[Sigmet-officers] Paper contest - Four diverse points
Jonathan Levitt
jonathan at levitt.net
Fri Apr 1 10:47:20 EDT 2011
Hi,
Four diverse points:
(1) Following on from Dietmar’s feedback on the additional criteria, I agree that we add the criteria of ‘Significance’ and ‘Quality of methods’.
(2) I would be pleased to distribute the papers with Dietmar.
(3) We have an extra reviewer, Henk Moed.
(4) I have informed students of informetrics of the contest. I suggest that officers do the same.
Jonathan.
--- On Thu, 31/3/11, Judit Bar-Ilan <barilaj at mail.biu.ac.il> wrote:
From: Judit Bar-Ilan <barilaj at mail.biu.ac.il>
Subject: [Sigmet-officers] Bidding
To: sigmet-officers at asis.org
Date: Thursday, 31 March, 2011, 19:10
Dear Dietmar,
Actually easychair has a bidding system, but the bidding process takes extra time, so it might be better that Jonathan and you distribute the papers.
Regards,
Judit
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 7:50 PM, <sigmet-officers-request at asis.org> wrote:
Send Sigmet-officers mailing list submissions to
sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sigmet-officers-request at mail.asis.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
sigmet-officers-owner at mail.asis.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Sigmet-officers digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Update on the paper contest (Dietmar Wolfram)
2. Re: Update on the paper contest (Jonathan Levitt)
3. Re: Update on the paper contest (Dietmar Wolfram)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 08:19:29 -0500 (CDT)
From: Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
To: Cassidy Sugimoto <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
Cc: SIG MET <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
Message-ID:
<585091429.20397.1301577569797.JavaMail.root at mail01.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I also like the idea of including criteria for quality and originality.
It looks like EasyChair does not have a bidding feature. Therefore, to keep the assignment?process manageable, I suggest having two officers perform this task. Having more involved could slow things down. Those interested could let Jonathan know.
Dietmar
----- Original Message -----
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 11:20:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
I know we don't want too many evaluation criteria, but I would also like to see components for the quality of the methods and the originality of the research...(and maybe "importance" or research or some other word for assessing contribution or potential to advance knowledge...)? Just my two cents--feel free to disregard.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net > wrote:
Dear all,
?
Of the ten potential reviewers, four have accepted (Kevin Boyack, Katherine McCain, Ronald Roussueau and Mike Thelwall), three declined and three have not yet replied.
?
I suggest that we finalise the reviewing criteria well before the deadline. ? On the basis of previous discussions, I suggest in addition to the default criteria (Overall evaluation, -3 to 3;
Reviewer confidence, 0 to 4) we have the following criteria:
(1) ????? Potential for publication (1 to 5).
(2) ????? Quality of the writing (1 to 5).
(3) ????? Comments on potential for publication and quality of writing.
?
As the reviewers prefer an absolute score, I suggest we go for it. ? We don?t have anyone to normalise, but hopefully the results will not be too skewed by not normalising.
?
I have two questions:
(a) ?????? How are the papers assigned to reviewers?
(b) ????? Is there any way of making sure that ?? reviewers receive their papers ASAP.
?
Judit wrote ?I am not sure, but I think that there is a way to send the scores to the authors - Chaoqun can probably test this.? ? ? Chaoqun could you please find out and also how many papers have already been submitted.
?
Best regards,
Jonathan.
?
?
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
--
Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD
Assistant Professor
School of Library and Information Science
Indiana University Bloomington
http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~sugimoto
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmet-officers/attachments/20110331/57aa6c41/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 08:57:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jonathan Levitt <jonathan at levitt.net>
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
To: SIG MET <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
Message-ID: <149506.50757.qm at web1210.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi,
?
Thanks Dietmar for your suggestions.? I have given my feedback on Cassidy?s suggestion in my last posting.? However I can amplify.? For ISSI I found it hard to assess the originality of a submission outside my core area (on on Web link analysis).? For my part I would not like to undertake additional work that is not central to our remit.? But, given that both you and Cassidy want additional criteria, I am content to include them, provided that reviewers could choose not to score for these additional criteria.? Is this possible??
