Writing for Top Ranking Journals

+
Professor Shahzad Uddin
Editor
Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies
University of Essex

1
Slide
+ Plan for Today

 Introduce JAEE
 Structure of a good paper
 Some writing tips to avoid desk rejected
 Submission and handling of the reviews

Slide 2
+ JAEE

 JAEE launched in 2010 – Only Accounting Journals in Emerging

Economies
 Defining “Emerging Economies”
 Our definition is broad – excluding rich economies – they are mainly
Western European and Anglo-American Countries.
 JAEE ranked in:
- NSD (Norway) -1
- ABS (UK)
- ADBC
- Scopus
- SJR – Q1
- SSCI indexed (impact factor)
Slide 3
 Crafting a Research Paper for Top
+ Ranking Journals

 Top Ranking: ABS, ADBC, SJR, and NSD Journal Ranking Outlet

Slide 4
+ Structure of the Paper

 Good Intro: Intellectual Puzzle

 Review of Relevant Literature
 Theoretical Framework
 Research Method
 Presentation of Findings
 Discussions
 Conclusions

Slide 5
+ Good Paper – Good Introduction

 Intellectual Puzzle provides academic Importance: reference to the

literature and debates in the area
 Practical Importance: Policy Relevance
 This may then give rise to research questions (RQs).

Slide 6
+ Expectations

 Academic Importance
 - Academic Debate
 Practical Importance (if relevant)
 Development of Research Question - Problematisation
- establishing the gap in the literature
 Context/Location importance
 Theoretical directions (if needed)
 Research Questions
 Listing the contributions (for some journals)
 Plan for the paper

Slide 7
+ Academic Importance

 Academic Debate
- Does it come from the context?
- Does it from the literature?

 Specify the literature first more broadly where you are contributing
- For instance, Corporate Social Responsibility, Earning Management, Corporate
Governance, Corporate Board Literature?
 Specify the debate within the literature
- Find the debate within the board literature that you are contributing to

Slide 8
+ Review of Literature

 Focused to the RQs

 Critical (non-descriptive)
 Review the literature to refine RQs
 Does it provide a conceptual framework for the
research? If so, the nature of the framework must be
quite explicit – how does it shape the research?
 If the research is quantitative, the RQs will probably be
expressed in the form of hypotheses.

Slide 9
Feature of good Lit Review

Relate to research question

 
Identify key issues
 
Demonstrate your knowledge of the topic
 
Distinguish between fact and opinion
 
Highlight conflicting evidence
 
Summarize what has be done and what needs to be done
 
Pose a formal research question that is linked to your
literature review

Slide
+ Theoretical Framework

 Theoretical framework or conceptual framework might be developed

from the existing literature
 Alternatively borrow from other disciplines: economics (quantitative
studies) sociology, anthropology (for qualitative studies)
 Selecting a theory
 Use Theory as a guide

Slide 11
+ Research Methods

 How does the research method address the RQs and make
use of the literature just reviewed.
 This section should justify the method (or methodology used),
and also the data collection and analysis methods.
 Why is a particular sample selected, or particular case(s)
studied?
 Why are the methods of data analysis the appropriate ones to
use for this study?
 For case studies it is important to explain how the data was
analysed – how did you get from the mass of information
collected to the “story told” and analysis presented?
Slide 12
+ Writing the research Method Section

 General Points (both for quants and qual studies)

- Write the method section as directly and clearly as possible

- Ask your colleagues to read it to see whether they understand it
- Follow step-by-step guidelines
- Explain everything that is required to understand the findings/results (especially needed
for quants paper)
- The main purpose of the research method section is to provide details so that the same
can be replicated by others

Slide 13
+ Presentation of Findings

 In quantitative papers this is usually quite straightforward –

but it should be focussed around the RQs.
 Testing hypotheses will usually provide an appropriate
structure.
 But if you are not testing hypotheses, it is important to ensure
that the structure of the presentation focuses on the research
issues and the RQs.
 Use theoretical guidelines to present the case – implicitly or
explicitly (if any)
 Also, allow the evidence comes through (not too much
clouded by theoretical terms.

Slide 14
+ Discussions

 This should go beyond the findings themselves,

 Use the theoretical concepts (if any) to say something more than
empirical findings: explore the implications
 What do the findings say about the broad research issue/intellectual
puzzle which you introduced at the outset?
 How does it impact on the state of knowledge in the literature that
was reviewed earlier?

Slide 15
+ Conclusion

 These should be kept short and set out the papers contribution –
i.e., its message(s). This should answer the “so what?” question.
 What are the practical implications and/or implications for future
research?
 There should also be some acknowledgement of the limitations of
the study and how they might be overcome in future work.
 But always finish on a positive note – what has been achieved (not
what has not been done!)

Slide 16
+ Writing: Practical Help!

 See each paragraph/section as staircase – which ultimately

lead to you to the final floor.
 Ensuring all terms are clearly defined and use consistently
(don’t assume the reader knows this) unless it is widely known.
 Careful about confusing words
 Do not change terms just for linguistic style – i.e., simply to use
different words.
 Ensure constant terms from sentence to sentence
 All points should be supported by arguments or by evidence –
from the study or from the literature (i.e., references).

Slide 17
+ Writing: Practical Help

 Where you use references they must be relevant.

 Avoid too many references.
 Avoid unsubstantiated assertions.
 Be very careful about making more general claims than
your evidence supports.
 Avoid long and complex sentences, with several sub-
clauses.
 Finally, be careful with the use of past and present
tense.

Slide 18
+ Good Paper - Features

 Catchy beginning
 Contribution to the debate
 Demonstrate the scope of the literature, understanding of the
literature
 Clear contributions: Empirically and Theoretically
 Good data set and a relevant theory/theories
 Acknowledge the limitations
 Identify potential areas for further investigation

Slide 19
+ Be Strategic (or use common sense!)

 Send the paper to journal which might be interested: read

the scopes of the journal – find out potential readers
 Find out about the editorial board members/editors
 Make sure you refer articles from the journal you are
sending to
 Make sure no language problems – please proof read
before sending it to the journal
 Read the instructions of the journal
 Getting the paper to be considered for the review – half job
done!

Slide 20
+ Be Strategic

 Once you receive the reviews – the game begins!

 You must appear to consider the reviewer’s comments
 Do not rush it - even if small revision
 Careful with the response to the reviewers
 Take extension if you need
 Be firm but polite if you do not agree with the reviewers

Slide 21