Peer Review Information I Received

Unknown’s Review – The blind peer review was the most helpful review. I had had previous reviewers mention correct formatting, but they pointed out specific examples on the reference page which needed to be corrected. I received the following feedback:

1. Great topic. Facebook is a hot topic.
2. Intro. is strong.
3. Watch in-text citation format.
4. Don’t start sentences with numbers.
5. Methods section is good.
6. You stated your results clearly and with graphs.

John’s Review – John gave me a lot of advice about referencing specific information I used in my paper. He also wanted me to provide more graphs, but I felt that data was very simple and didn’t need charts or graphs. Some specific feedback I received:

1. Good flow
2. Outstanding Lit. Review
3. Needs better formatting.
4. Needs appropriate citations.
5. Your results and the graph was excellent.
6. Discussion is excellent.

Sarah’s Review: Sarah gave me a lot of advice about stylizing my paper for a more general audience. Specific feedback I received includes:

1. Paper sounds professional.
2. Paper flowed well.
3. Need to look at citing again.
4. Need to re-do references

Heather’s Review: Heather gave me similar advice to Sarah about simplifying the paper to a more general audience. She also helped take my survey. Some of the feedback I received included:

1. Your information is varied and interesting.
2. I was not bored at all while reading.
3. Some of the vocab. was difficult to figure out.
4. Your methods section switches from past to present tense.
5. Your survey was well-written and thought-out.
6. You made valid points in your intro.

Peer Review Information I Gave

Heather – Heather’s paper was about orgasm and partner satisfaction. She had an excellent, well-researched methodology and showed a great passion in her work. There were very few problems with content and I mostly corrected for small grammatical issues.

Sarah – Sarah wrote a paper on the ability of resident assistants to assist sexual minority students. The paper also had very few problems with content. The methodology was especially strong, protecting the identity of the researcher at all times. I learned some very interesting things from this paper, as well. Most of the corrections I made were small, and usually related to grammatical issues.

John – John wrote a paper on attitudes towards women’s rights with an international perspective. Some of the order needed to be revised, such as stating the complete hypothesis earlier in the paper. There were a lot of grammatical / structural issues, but those are understandable for an international student. I tried to help him understand the reasoning behind the grammar. I liked how John used passionate arguments in his paper. It used quite a bit of allegory and poetic speech, which made the arguments very strong.

Unknown – The blind peer review was concerning a multimedia project, so this was a new perspective for me because the previous articles were all meant to be journal articles. The research was about friendship’s effects on musical collaboration. This paper had the opposite problem of the earlier ones. Its grammar and style were excellent, but its methodology was not very appropriate. There seemed to be design flaws at many of the stages and I couldn’t suggest correcting them since the project was already complete. I suggested expanding the literature review to compensate.

Publishing Research

There may be a paper somewhere in the garage of a mad scientist that provides for astounding scientific innovation and progress. However, this paper will never see the light of day because it was not published. Publishing is a key aspect of academic writing. Without publishing, others do not have the opportunity to review the information at hand and input their own ideas. However, it can be very difficult to be published, especially if someone hasn’t developed the skill set necessary to be included in the journal or if they did not revise their paper to an adequate level. However, there is hope. One of the most important things to remember when publishing is to keep a positive attitude and be persistent, much like a job search. Some other interesting tips about publishing research come from a presentation on the subject from a professor at the University of Dublin, Karl Whelan. There is no better advice than that which has come from the horse’s mouth. Some of the tips which are presented include:

• Be confident; Don’t be afraid to publish your paper under the premise of perceived imperfections
• Don’t be afraid to be rejected; you will be rejected. However, you can learn what you need to revise and improve your methodology in writing for the future.
• Peer reviewers may not read the entire paper and augment minor imperfections while ignoring larger ones.
• Perform background research on the journal which you are going to submit. It would be best to submit to a journal which has published work similar to your own.
• If you are rejected, don’t be afraid to resubmit work; be persistent.
• Do not fret about criticism on drafts.

(Whelan, 2007).

I have my paper ready for submission at this time, but one of the biggest mental blockages if it were not for the class requirements is the feeling that the paper is not “good enough”. Of course I have this apprehension, because I used a small sample size and a gender-distorted sample. However, I wish that like the document declares, it will be a learning experience. I currently subscribe to an information systems listserv which often includes requests for publications from around the world. In my future career, it may be beneficial to have this experience in submitting to a journal if I am assigned to do a research project in my job duties (which is very possible). Having to follow all of the requirements for submission has reinforced the importance of formatting and standards in publication. Therefore, I look forward to receiving feedback on my submission, whatever the result may be.