?
Could you pleases clarify what is a bidding feature?? It is important for things to movie quickly, especially as one reviewer has asked to be sent the papers as early as possible.? I agree that we need twp officers to be involved in this process, and volunteer to be one of these officers.? Could someone else who will give this matter high priority please volunteer to join me in this process?
?
Thanks,
Jonathan.
--- On Thu, 31/3/11, Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu> wrote:
From: Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
To: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
Date: Thursday, 31 March, 2011, 14:19
#yiv993792492 p {margin:0;}
I also like the idea of including criteria for quality and originality.
?
It looks like EasyChair does not have a bidding feature. Therefore, to keep the assignment?process manageable, I suggest having two officers perform this task. Having more involved could slow things down. Those interested could let Jonathan know.
?
Dietmar
From: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 11:20:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
I know we don't want too many evaluation criteria, but I would also like to see components for the quality of the methods and the originality of the research...(and maybe "importance" or research or some other word for assessing contribution or potential to advance knowledge...)? Just my two cents--feel free to disregard.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jonathan Levitt <jonathan at levitt.net> wrote:
Dear all,
?
Of the ten potential reviewers, four have accepted (Kevin Boyack, Katherine McCain, Ronald Roussueau and Mike Thelwall), three declined and three have not yet replied.
?
I suggest that we finalise the reviewing criteria well before the deadline. ?On the basis of previous discussions, I suggest in addition to the default criteria (Overall evaluation, -3 to 3;
Reviewer confidence, 0 to 4) we have the following criteria:
(1)????? Potential for publication (1 to 5).
(2)????? Quality of the writing (1 to 5).
(3)????? Comments on potential for publication and quality of writing.
?
As the reviewers prefer an absolute score, I suggest we go for it.? We don?t have anyone to normalise, but hopefully the results will not be too skewed by not normalising.
?
I have two questions:
(a)?????? How are the papers assigned to reviewers?
(b)????? Is there any way of making sure that ??reviewers receive their papers ASAP.
?
Judit wrote ?I am not sure, but I think that there is a way to send the scores to the authors - Chaoqun can probably test this.?? ?Chaoqun could you please find out and also how many papers have already been submitted.
?
Best regards,
Jonathan.
?
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
--
Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD
Assistant Professor
School of Library and Information Science
Indiana University Bloomington
http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~sugimoto
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmet-officers/attachments/20110331/c5729ac6/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 12:49:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
To: Jonathan Levitt <jonathan at levitt.net>
Cc: SIG MET <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
Message-ID:
<1987307328.38308.1301593799014.JavaMail.root at mail01.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I don't know if some criteria may be left blank. If originality assessment?might be problematic , then perhaps a criterion that addresses the significance of the research problem could be used instead. You could have two well-crafted submissions-- but if one is on an interesting and novel topic and the other is on a perennial topic that has been studied to death, it would be nice to acknowledge the submission that makes the larger contribution.
A bidding feature on a conference submission system allows reviewers to?see submission?abstracts and then indicate which of the submissions they would be interested in reviewing.?Assignments are then based on the?expressed interest. ?I'd be willing to join you in assigning the submissions to reviewers if no one else has done so already.
Dietmar
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Levitt" <jonathan at levitt.net>
To: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 10:57:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
Hi,
?
Thanks Dietmar for your suggestions. ? I have given my feedback on Cassidy?s suggestion in my last posting. ? However I can amplify. ? For ISSI I found it hard to assess the originality of a submission outside my core area (on on Web link analysis). ? For my part I would not like to undertake additional work that is not central to our remit. ? But, given that both you and Cassidy want additional criteria, I am content to include them, provided that reviewers could choose not to score for these additional criteria. ? Is this possible? ?
?
Could you pleases clarify what is a bidding feature? ? It is important for things to movie quickly, especially as one reviewer has asked to be sent the papers as early as possible. ? I agree that we need twp officers to be involved in this process, and volunteer to be one of these officers. ? Could someone else who will give this matter high priority please volunteer to join me in this process?
