The Task of the Referee Arnon Rungsawang Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering COmputer and Network SYstem Laboratory Department.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
© Nick Feamster and Alex Gray Reading and Reviewing Papers Nick Feamster and Alex Gray College of Computing Georgia Institute of Technology.
Advertisements

25 de febrero de 2009 Coloquio de Investigación CICIA Marisela Santiago, PhD Myra Pérez, PhD.
Evaluating Thinking Through Intellectual Standards
Cleveland State University ESC 720 Writing in Electrical and Computer Engineering Peer Review Dan Simon 1.
Publishers of original thinking. What kinds of academic writing are there? There are many kinds of writing that originates from academia. In my view there.
Review of Related Literature By Dr. Ajay Kumar Professor School of Physical Education DAVV Indore.
Getting Published in Quality Journals Simon Pierre Sigué, Ph.D. Athabasca University Dealing with Reviewers’ Comments.
GETTING PUBLISHED Chapter 18.
How to Write a Critique. What is a critique?  A critique is a paper that gives a critical assessment of a book or article  A critique is a systematic.
Writing for Publication
The Rosabeth Moss Kanter Award Module 2, Class 2 A Teaching Module Developed by the Curriculum Task Force of the Sloan Work and Family Research Network.
Reviewing Papers: What Reviewers Look For Session 19 C507 Scientific Writing.
CPSC 699. Summary Refereeing is the foundation of academic word: it promotes equity, diversity, openness, free exchange of ideas, and drives the progress.
Preparing research manuscripts
Reviewing the work of others Referee reports. Components of a referee report Summary of the paper Overall evaluation Comments about content Comments about.
ALEC 604: Writing for Professional Publication Week 11: Addressing Reviews/Revisions.
How to Read a CS Research Paper? Philip W. L. Fong.
CMPUT Teaching and Research Methods1 CMPUT603 - Fall 2005 Topic2: Refereeing (After Alan J. Smith, “The Task of the Referee”, IEEE Computer, April,
Publishing your work in English in international journals October Prof. Arthur P. Cracknell Editor, International Journal of Remote Sensing Modified.
Writing Good Software Engineering Research Papers A Paper by Mary Shaw In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE),
H E L S I N G I N K A U P P A K O R K E A K O U L U H E L S I N K I S C H O O L O F E C O N O M I C S Orientaatiopäivät 1 Writing Scientific.
The peer review process and the task of a referee
Advanced Research Methodology
Choosing a Research Topic Arnon Rungsawang Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering COmputer and Network SYstem Laboratory Department.
The EZ way to write a prospectus, thesis, publishable paper John M. Hoenig, Ph.D. Department of Fisheries Science.
Chemistry B.S. Degree Program Assessment Plan Dr. Glenn Cunningham Professor and Chair University of Central Florida April 21, 2004.
Refereeing “And diff’ring judgements serve but to declare, That truth lies somewhere, if we knew but where.” – William Cowper, Hope.
Publication in scholarly journals Graham H Fleet Food Science Group School of Chemical Engineering, University of New South Wales Sydney Australia .
Dr. Dinesh Kumar Assistant Professor Department of ENT, GMC Amritsar.
How to write an article Dr. Zahra Abdulqader Amin
Procedures for reviewing and/or editing an article Role of the members of the editorial board in the reviewing process:. 1.Role of the editor in chief.
Research Methods and Techniques Lecture 1 Introduction & Paper Review 1 © 2004, J S Sventek, University of Glasgow.
Writing a Research Proposal. Today Definition and purpose of the proposal Structure of a proposal The process of writing.
 How to referee. Refereeing is excellent practice for  developing critical appraisal skills  understanding how good (and bad) papers are written 
1 How to review a paper by Fabio Crestani. 2 Disclaimer 4 There is no fixed mechanism for refereeing 4 There are simple rules that help transforming a.
Software Engineering Experimentation Rules for Reviewing Papers Jeff Offutt See my editorials 17(3) and 17(4) in STVR
Patterns of Square Numbers Module 1. A Question For You… You are helping your niece with her homework and she says, “I notice that every time I square.
Abbas YEGANEH BAKHTIARY. Outline of my Talk  Introduction on writing a Journal paper  Brain storming of writing a paper  Journal Papers format  Abstract.
Research Methods and Techniques Lecture 8 Technical Writing 1 © 2004, J S Sventek, University of Glasgow.
How should it respond to reviewers’ views? Prof. Suleyman Kaplan Department of Histology and Embryology Medical School Ondokuz Mayıs University Samsun,
MA Thesis/Papers-In-Lieu Overview and Process. Thesis: What is it?  A thesis is a scholarly manuscript that reports on a significant in-depth investigation.
Literature Search – How to Make Hard Work Easier? Prof. Haiying Huang Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering University.
MedEdPORTAL Reviewer Tutorial Contact MedEdPORTAL
How to write a professional paper. 1. Developing a concept of the paper 2. Preparing an outline 3. Writing the first draft 4. Topping and tailing 5. Publishing.
Reviewing the Research of Others RIMC Research Capacity Enhancement Workshops Series : “Achieving Research Impact”
Christoph F. Eick: ML Project Post-Analysis 1 Project2 Post Analysis —General Things Reviewing is about voicing your opinion about the paper! Reviews.
Reviewing Papers© Dr. Ayman Abdel-Hamid, CS5014, Fall CS5014 Research Methods in CS Dr. Ayman Abdel-Hamid Computer Science Department Virginia Tech.
REVIEWING MANUSCRIPTS TIPS FOR REVIEWING MANUSCRIPTS IN PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS Bruce Lubotsky Levin, DrPH, MPH Associate Professor & Head Dept. of Community.
How to Satisfy Reviewer B and Other Thoughts on the Publication Process: Reviewers’ Perspectives Don Roy Past Editor, Marketing Management Journal.
PUBLISHING THE RESEARCH RESULTS: Researcher Motivation is an Important Step Dr.rer.nat. Heru Susanto Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat.
FOR 500 The Publication Process Karl Williard & John Groninger.
The Research Process.  There are 8 stages to the research process.  Each stage is important, but some hold more significance than others.
 An article review is written for an audience who is knowledgeable in the subject matter instead of a general audience  When writing an article review,
Responding to Reviewers. Rare to get an acceptance with no changes So two paths, rejection or revise and resubmit Rejection Revise and Resubmit.
Thomas HeckeleiPublishing and Writing in Agricultural Economics 1 Observations on assignment 4 - Reviews General observations  Good effort! Some even.
Principals of Research Writing. What is Research Writing? Process of communicating your research  Before the fact  Research proposal  After the fact.
PSY 219 – Academic Writing in Psychology Fall Çağ University Faculty of Arts and Sciences Department of Psychology Inst. Nilay Avcı Week 9.
Scope of the Journal The International Journal of Sports Medicine (IJSM) provides a forum for the publication of papers dealing with basic or applied information.
Tutorial 1 Dr. Oscar Lin School of Computing and Information Systems Faculty of Science and Technology Athabasca University January 18, 2011.
A gentle introduction to reviewing research papers Alistair Edwards.
Abstract  An abstract is a concise summary of a larger project (a thesis, research report, performance, service project, etc.) that concisely describes.
Dr.V.Jaiganesh Professor
Observations on assignment 3 - Reviews
How to publish from your MEd or PhD research
Barbara Gastel INASP Associate
Software Engineering Experimentation
Business The test… The peer reviews….
Managerial Decision Making and Evaluating Research
Strategi Memperbaiki dan Menyiapkan Naskah (Manuscript) Hasil Review
Presentation transcript:

The Task of the Referee Arnon Rungsawang Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering COmputer and Network SYstem Laboratory Department of Computer Engineering Faculty of Engineering Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 2 Referee ’ s Task Evaluate in a timely manner a paper for publication in a specific journal or conference proceedings. Determine whether The work presented is correct, The problem studied and the results obtained are new and significant, The quality of the presentation is satisfactory or can be made so, What revisions and changes to the paper are necessary and/or desirable.

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 3 What is Publishable Paper? A paper is publishable if it makes a sufficient contribution. A contribution is New and interesting research results, New and insightful synthesis of existing results, A useful survey of or tutorial on a field, A combination of above.

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 4 Publishable Paper may be … A paper which merely confirms previously published results by different researcher, using different data, if previously published result is important enough to require confirmation. The role of the referee is to provide an opinion as to whether the paper makes such a sufficient contribution.

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 5 Publishable or not … Small results which are surprising and might spark new research should be published. Papers which are mostly repetitions of other papers should not be published. Papers which have good ideas badly expressed should not be published, HOWEVER the authors should be encouraged to rewrite them in a better more comprehensive fashion.

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 6 Two Major Components of a Referee Report Recommend acceptance or reject a publication: Equivocal acceptance should provide with adequate discussion for guiding the editor or program committee. Reject if the paper does not contain some publishable research, or the referee can suggest another place to publish in case of inappropriate to the discussed forum. Recommend change or revise: Suggest change or revision that might permit the paper to be published elsewhere, or after resubmission.

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 7 Overly Permissive Referee Everything will be published. Poor research is encouraged. Recognition or honors are given to those who don ’ t deserve it. Na ï ve and inexperienced reader is misled. Author is misled as to what is publishable. Disrespect for field is encouraged. …

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 8 Overly Restrictive Referee Block good research from, or causes it to be delayed in publication. Waste the time of authors and damages their career. Perhaps leave journals with nothing to publish, and conferences wit nothing to present. …

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 9 A Good Referee … Be in a middle of overly permissive and overly restrictive. Be able to distinguish: Good from bad work. Major from minor, from negative contributions to the literature. A referee who always says YES or always says NO is not helpful.

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 10 A Referee Report … State very briefly his recommendation and reasons for it. Summarize the point of paper in 1-5 sentences, both for use of the editor or to ensure that the referee actually understand the point of the paper. Evaluate the goal of the work both with respect to its validity and to its significance. Evaluate the quality of work (methodology, techniques, accuracy, errors, presentation).

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 11 A Referee Report … (continue) Provide overall recommendation as to publication. Contain enough discussion and information to justify the recommendation. If the recommendation is negative, be clear at what point why the paper is rejected. Equivocal ( “ maybe ” ) recommendation is acceptable if the reasons for it are clearly documented.

Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering Research Methodology in Computer Engineering 12 Questions and Answer