References

Whelan, Karl. (2007). Tips for Preparing and Publishing Research Papers. Retrieved May 3, 2010 from http://www.karlwhelan.com/Teaching/research_talk_tcd.pdf

Drafting and Revising

It is said that a journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step, and this is quite true when it comes to the drafting process. One helpful document I used during the drafting and revision process is by the Center for Educational Partnerships at Berkeley University. The document notes that a first draft is by no means a final draft and that a writer should not be afraid to make mistakes. The first draft is primarily used to create structure (Berkeley, 2007). In future revisions, more vivid language can be used or previously unknown details can be added. In the revision process, there are three subjects which should receive improvement: focus, clarity and depth (Berkeley, 2007).

Conventions and proper styling should also be used in later drafts. Some of the tips which were presented in the document included:

• When possible, use a more simple word in place of an obscure word.
• Double-check word meanings if you are unsure
• Avoid empty words
• Use active verbs
• Avoid clichés and widely-used idioms

As far as proofreading, the source suggested leaving the paper aside for several days and then revising it again. Errors in the paper may be caught when in a fresh state of mind than when under fatigue. Additionally, try to read the paper backwards or in sections to catch sentence fragments or run-ons. One of the suggestions that is made that was also made in class is to have someone else read the paper. What makes sense to one person may not always make sense to another person.

Some of this advice I actively used in my own revision process, however my writing process is somewhat different, but effective. I generally followed guidelines on style and convention, using active verbs, engaging vocabulary, and using processes meant to catch errors. I had my paper proofread by others, to varying degrees of effectiveness. I also set my paper aside for several days to get a fresh state of mind. However, I did not always follow recommendations. I used what I thought was seemingly normal vocabulary in my paper, however many people found the vocabulary obscure or difficult to understand. However, when I tried to revise the vocabulary usage, the paper was not as effective and sounded elementary. It was my intention for this to be a paper read by sociologists and those interested in social media, an audience which is not accurate of peer reviewers. If I was writing a simplified version for readers of the USA today, I would have made the vocabulary much different. Another way I violated recommendations was that in my first draft, I typically did use more bombastic vocabulary and did not write the paper as a wireframe; I instead wrote it in sequential order, accounting for flow and transitions. However, I was told by all of the peer reviewers that the paper flowed well.

In conclusion, the drafting and revising process is a continuous cycle, but one must eventually decide that a work is finished, at least for that moment in time. If guidelines and recommendations are followed, it is much easier and faster to create a final document that is engaging, organized, and presented in a logical fashion.

Works Cited

Center for Educational Partnerships, University of Berkeley. (November 17, 2007). Drafting & Revising. Retrieved May 3, 2010 from http://students.berkeley.edu/apa/personalstatement/proofreading.html.

Post #17: Reflection on the Course

At the beginning of this class, I was not sure what to expect. While I had received numerous ominous emails about the difficulty of the class, this contradicted about what I had heard about the class. On the first day of class, I felt that the class schedule was a lot to track in my schedule. I also felt that choosing a topic within the first week seemed unreasonable. I didn’t know what to choose; I could have performed a very technical and esoteric study or a very creative one. However, I knew that I wanted to do something where little research existed within the field.

The course became very difficult and stressful when I wrote the introduction and literature review because I had yet to change my topic to its current state. After performing close-reading, I decided that I definitely wanted to change my topic, and the close reading showed me the importance of fully reading the articles instead of reading only certain sections. I was worried at this point that I would not be able to keep up while performing regular blog assignments. This indeed was true and the fact that Marlen performed a random blog check on the one day I was not able to keep up made me consider dropping the class. However, I did not drop the class and instead performed well until I was about to launch the survey. Around this time, the class became a hassle, as I would consistently become demotivated after undirected anger in the class was released, which I interpreted as directed towards myself, even though I knew it was not the case. Hence, I was not able to launch the survey until some classes were canceled and I was not demotivated. Once I collected the data, I felt much better; this was my proudest moment in the class and was a great sigh of relief. The data analysis was the most fun part, and confirmed some of my hypotheses and research I had read.

One way I turned my worries and anxieties into strength was by being very thorough in grooming the research, even after I had changed my topic. I am somewhat of a perfectionist and did not want to turn in an assignment without performing adequate and correct research on the topic.

My future goal as a writer is to use the skills I learned in this class and apply it to my career in IT design and development. I know that I will have to creatively make presentations combining artistry, technical specifications, and good style and convention to businesses. While I may not have to write a full research paper, I will certainly have to perform studies and analysis such as the one I conducted. In addition, I will have to communicate to those higher in the chain of command the best options and the backing reasoning. I feel as if I already had the work ethic and time-management skills before the class, but the class reminded me that they will always need to be utilized.

