Post on 31-Dec-2015
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
A Research Publishing Checklist for New Authors
See: http://brianwhitworth.com/researchroadmap
Brian Whitworth, Massey University, Albany New Zealand
Presented at ACIS 2007 - 18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, 5-7 Dec 2007, Toowoomba
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
The Problem: A New Requirement for Students/Advisors
• Traditionally: Students graduated then published
• Today: Most students publish before they graduate, i.e. it is an additional duty
• The need: A tool to support research publishing students and advisors
A Research Roadmap
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Postgraduate Publishing Advantages
• Realistic practice and good feedback
• Improves student recognition and CV
• Motivates students as a real goal
• Justifies grant/scholarship support
• Involves student/advisor in a common project
• Makes useful connections via conferences
Improves the thesis learning experience
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
On the research journey you need
• Yourself– Willing to work hard to
achieve a goal– Capable of quality logical
thinking at an abstract level
– With an understanding of what research is
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
• An experienced guide – To point out the right
directions to go– To interpret signs along
the way left by other people
– To warn of pitfalls and dangers that may prevent success
You also need …
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
An additional tool – A Map
• A good map …– Shows where you currently are – Shows where you want to go– Suggests how to get from
where you are to where you want to go
– Warns of dangers on the way
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Some Research Pitfalls
Swamp of detail
Forest of Complexity
Cliffs of Contradiction
Desert of Irrelevance
City of Good ResearchSlums of Bad Research
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
The Research Roadmap
• Chunks research knowledge into elements, so students can address them one at a time
• Gives concrete examples, statements and questions, to give students a focus
• Is structured in traditional academic document form, for easy element location
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
How to use the research roadmap• Topics for discussion between student/advisor• An advice template, advisors can
– Expand, modify or correct elements– Use elements as “signposts” to point students to study
areas in more detail, e.g. in a larger text• Choose a profile, e.g. quantitative or qualititative
– Not every element applies – it is a “toolbox”– Elements marked * are for quantitative research
• A progress monitor– Gives a layout to start a “thesis.doc” right away
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Research: not a formula
If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called
research, would it?”
Einstein
There is no research “formula” - this is a map to guide not a formula to produce
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Research: a process not a product
• Research is a method, developed over centuries, to risk theories about the world against feedback from the world in an unbiased way– Theory alone enables imaginary theories – Data alone enables confusion and superstition– Research integrates abstract theory and concrete data
Research is not a fixed set of “right” answers, but a flexible way to rightly ask questions
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Research drives thought forward
Based on Socrates dialectic, which began with known “facts”, then bravely “followed the logic”, wherever it led!
#O2 Give reasons before conclusions, & derive conclusions from what went before
OutcomesReasons
Rationalization Thought works backward
e.g. excuses take an outcome, then find a reason
Research Makes thought work forwards
e.g. begin with a theory, then predict outcomes
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
The common academic form
– Introduce Topic– Review Theory – Describe Method – Analyze Data – Discuss Results
LogicalProgression
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Topic/Problem
ABSTRACTWORLD
Research Method
Figure 1. A Research Logic
CONCRETEWORLD
Theory Review
Research Question
DataAnalysis
Discuss Results
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
• Introduction defines theory scope.
• Theory review derives a research question
• Research question implies a method.
• Method creates physical data
• Data analysis implies conclusions that answer the research question
• Conclusions have general theoretical and practical implications
Academic Logic
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Naïve Research• Research without theory (the swamp of detail)
• No single theory base (the forest of complexity)
• No founding problem (the desert of irrelevance)
• Mechanically stick each section together (the cliffs of contradiction)– e.g. research that reviewed the literature on IS
evaluation, then asked questions about a hypothetical system (i.e. market research)
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
INTRODUCTION
Topic/Problem
Research Method
Theory Review
Research Question
DataAnalysis
Discuss Results
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Title should describe the topic in an interesting way and invite the reader to
read on (#I1)• Title briefly conveys what the paper is about, e.g.
research topic, dependant or topic construct– ‘Websites” - too vague
– “The Usage of Websites”- describe the dependant variable
– “A Study of Factors Influencing Website Usage” - adds research contribution
• To also attract reader interest?– “Website Usage: Why people Come”
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Abstract should tell the reader the paper’s main purpose, results and
implications (#I3)• Abstract should convey meaning
– e.g. NOT “This paper gathers data relevant to current theories
and analyses it to draw several critical conclusions” – Don’t state “conclusions were made”, state the conclusions!
1. Purpose e.g. “To study a new technology acceptance variable”
2. Findings e.g. “User control significantly increased user acceptance.”
3. Implications e.g. “Systems with user control are more accepted.”
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
State a practical problem which the research addresses (#I4)
• Problems agitate and activate people and highlighting a problem invokes reader interest
• If there is no problem, why was this research done?
