【说明】下午听Flynn教授的题为『Writing publishable papers』的报告，这是记录的PPT的内容。很受启发，但知易行难，重要的还是要learn by doing。

Top ten tips for publishing
10. Read the journal
9. Follow the instructions
8. Write clearly
7. Leverage your work
6. Divide and conquer
5. Learn by doing
4. Have a thick skin
3. Take the reviewer seriously
2. Make changes, not excuses
1. Be passionate

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.

Characteristics of a research paper
--Research is needed and interesting
--Theory based for research
--Amenable to research methods
--Achievable in reasonable time
--Symmetry of potential outcomes
--Matches capabilities and interest
--Area for professional development

Contribution to knowledge
--New or improved evidence
--New or improved methodology
--New or improved analysis
--New or improved concepts or theories

Project generally NOT accepted as a research paper
--Literature surveys and descriptive complications
--Historical survey, unless accompanies by some analysis or testing of historical ideas
--Single-case descriptions, unless used in interpreting or developing an underlying structure, theory or concept
--Development projects that apply known knowledge

Topic analysis form
--Problem, hypothesis or question
--Important of the research
--Theory base for research
--Significant prior research
--Possible research approach or methodology
--Potential outcomes of research and important of each

Peer-reviewed journal
--Blind reviewed
    --Single-blind
    --Double-blind
--2-3 external reviewers
--Other journals use an editorial review process

About acceptance rates
--Method of calculating varies among journals
    --All manuscripts reviewed
    --manuscripts sent to reviewers
--Many editors do not maintain accurate records
--Influenced by the number of people in an area of specialization
--Influenced by authors' knowledge about journal

Finding the right journal
--Many peer-reviewed journals
--Many levels of journals
--Cabell's directory
--Conferences and conference journals
--References for published article
--Consider teaching journals

Writing for high probability of acceptance
--Check out editorial review board
--Check out published articles
--Follow instructions for authors
--Pass manuscripts by colleagues
--Check with editor on appropriateness of topic
--Become a reviewer

Tailoring your research
--Choose a topic that really matters to you
--Think about things you've done throughout academic career, as a student and faculty member
--Look for patterns in your best work
--Look at types of projects you've succeeded at and enjoyed
--Consider that type of writing and research by others you have enjoyed the most
    --Detailed vs.. general treatments
    --Inductive vs.. deductive
    --Use of examples
    --Terse vs.. expansive writing style
--Find a model for what you would like to do

Finding organizations and data to study
--Archival data sources
--Web transactions files
--Contacts with students who are working professionals
--Consulting contacts
--Incentives
--Student subjects

Sources of potential topics
--Current events
--Suggestions from past research
--Suggestions by authorities in the field
--Expressions of need for research by practitioners in a field
--Generally accepted, but unproved, suppositions
--Unproved or weakly proved assertions by an authority in the field
--Theories and concepts without supporting research
--Different approaches to testing important results

Reviewing standards and criteria
--Vary with perceived quality of the journal
--Ask about criteria -- may be on website
--...

Research paper format
--Abstract
    --50-100 words, summarizes entire paper
--Introduction
    --3-5 paragraphs, grab reader's attention
    --General terms
    --Introduction topics, don't summarize
--Review of literature
    --Lays foundation from which other sections emerge
        --Rational for study
        --Statement of problem and hypotheses
        --Design of the research
    --Establishes perception that author is in full grasp of the subject
    --Connects specifics of the paper to larger themes - "big picture" in area
    --Establishes original contribution
    --Generates bibliography
    --Builds a compelling case for your research, broad to narrow
    --Persuasive justification for your subject should flow right out of a critical review of your literature
    --Focus on building justification, critiquing, synthesizing
    --Contributions to knowledge
        --Knowledge/theory extension
        --Fill a gap
        --Rectify an error or misunderstanding
        --Apply known theory in a new context
        --Develop or modify a methodology
        --Synthesize known theories
    --Implications of the study - how the findings might be used practically
--Statement of the problem and hypotheses
    --Problem: Key issues which continued examination of the topic, in light of related literature and research, repeatedly yields as compelling questions
    --Hypothesis: Procedures necessary to test out the truth probability of competing answers to the problem
--Methodological and statistical design
    --Spell out the operational procedures used to test the hypotheses
    --Be specific
        --Data or sample
        --Operationalization of variables
        --Analytical procedures
        --Pilot studies
        --Reliability and validity of measures
--Results
    --Summarize, without judgment, the results of the hypothesis tests
    --Tabular displays
    --Clearly state the result of each test
    --Report all findings, not just those that support your hypotheses
    --What if the analysis doesn't support your hypothesis?
        --Nothing ever turns out exactly as you expected
        --Sometimes, counterintuitive results are the most interesting
        --The trick is using the literature to explain them and using them to build theory
        --A rejected hypotheses makes its contribution to the field by closing off ultimately dead-end research direction
        --Look at measurement, analysis and design issues
        --Do a "full-scale inquiry" into the theoretical causes of the outcome
--Discussion
    --What do the results mean?
    --Which results support the hypotheses?
    --Explanations for results counter to hypotheses
    --Implications, in terms of the purpose of the research
    --Limitations of the research
    --Generalizability
    --Suggestions for future research
--Conclusions

Moving from zero draft into first draft
--"First you make a mess, then you clean it up"
--Begin by saying what comes to your mind
    --Stronger, more imaginative writing
    --Control your worry
    --A sketch, not a finished oil painting
--Make comments to yourself in the text
--Zero draft: the point where it becomes possible to discern a shape to your material
--First draft: a complete, although very imperfect, version of what you're ultimately going to say
    --More form, different feel than zero draft
    --Piece or writing from which you can extract some sort of coherent outline
--Build or flesh out ideas you have already put down in writing
--Try to take reader's perspective; ask yourself questions
--Ask as your own reviewer
--Experiment with different ways to organize your work
--To strengthen your point, remember that less is more.
--Try reading your work aloud, to catch awkward phrasing and redundancies
--Use your breath - if you can't read a sentence aloud without turning blue, it either needs more than one sentence
--Watch out for writing quirks, such as overusing particular words or punctuation marks
--Don't use complex language or jargon when simple words will make your point equally well
--Avoid computerese
--At some point, be able to stop fiddling with it and send it off

Revision strategies
--Don't take reviews too personally
--Carefully consider each suggestion
--Provide a detailed, point-by-point list of how each suggestion was addressed (detailed, but brief)
--Okay to choose not to take every suggestion - explain why
--Say what you have to say in the paper, not in your list