Finally, the thing that will ‘stick with me’ for the longest amount of time after this class is the sense of community that the class fashioned. You could always walk into class and exchange in free discussion of everyone’s topic and receive constructive feedback about your plans. I liked how the ‘groups’ worked in the class, even if they were not utilized much towards the end of the semester. While most groupwork causes a disproportionate amount of work to fall on one or two members, the way groups were utilized in this class fostered individualism and worked well with the subject material. In the future, if I get a project management position in IT, I will remember this type of unit and use it appropriately within the organization, as it would be beneficial.

Blog #16: Reflection on Writing a Research Paper

During the completion of my research paper, I learned a great deal about formatting, style, conventions, and most importantly, integration of sources.  I began the project with a very rigid research question of determining how the internet has affected friendships.  I continually revised this question until I reached the question of  “how has social networking affected closeness of friendships?”  However, I felt that this topic had already been discussed in depth and was known among the general population in a subconscious manner.  Therefore, I modified my topic to a new, very narrow, and largely uncharted topic.  This of course, is the current research question I proposed: “What are the sociological motivations behind Facebook creeping?”  I found that I instantly enjoyed this topic more, because I felt as if I was performing meaningful research.  Furthermore, almost no research had been performed on the behavior in question, even though many in college are well aware of its presence and consequences.  Having a background in web development and social networking development gave me the inspiration to research the topic even though little direct research had been performed.  In fact, only one researcher had actually created a scientific name for the phenomenon, which I utilized throughout my paper.

As far as the research process, I did not find it to be as daunting as one would believe.  My previous research questions gave me a lot of background as to privacy violation and online friendship, and I used two of these studies in my final draft.  However, it was fairly difficult to separate relevant information from the older articles to apply them to the new topic. I did not encounter many problems until the final stages, after I had received all of the survey responses.  I had to creatively separate some of the responses in a manner consistent with current research in order to even consider three of my hypotheses.  From there, I also found the analysis difficult; I spent around 2.5 days on-and-off analyzing the data in around 25 Excel spreadsheets.  However, with the surprising results, it was well worth it.

I received little feedback about the paper from others before getting into the methodology section. I received help from friends in making sure the survey questions made sense to those not studying the topic. Despite the peer reviews, this help was the most useful feedback I received during the research assignment because it provided consolation that the survey would actually be able to find correlations. In addition, discussing others’ research and thinking about it in comparison to my own topics was also a great help.

The assignment which was the most useful to me during the research process was the close reading of two journal articles. This made me really consider if I wanted to stick with my current topic. Until this point, I had not fully read a journal article; I had only considered certain sections. I would later re-read in full all of the journals I had utilized, which helped me find my new topic and discover the Tufekci study.

The most difficult part of the drafting process was integrating sources from the literature review due to my change in topic. After close reading, I found that I had to eliminate some of the references and incorporate others. Consequentially, this took a large portion of my time. The easiest part of the drafting process was style and word choice. Everyone that has read the paper so far has said it sounds very professional, but I had no difficult in choosing professional language after becoming familiar with the jargon used in previous studies.

While I have written research papers before, I have never written one at the professional level. I would hope that the final essay shows the vast amount of research, time, and effort I put into the paper during the last semester. In addition, I hope that it shows my evolution as a writer as far as style and reader captivation.

Abstract Draft #1

Facebook has become the most popular social networking website in the US, raising public awareness of social networking through its vast market penetration.  A variety of new social situations have arisen due to the rise of social media and networking.  One phenomenon commonly called “Facebook creeping”, or more scientifically, “peer monitoring”  has entered the realm of young adults, especially college students in the past two years.  This study attempted to discover the sociological motivations behind peer monitoring.  31 students at Indiana University of Pennsylvania were surveyed as to their attitudes and behaviors regarding “creeping”.  The study found a probable third person effect regarding privacy violation between the self and others, confirming other studies.  The study probed differences between extroverts and introverts regarding self-modeling and their motivations for popularity, finding that introverts were more likely to contradict themselves about peer monitoring behavior due to self-modeling.  In addition, users found that attractiveness of peers was a major factor in acceptability of peer monitoring directed to themselves.

Post #15: Experience from Peer Reviews

I received both of my peer evaluations back recently (although before I included the results), and this was very beneficial to my writing process. The comments and rubric helped me locate specific things I needed to focus upon. I found that the things I had to focus on the most were making the paper sound less ‘stiff’ and using proper APA formatting. Both peer editors told me that the paper was very professional, but some of the language was hard to understand or overly proper. Therefore, I explained a few definitions such as “social capital accumulation” and “third person effect” which may not be immediately apparent to readers in a general audience or even a sociology or communications media department. I am in the process of currently formatting the paper and using section headers and a proper reference page. I realize now that I should have annotated the notes on results, discussion, and conclusion earlier because I will now have to move a substantial amount of my conclusion to the discussion section. The addition of proper APA formatting also means that I will have to use subheadings in the methods section to cover participants and survey methodology.