?
Thanks,
Jonathan.
--- On Thu, 31/3/11, Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu> wrote:
From: Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
To: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
Date: Thursday, 31 March, 2011, 14:19
I also like the idea of including criteria for quality and originality.
?
It looks like EasyChair does not have a bidding feature. Therefore, to keep the assignment?process manageable, I suggest having two officers perform this task. Having more involved could slow things down. Those interested could let Jonathan know.
?
Dietmar
From: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 11:20:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
I know we don't want too many evaluation criteria, but I would also like to see components for the quality of the methods and the originality of the research...(and maybe "importance" or research or some other word for assessing contribution or potential to advance knowledge...)? Just my two cents--feel free to disregard.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net > wrote:
Dear all,
?
Of the ten potential reviewers, four have accepted (Kevin Boyack, Katherine McCain, Ronald Roussueau and Mike Thelwall), three declined and three have not yet replied.
?
I suggest that we finalise the reviewing criteria well before the deadline. ? On the basis of previous discussions, I suggest in addition to the default criteria (Overall evaluation, -3 to 3;
Reviewer confidence, 0 to 4) we have the following criteria:
(1) ????? Potential for publication (1 to 5).
(2) ????? Quality of the writing (1 to 5).
(3) ????? Comments on potential for publication and quality of writing.
?
As the reviewers prefer an absolute score, I suggest we go for it. ? We don?t have anyone to normalise, but hopefully the results will not be too skewed by not normalising.
?
I have two questions:
(a) ?????? How are the papers assigned to reviewers?
(b) ????? Is there any way of making sure that ?? reviewers receive their papers ASAP.
?
Judit wrote ?I am not sure, but I think that there is a way to send the scores to the authors - Chaoqun can probably test this.? ? ? Chaoqun could you please find out and also how many papers have already been submitted.
?
Best regards,
Jonathan.
?
?
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
--
Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD
Assistant Professor
School of Library and Information Science
Indiana University Bloomington
http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~sugimoto
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
From: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 11:20:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
I know we don't want too many evaluation criteria, but I would also like to see components for the quality of the methods and the originality of the research...(and maybe "importance" or research or some other word for assessing contribution or potential to advance knowledge...)? Just my two cents--feel free to disregard.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net > wrote:
Dear all,
?
Of the ten potential reviewers, four have accepted (Kevin Boyack, Katherine McCain, Ronald Roussueau and Mike Thelwall), three declined and three have not yet replied.
?
I suggest that we finalise the reviewing criteria well before the deadline. ? On the basis of previous discussions, I suggest in addition to the default criteria (Overall evaluation, -3 to 3;
Reviewer confidence, 0 to 4) we have the following criteria:
(1) ????? Potential for publication (1 to 5).
(2) ????? Quality of the writing (1 to 5).
(3) ????? Comments on potential for publication and quality of writing.
?
As the reviewers prefer an absolute score, I suggest we go for it. ? We don?t have anyone to normalise, but hopefully the results will not be too skewed by not normalising.
?
I have two questions:
(a) ?????? How are the papers assigned to reviewers?
(b) ????? Is there any way of making sure that ?? reviewers receive their papers ASAP.
?
Judit wrote ?I am not sure, but I think that there is a way to send the scores to the authors - Chaoqun can probably test this.? ? ? Chaoqun could you please find out and also how many papers have already been submitted.
?
Best regards,
Jonathan.
?
?
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
--
Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD
Assistant Professor
School of Library and Information Science
Indiana University Bloomington
http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~sugimoto
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmet-officers/attachments/20110331/1e6b88d9/attachment.html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
End of Sigmet-officers Digest, Vol 5, Issue 33
**********************************************
--
Judit Bar-Ilan
Head of Department
Department of Information Science
Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 52900, Israel
Tel: 972-3-5318351 Fax: 972-3-7384027
email: barilaj at mail.biu.ac.il
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Sigmet-officers mailing list
Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmet-officers/attachments/20110401/7fa517b3/attachment.html
More information about the Sigmet-officers
mailing list