©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University A Research Publishing Checklist for New Authors See: ...

©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


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


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


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


• 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 …


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


Some Research Pitfalls

Swamp of detail

Forest of Complexity

Cliffs of Contradiction

Desert of Irrelevance

City of Good ResearchSlums of Bad Research


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


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


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


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


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


The common academic form

– Introduce Topic– Review Theory – Describe Method – Analyze Data – Discuss Results

LogicalProgression


Topic/Problem

ABSTRACTWORLD

Research Method

Figure 1. A Research Logic

CONCRETEWORLD

Theory Review

Research Question

DataAnalysis

Discuss Results


• 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


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)


INTRODUCTION

Topic/Problem

Research Method

Theory Review

Research Question

DataAnalysis

Discuss Results


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”


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.”


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


THEORY

Topic/Problem

Research Method

Theory Review

Research Question

DataAnalysis

Discuss Results


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


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


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


METHOD

Topic/Problem

Research Method

Theory Review

Research Question

DataAnalysis

Discuss Results


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)


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)


RESULTS

Topic/Problem

Research Method

Theory Review

Research Question

DataAnalysis

Discuss Results


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.


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”


DISCUSSION

Topic/Problem

Research Method

Theory Review

Research Question

DataAnalysis

Discuss Results


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?


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?


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)


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


Further Info- http://brianwhitworth.com/researchroadmap/

Full Article

©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University A Research Publishing Checklist for New Authors See: ...

Documents

Transcript of ©Brian Whitworth 2007, Massey University A Research Publishing Checklist for New Authors See: ...