Publishing Internationally: Some reflections

Prof. Magnus Sverke

Department of Psychology
Stockholm University magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

Important questions
How to write up the results in a way that make them interesting and relevant to readers as well as to editors and reviewers? How should the research problem be outlined? How general or specific, and how broad or narrow, should one make the review of previous theory and empirical studies? What to include in the different parts of the paper? Can I further my own standpoints and arguments?
Magnus Sverke magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

Doing research: Words of wisdom from my supervisors

It doesnt matter how nice a research design one has, or how sophisticated analyses one conducts, unless one is also able to wrap this up in a nice parcel
Research involves 10 % inspiration and 90 % transpiration Make one point, investigate that point, and conclude by stating how that point has been answered

Magnus Sverke

magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

The highway metaphor

An article is a long argument Make sure to develop this argument in a consistent way No research is objective Dont go into (too many) side tracks Stick to one (or a few) major point(s) Pick up what is needed Get rid of unnecessary things Stay on the road

NB. This is not to say you should be uncritical to your own work
Magnus Sverke magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

Or, in reality, perhaps more like this?

Magnus Sverke

magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

The different parts of a paper

Brief introduction
Typically integrated into one section

Problem area/Rationale

Rest of introduction
Theoretical part

The research aim can be placed here or here

Method section
Sometimes interwoven into one section

Results

Discussion

Magnus Sverke

magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

Introduction: Knowledge gaps

Problem in the real world?

What does the theory say?

What is (not ) known from previous research? What is the gap in current knowledge? What is needed to fill this gap? This is the rationale for the Introduction Dont forget to use references
Magnus Sverke magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

The introduction is the menu:

It describes what will be eaten in the theoretical part
After reading the Introduction, the reader should know what aspects will be dealt with in the theoretical part Typically concluded with (explicit or implicit) research aim Most importantly: Show why there is a need for the present study (using previous research as your tool) The Intro can bring up side-issues (that will not be investigated) to provide the studys rationale It is not sufficient that this is interesting or has not yet been examined
Magnus Sverke magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

Theoretical part: The mechanisms that link constructs

Focus only on things that are relevant to your research aims (and, hence, will be empirically investigated) Outline the mechanism, i.e., why should your constructs relate to each other in a certain way? Make use of existing theory and empirical research Sometimes necessary to extrapolate from other research areas and/or theories Make correct use of adequate references
Magnus Sverke magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

The noble art of referencing

Bla bla bla. Bla bla bla. Bla bla bla Bla bla bla Bla bla bla. Bla bla bla (REF).
Karasek (1979) suggested that control at work may lead to satisfaction.

What does the reference refer to? In principle, one needs a reference for each assertment or truth that is presented
To start with the reference can sound as if only one study has come to this conclusion, i.e., that this is a unique claim

Control at work appears to be essential for employee satisfaction (Karasek, 1979).

Magnus Sverke

If the reference is placed after a claim, this suggests that the claim is of a more general character

magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

10

Method section
Provide relevant information concerning Setting (when appropriate) Sample & procedure
Population and Sampling method Original sample, response rate, info on non-respondents Measures Reference, sample item, scale range, reliability Methods of analysis Often better to describe this here, not in the Results Necessary only for fairly complex analysis methods
For quantitative studies, it is in many fields recommended to include a correlation matrix for descriptive purposes magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se (here, in the results or in an appendix) Magnus Sverke

11

Results section
Present only such information that is related to your research aims Avoid interpretations, such as why you found this, or how it corresponds to other research (of course, you should state whether a finding corresponds to a hypothesis) What could/should be summarized in tables/figures? Dont repeat such information in running text Remember that non-significant results are not insignificant
Magnus Sverke magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

12

Discussion
1. Repeat rationale & aims briefly

2. Discuss your major findings (aim by aim)

Was this expected or unexpected? How do the results correspond to existing theory/research

3. Limitations & future research

Are there methodological aspects that threaten your conclusions? What questions should be addressed in future research?

4. Conclusions
What major conclusions can still be drawn? Return to the rationale you sketched in the opening of the paper Implications for theory and practice?

Magnus Sverke

magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

13

Past or present tense?

Present tense
For developing/describing theory, model, aim, hypotheses, implications e.g.,: This suggests that men are more likely than women to

Past tense
What was done (method) What was found (in this study and in previous research) e.g., Kalyal et al. found that ; Commitment was positively related to

Present past tense

What has typically been done e.g., Numerous studies have investigated

Future tense
Avoid future tense in hypotheses (sounds as if the predictions relate only to the specific sample)
Magnus Sverke magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

14

How the parts mirror each other

Introduction
Problem area/Rationale Research aim Theory Definitions Mechanism Nomological net Method Design & data Operationalizations Analysis Results Structured according to research aims

DISCUSSION Recapitulation of aims Findings, aim by aim, as if they were true

Correspondence to theory

Limitations Conclusions

Magnus Sverke

magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

15

Submitting a manuscript
Pay close attention to the style guidelines of the journal
Have the manuscript carefully proof-read

Be sure not to borrow someone elses text

Make sure you get the message through Check recommendations regarding abstract

Do your parts mirror one another?

Magnus Sverke

magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

16

Revising a manuscript
Carefully check all of the review comments Be sure to write a cover letter detailing how you have responded to each of the review comments Address all the comments in the manuscript and/or the cover letter You dont have to adhere to all comments, but will need good arguments not to Indicate where in the manuscript the corresponding changes have been made Respect the opinions of the reviewer(s) and editor Sometimes the cover letter may be very long. A lot of information (arguments, contra-arguments, additional analyses) can be included here, without being included in the paper
Magnus Sverke magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

17

Concluding recommendations
Dont submit prematurely
Be critical to your own work Make sure to get comments from colleagues

Carefully edit the manuscript

Missing words, missing references, misspellings Language check

For revisions, spend much time on the memo on how you addressed the review comments
Magnus Sverke magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se

18

Thank you
www.psychology.su.se
magnus.sverke@psychology.su.se