• Not included variables.
• Not answered research questions.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
59
2015/7/17
Paper Body
• Avoid piecemealed sections
• Adhere to the size (word count) limit
• Delete unimportant sections
• Eliminate repeated sentences
• Always include “Recommendations
for Practice” or “Implications for
Management” section
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
60
2015/7/17
Responses to reviewers’
comments
• Avoid descriptive “All in One”
response.
• Use the following format:
– Reviewer #1
– Comment #1: (Repeat first comment)
– Response: (State how you take it)
– Action: (State how you deal with it)
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
61
2015/7/17
Reviewer #2:
Comment #1: “The case itself reads rather
like a Masters project. There is little in
it…….”
RESPONSE:
This case is not a Master
thesis, it is a consulting project. We have
never seen a planning framework like ours
in the literature. We believe that with your
constructive comments and our revisions, it
has significant contribution to the existing
literature.
ACTION: None.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
62
2015/7/17
Comment #2: "....There is no evidence that the strategic plan provided value.
No alternatives appear to have been considered.“
RESPONSE: The value of a strategic plan in itself is intangible and cannot be
quantified. However, if some of the recommended application systems in
the planning document are implemented and continuously used by the
users, we would know that it provided value to the ABC bank. As indicated
in the original paper (see "Step 6: Conclude the Project"), three of our
recommended application systems were subsequently put in place three
months after we concluded the planning project. Furthermore, I spoke
informally with the bank's CEO recently and he told me the users have been
“very happy” about the implemented systems. As for providing alternative
plan, it is not a normal practice at the strategic level of IS plan, especially in
a limited project time. We agree that if we were designing a system, we
would need to provide alternatives because there are more than one way to
implement a system. Furthermore, a strategic IS plan must link with the
business plan. During the strategic planning process, we have constant
input from the bank through its representatives in the planning team on the
"no-technical" matters. This ensure the planning outputs closely adhere to
the business plan. Since there was only one business plan at the ABC bank
and one set of planning output requested by the CEO, we provided only one
strategic IS plan. In fact, the content of our planning outputs does not
dictate the way ABC bank implement the plan. It is very flexible and ABC
can formulate various implementation plans according to our planning
output.
ACTION: A paragraph has been added in the “Conclusion and
Recommendation” section indicating that the users are satisfied with the
implemented systems. The paragraph states: "The users, both managers
and staff, have been very satisfied with the implemented systems. These
systems have improved not only the processes of top management's
decision making and resource allocation but also the quality of customer
service. All these help attract more customers to use the bank's services."
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
63
2015/7/17
Recommendations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Record and review your ideas
Fill up your pipeline
Know what the journal wants (criteria, style)
Start with lower-tier SCI journal
Track the submission progress
Turn conference papers into journal papers
Need to train yourself (single author)
Work together, not alone
Consult with top researcher
Learn how to write
Know the editors
Know the acceptance rate of the journal
Find the journals that need papers
Try to cite the target journal in your paper
Never send the same paper to two or more journals at the
same time (code of ethics)
• Where there is a will, there is a way
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
64
2015/7/17
CACM Review Criteria
General interest articles (3,000 words maximum)
cover material of substance and emphasize concepts
and principles. An article sets the background, defines
fundamental concepts, compares alternate approaches,
and explains the significance or application of a
particular technology or result by means of wellreasoned text and pertinent graphical material (3
figures and 3 tables maximum). Reference lists (12
references maximum) should indicate the most
significant items supporting and substantiating the
article; all listed references must be cited within the
text of the article. Submissions in this category are
reviewed for
1) technical accuracy,
2) importance to the field,
3) appropriateness to the audience, and
4) effectiveness of style and presentation.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
65
2015/7/17
TQMJ/IJEB Review Criteria
1. This paper is based on rigorous academic standards.
2. This paper is presented in a format which is accessible by practitioners.
It focuses on justification, results and implementation; has readable
style; technical material is in appendix.
3. The paper has clarity of presentation. It is well organised, clearly
written.
4. The paper makes a significant contribution to the body of knowledge
related to this Journal. It is highly significant, breaks new ground, and
provides a foundation for future research.
5. The topic of this paper is relevant, timely, and of interest to the
audience of this journal.
6. The rationale for the paper is well grounded. It is based on a known
theory or on an interesting issue.
7. The research methodology for the study is appropriate and applied
properly.
8. The material of this paper is technically accurate and sound.
9. If this paper is a survey, it provides strong evidence of reliability and
validity of the constructs.
10.Discussion of the results is based on analysis of data; results aren't
overstated or overgeneralized
11.Implications and recommendations for management are relevant and
useful.
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
66
2015/7/17
Prof. Dr. Gao’s Submission Log
1. 1993.09.16 Annals of Operations Research
(“Follow-up evaluation of the performance of
Taiwan forests after reorganization”)
1994.05.27 Rejection
2. 1994.10.11 J. Operational Research Society
11.11 Recommend sending to OR Insight
3. 1994.11.23
European J. Operational Research
(“Evaluation of efficiency changes: a case of
Taiwan forests”)
1996.01.24 Revision (give up)
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
67
2015/7/17
4. 1996.02.12
J. Environmental Management
5. 1996.11.04
Omega, Int. J. Management Science
(“Follow-up evaluation of the performance of
Taiwan forests after reorganization”)
09.23 Rejection
1997.03.06
06.16
06.30
08.16
10.04
11.04
11.25
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
(“Data envelopment analysis for measuring
efficiency changes: a case of Taiwan forests” )
Revision (1st)
Revision (2nd)
Revision (3rd)
Revision (4th)
Revision (5th)
Revision (6th)
Rejection
68
2015/7/17
6. 1999.07.20 Forest Science
(“Measuring the performance improvement of
Taiwan forests after reorganization”)
11.16 Revision
2000.05.01 Acceptance
Where there is a good paper, there is a
journal (to publish) !
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
69
2015/7/17
Potential Journal Targets
• International Journal of Electronic Business
•
•
•
•
•
(IJEB) - EI
International Journal of Internet and Enterprise
Management (IJIEM) - EI
International Journal of Internet Marketing and
Advertising (IJIMA) - EI
International Journal of Information and Computer
Security (IJICS) - EI
MIS Review (MISR)
Journal of Information Management (JIM) - TSSCI
Copyright (c) E.Y.Li
71
2015/7/17