• Stating the problem your research addresses is a natural publication start point– e.g. cancer research is based on the problem of
cancer
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
THEORY
Topic/Problem
Research Method
Theory Review
Research Question
DataAnalysis
Discuss Results
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Analyze the literature by issues (agreements/contradictions), not as a
sequential list of other’s research (#T2) • Honestly summarize current research in the field• Don’t give a sequential list of what others did, e.g.
A did this, B did that, C did the other, etc. • Integrate past research, find themes, agreements,
conflicts, contradictions and gaps, compare and contrast many authors on one issue, then review another issue
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Research question is a single sentence (clear), with many answers (falsifiable), that allows feasible data
collection (testable) (#T6)• RQ is the conclusion of the literature review• Defined before the method – for one research
question one choose many methods• A single question • Puts a real choice, e.g. “Does fear make one
afraid?” is not a real question
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Choose a suitable research type (exploratory, descriptive, correlational or
explanatory) that is feasible to do (#T7) Exploratory, e.g. grounded theory - new topic
Descriptive, e.g. case study - evolving areas.
Correlational, e.g. longitudinal study - known but not controlled area
Explanatory research, e.g. controlled experiment – known and controllable area
Choose the right type of research for your topic
Control
Realism
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
METHOD
Topic/Problem
Research Method
Theory Review
Research Question
DataAnalysis
Discuss Results
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Use qualitative and quantitative data (mixed-method approach) .. (#M2)
• The principles of science apply to qualitative (e.g. language) and quantitative (numeric) data
• Constructs (qualitative) and Variables (quantitative) are different names for abstraction
• Qualitative data - better meaning but less precision• Quantitative data - more precise but less meaning• Justify your data type (based on the research goal)• Gather a complementary data type (mixed-method)
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Specify the unit of research of your study, i.e. one data gathering “case” (#M9)
• The unit of research, or case, is the data collection unit, e.g. for online group voting case could be:– The vote (choice)
– The individual (satisfaction)
– The group (agreement)
• Raw data tables - variable columns and row cases• Case affects N, e.g. 90 subjects could give 900 votes
(N=900), 90 satisfaction ratings (N=90), or 18 five person agreement ratings (N=18)
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
RESULTS
Topic/Problem
Research Method
Theory Review
Research Question
DataAnalysis
Discuss Results
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Research rigor avoids Type I errors (false claims), and sensitivity avoids
Type II errors (null results) (#R1)• Type I error- a false result from insufficient rigor,
i.e. an error of commission• Type II error miss a true result from insufficient
sensitivity, i.e. an error of omission– Enhance responses (e.g. motivate subjects)
– Reduce subject error (e.g. train subjects)
– More powerful (sensitive) statistical methods.
• Sensitive research gets true results and rigorous research avoids false results.
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
State how raw data was converted to descriptive data, and how missing
values were handled (#R2)• How was study raw data converted to descriptive data,
e.g. transcribing tapes, translating computer data• What was left out? Describe missing values, number
and how dealt with• Missing values can be Nil Response (NR) or did not
reply, or Not Applicable (NA) response or could not reply
• e.g. “Why did you buy your mobile phone?” – NR - Ignores and walks away – NA – “I don’t have a mobile phone”
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
DISCUSSION
Topic/Problem
Research Method
Theory Review
Research Question
DataAnalysis
Discuss Results
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Distinguish the value this research adds, apart from what others have
done (#D1)• Paper should be clear on its research contribution,
i.e. what it adds that is new• Don’t confuse your work with past research by
others:– To add knowledge currently lacking– To resolve a theory conflict– To specify more detail on that already known– To summarize current work
• Answer what value does this paper add?
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Ensure the references reflect the quality, breadth and recency of your
publication (#D6)• Reviewers may judge publication quality
by the references:– Are journal article page numbers given? – Are author names spelled correctly? – Are major authors in the field referenced? – Are the references up to date? – Are there journal references, not just books,
web sites or magazines?
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Final Points (#F1-5)• Is the research relevant? –Practically/theoretically
useful? (Introduction, Theory)• Is the research rigorous? –Scientifically correct?
(Method, Results)• Is the research generalizable? –Widely
applicable? (Theory, Discussion)• Is the research logical? – Consistent and logical
sequence of ideas? (All)• Is the research well written? – Interesting and
understandable? (All)
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Seeking Collaborators for an Online Research Roadmap Project
(Brian Whitworth, Tong Liu)
• Thousands of new researchers going online (China, India, South America, Africa…), a huge need
• Aim: An online interactive site:– Presents a checklist of knowledge elements– “Detail” button gives more info & examples– Records progress over time– Accepts user comments and FAQ section
©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University
Further Info- http://brianwhitworth.com/researchroadmap/
Full Article