Transcript Publishing Your Research - CRA-W

Publishing Your Research
Meredith Ringel Morris
Know your numbers!
• Quantity v. Quality (and Conferences v. Journals)
• Impact Factor
• Indices (h-index, etc.)
Choose Your Format(s)
• Traditional, Higher Prestige:
– Journal Paper, Conference Article, Book
(Chapter)
• Traditional, Lower Prestige
– Poster, Demo, Workshop Paper
• Nontraditional
– blog, Twitter, YouTube
Getting Married???
• Your legal name and professional name
don’t have to be the same!!!
• Factors to consider :
– Consistency
– Uniqueness
– Spellability
If You Do Change Names…
• Merge your profiles!
– Google Scholar allows you to indicate
publications that should be part of your
profile.
– The ACM DL will merge separate author
profiles into one if you contact them.
• Craig Rodkin, Digital Library Production Manager, [email protected]
Hone Your Communication Skills
• Take a writing class (or two or three…)
• Take a public speaking class
Improving Your Technical Writing
• Start with an outline
– Focus on CONTRIBUTION
• Revise, Revise, Revise
– Start Early!!!!!
• Enlist Excellent Proofreaders
– For clarity & for grammar.
• Start Early!!!
Contribution: Example Text
Assessing Web page credibility is an increasingly important
literacy as people turn to the Web for information in a
variety of critical domains. In this paper, we made several
contributions toward the goal of enhancing users’ ability to
assess Web page credibility, including (1) creating a
publicly available data set of 1,000 Web pages with
associated credibility ratings, (2) identifying features not
readily available to end-users that relate to credibility, and
quantifying the degree to which they do so, (3) designing
visualizations to augment Web pages and search results
that convey the most promising of these features, (4)
evaluating the effectiveness of these visualizations in a
laboratory study, and (5) offering design suggestions and
future research directions based on these findings.
[Schwarz & Morris, CHI 2011]
More Ways to Improve Your Writing
• Read!
• Review!
• How is a program committee like the prom?
Receiving Reviews
• Read them!
• Cool off for a day or two.
• Re-read them!
– Use them to improve your paper
(for this venue or a future one)
• Reviewers don’t know everything, but they
know a lot!
• If more than one reviewer has they same
issue, it probably isn’t a fluke.
• You may get the same reviewer in the future!
Questions?
[email protected]
@merrierm
Being an ethical author
Maria Gini
Department of Computer Science and
Engineering
University of Minnesota
Topics
• Ethics in conducting research
– Why we should care about ethics
• Ethics as an author
– Who should be a co-author
– Responsibilities of co-authors
– Plagiarism and self-plagiarism
• Ethics as a reviewer
– Requirements and expectations
Ethics in doing research
• Why?
– To protect your reputation. Reputation is easy to
ruin and hard to restore.
– To protect science. Science is mostly selfregulated. There is significant freedom, but high
responsibility and high ethical standards.
– Society invests in research, scientists are expected
to act in the society interests.
• Unethical behaviors
– Undisclosed conflicts of interest (payments,
ownership of stocks, close family members, etc).
– Data fabrication, data falsification, data omission.
– Publication of non reproducible results.
Ethics as an author
Co-authorship. Who should be a co-author?
• Your advisor because
–
–
–
–
She worked with you?
She is supporting you financially?
She proposed the problem and helped you in solving it?
She taught you how to do research?
• Who else? A coworker who
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Designed an algorithm?
Wrote a program?
Did the analysis?
Did help with writing and editing?
Did all the writing?
Is your friend?
Needs another publication?
• To avoid contentious issues set the rules of who will be
author when you start.
Co-authors
• Order of authors
– Alphabetical
– Sorted by amount of work
– Students first, senior author last
• Responsibility of co-authors
–
–
–
–
Check correctness of the work
Ensure there is no plagiarism/self-plagiarism
Have contributed to the work
Be willing and capable to present the work
• Acknowledgements
– Anyone who helped
– Reviewers who provided feedback
– Sponsors
Plagiarism and self-plagiarism
• Plagiarism is
– Using text and ideas from someone else without citing
them and without quoting.
– Much worse is to use someone else paper and put your
name on it! Does it happen? Yes!!
• Self-plagiarism is
– Using text and figures from some of your own papers
without citing and quoting.
– How much new material has to be added to republish a
paper? At least 20-30%, not just some new text but some
new ideas and results.
• Both are VERY serious and can ruin your career. Many
professional societies check for plagiarism and selfplagiarism in papers submitted
Ethics in reviewing
• Integrity, objectivity, accountability
– Cannot reject a paper because
• you are writing a paper on the same subject
• you do not like the author
• Confidentiality
– Single blind, double blind reviews
– The material in the paper is not publically available, so
you cannot use ideas from it
• Conflicts of interest with people who
–
–
–
–
–
Work in the same place (never)
Was your advisor (never)
Have written papers together (recently)
Have a financial interest
Double blind review makes things harder, but when in
doubt check with program chair
Materials taken in part from talks by Judy Goldmith (University
of Kentucky) and by Toby Walsh (NICTA, University of South
Wales) at the IJCAI 2011 doctoral consortium.
Watch the videos on different ethical situations at the
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Office of Research & Economic
Development
http://research.unl.edu/orr/videos.shtml
Questions?
[email protected]