I enjoyed reading the two papers which I received, as they both related to sociology. I corrected grammatical errors, because I feel that it would be better to correct these sooner in the writing process than later. I found the most useful strategy for me when grading for content was to first read through the paper without making any corrections or notes, and then reading it a second or third time and making notes in formatting, conventions, flow, logical order, and so forth.

Post #14: Results, Discussion, and Conclusion

The first article on the results section of a research paper is by the language center at the Asian Institute of Technology. The article suggested various tips and recommendations on what to include in the results section of a research paper. Here are a few of the tips which were offered:

• The data should be presented using an easy-to-follow format, utilizing graphics when appropriate.
• Any graphs or figures should have a caption explaining the significance.
• Point out certain important trends rather than include statistics with no accompanying explanation.
• There are two different ways to write the results section – write the results and then the discussion, or have discussion accompany sections of the results.
• Some raw data may be better suited for the appendix.

The second article I found on writing the results section suggested many of the same techniques and principles. For example:

• Provide context to the results such as which question the data in answering.
• Do not interpret the results; save this for the discussion section.
• Do not repeat data, put any raw data into an appendix.
• Refer to figures by number and label them.
• Either include tables in the results section on as an appendix.

The next section in a research paper is the discussion section, where the data should be analyzed, the significance explained, and provide an explanation of any errors in testing or unforeseen problems. The first source I viewed gave the following information about the discussions section:

• If the findings support the hypothesis, explain the background behind why the theory is correct. If the findings are contrary to the hypothesis, explain why it is possible to find a contradictory response.
• Explain if the findings agree with others who have performed similar research.
• Explain what types of experiments would be proper for further study.
• Do not introduce new results in the discussion.

The second source is the same source used in the results section, as it gives formatting recommendations for all parts of a research paper. Some of the recommendations from this source are:

• Support or reject a hypothesis or declare a hypothesis indeterminate if there is not enough data. Do not say a result is “inconclusive.”
• Suggest future research as recommendation for future study.
• Explain if the designed experiment was controlled sufficiently and if there were any problems.

The final section, the conclusion, should summarize the main ideas of the research and solidify the significance of the research to the reader. Some tips provided by my first source include:

• Play the “So what?” game: provide a dialogue which forces you to explain the significance of the research to a partner.
• Return to themes present in the introduction
• Do not use phrases such as “in conclusion”, “in summary” or “in closing”.
• Do not introduce new topics in the conclusion.
• Avoid emotional appeals.

The second source provides the following tips on writing a conclusion:

• Restate the main ideas of the research in a very concise manner.
• The conclusion should be short. Do not repeat long sections of the paper.
• Use “signpost words” to help the reader transition into the conclusion. (ex. “next”, “finally”)
• The final sentence should bring the reader to a mental conclusion. Possibilities include a brief anecdote, an appropriate quotation, a humorous statement, a simile, or a brief statement about future research.

References

Caprette, David R.(2007, August 20). How to write a research paper. Retrieved April 20, 2010 from http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~bioslabs/tools/report/reportform.html

Department of Biology, Bates College. (2008, September 25). How to Write Guide: Sections of the Paper. Retrieved April 20, 2010 from http://abacus.bates.edu/~ganderso/biology/resources/writing/HTWsections.html

Language Center, Asian Institute of Technology (2003). Writing up Research: Results. Retrieved April 20, 2010 from http://www.languages.ait.ac.th/EL21RES.HTM

Rockler-Gladen, Naomi. (2008, November 17). How to write a College Term Paper Conclusion: Effective Tips for Ending an Essay.. Retrieved April 20, 2010 from http://studyskills.suite101.com/article.cfm/how_to_write_a_college_term_paper_conclusion

UNC Writing Center. (2010, February 11). Conclusions. Retrieved April 20, 2010 from http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/conclusions.html

Post #13: Combined Paper Evaluation

I had previously added on parts sequentially to my paper, therefore I didn’t have much trouble creating a collective work. The most difficult part occurred when I combined my introduction and my literature review, because through the literature review, I focused on something very narrow, whereas the topic was more broad in the introduction. This was reflected in the choice of a new title. At this point, I am going to transfer the survey to a digital form in the next two days. After this, I will begin to send out invitations and collect data over the next week. Additionally, I am going to work on a revised literature review in the same time period. Although the present literature review contains fairly focused information on grassroots surveillance, I feel I could draw more information from sociological motivations behind traditional stalking and discover relations to peer monitoring. I currently have two books on the subject; although they are older, they are still relevant to traditional stalking and privacy concern formation. I also want to add some more detailed information on the nature of online friendships, while remaining relevant to my topic.