[Sigmet-officers] Paper Contest - Letter

Tue Mar 22 09:39:34 EDT 2011

Hi,

I like Dietmar's suggestion of including the reviewers' names on the Web-site; their names could also be included in our report on the paper contest in our Newsletter.

I am not entirely happy about giving reviewers more than three weeks.  If we ask for the reviews by May 1, we could still give feedback well before the May 31 ASIST deadline.  If we opt for May 5, given that it will take us time to collate the reviews and send out the emails, students may only receive their feedback well into May.

My only other suggestion (apart from thanking the reviewer from their previous involvement; last email) is to amend 'between two to four' to 'three or four'.  I am concerned that some bibliometricians would consider that it would be inappropriate to select a winner based on only two papers per reviewer (even if there is a second stage of reviewing).

Jonathan.

--- On Mon, 21/3/11, Chaoqun Ni <chni at indiana.edu> wrote:

From: Chaoqun Ni <chni at indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Sigmet-officers Digest, Vol 5, Issue 15
To: sigmet-officers at asis.org
Cc: sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org, sigmet-officers-request at asis.org
Date: Monday, 21 March, 2011, 23:55

Dear Dr. Wolfram and all,

I think it is a good idea to include reviewers' names on sigmet website to acknowledge them. As for the potential reviewer list, I agree with Dr. Wolfram that we only need a fraction of them to keep the number of reviews manageable. The only reason why I gave a long list is that maybe only some of the listed names will be willing to be reviewers. But I am not sure about this.  How about I emailing some of them first and waiting for their responses. If there is a "reasonable" fraction of them willing to review, I will not email the rest of the listed name. If not, I will start to send another round of emails to some of the rest. Is that reasonable?

Best,
Chaoqun Ni

On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:08 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: Sigmet-officers Digest, Vol 5, Issue 13 (Dietmar Wolfram)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:07:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Sigmet-officers Digest, Vol 5, Issue 13
To: chni at indiana.edu
Cc: sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org, sigmet-officers at asis.org
Message-ID:
       <498169351.981071.1300745251341.JavaMail.root at mail01.pantherlink.uwm.edu>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Chaoqun,

The text of the?letter looks fine to me. Allowing a bit of wiggle room in the review date is a good idea. As an incentive for reviewer participation, I'm wondering if we include a statement?that reviewers will have their names included on?the SIG?website to acknowledge?their service (if the SIG officers think this is appropriate).

The list of names provided is?extensive. I suspect we will only need a fraction of those on the list to participate?to keep?the number of reviews?manageable.

Dietmar

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chaoqun Ni" <chni at indiana.edu>
To: sigmet-officers at asis.org
Cc: sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 3:34:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Sigmet-officers Digest, Vol 5, Issue 13

Dear All,

I just had the ?first draft of invitation letter for external reviewers. Would you please give some?comments?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/19OtWEVjhHZ-HgU0pwp_SKhuG__D59IiMRi8s8PCynzI/edit?hl=en&authkey=COnH2WM#

In the letter, I wrote that that the reviewing process will take place at approximately April 10th, 2011 to May 5th, 2011. I know that we wrote in the announcement that will would try to give feedback by the end of April, but I agree with you that it might be not very possible to get feedback from reviewers within 20 days. Will a 5-day extension make this better?

Here is a list of names who I can think of to be our potential external reviewers. Am I missing someone??
? https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UD27kmxTEyqgbzEynWj6xGUB3eT-Yqmx8_FdcNAvp8A/edit?hl=en&authkey=CJ6o7MQD

Best,
Chaoqun Ni
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 5:00 AM, ?< 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. the letter to external reviewers (Jonathan Levitt)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 11:02:18 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net >
> Subject: [Sigmet-officers] the letter to external reviewers
> To: chni at indiana.edu
> Cc: sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> Message-ID: < 937331.60393.qm at web1208.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Chaoqun,
> ?
> On Thuirsday I wrote "Chaoqun, could you please draft the letter to external reviewers?"? Could ?ypu pleae let me know when you are likely to send us your draft of the letter to external reviewers?
> ?
> Thanks,
> Jonathan.
> ?
>
>
> --- On Thu, 17/3/11, Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net > wrote:
>
>
> From: Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net >
> Subject: [Sigmet-officers] Paper contest: number of reviewers, letter to reviewers
> To: sigmet-officers at asis.org
> Date: Thursday, 17 March, 2011, 11:59
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear all,
> ?
> Thanks for your latest suggestions.? We have at least four reviewers amongst the officers and we have agreed to a maximum of four papers for reviewer. To me the most urgent matters are for us to decide how many external reviewers to enlist and for Chaoqun to contact them.
> ?
> Unfortunately we need to have enlisted reviewers before the April 10 deadline, but we won?t know how many papers to review until after the April 10 deadline (I sought to address this problem in my March 11 email).? Nor do we know in advance what percentage of the people contacted will agree to review. ?Has anyone any suggestions on how many external reviewers to enlist??
> ?
> Whilst we decide on how many external reviewers to enlist, I suggest that we prepare the letter to external reviewers.? Chaoqun, could you please draft the letter to external reviewers?
> ?
> Best regards,
> Jonathan.
>
> ?
> --- On Mon, 14/3/11, Judit Bar-Ilan < barilaj at mail.biu.ac.il > wrote:
>
>
> From: Judit Bar-Ilan < barilaj at mail.biu.ac.il >
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Paper contest: appointment of reviewers
> To: sigmet-officers at asis.org
> Date: Monday, 14 March, 2011, 6:30
>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> It is very easy to set up evaluation criteria in Easy Chair. Overall evaluation (on a scale of -3 to 3) and reviewer's confidence (on a scale of 0 to 4) are built in, and so are two textboxes, one for comments to the authors and one for comments to the other program committee members. Instead of a filling in the textbox it is possible to upload a file with the comments . Additional rating criteria can be added easily. For the ISSI conference these were:
> Significance of problem, Originality, Quality of methodology/treatment, Validity of claims and interpretation, Integration into prior art, Quality of writing and Overall assessment - all of these on a scale of 1 to 5.
>
> Obviously for the authors the free text narrative is much more important, but for deciding on the winner(s), scoring might be helpful, although I often find it difficult to assign scores to the evaluation criteria.
>
> For the paper contest we are supposed to give more detailed comments than for the papers submitted to ISSI conference (some of my co-reviewers for ISSI have not commented at all, or wrote 1-2 sentences), so I still think that seriously reviewing 6 papers per reviewer is too much.
>
> Regards,
> Judit
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 11:52 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: Paper contest: appointment of reviewers (Jonathan Levitt)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:52:48 -0800 (PST)
> From: Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net >
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Paper contest: appointment of reviewers
> To: sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> Message-ID: < 403991.8284.qm at web1206.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Dear all,
> ?
> Thanks Judit and Stasa for offering to review and for your interesting feedback.?
> ?
> I suggested six reviews per reviewer, as: (a) ISSI asked me to review six submissions and (b) the fewer the number of papers per reviewer the less liable their normalised score.? I am happy for us to opt for a four peepers per reviewer if we have a two stage review process; in the second stage the most highly rated papers from the first stage are re-reviewed.?
> ?
> Judit wrote ?What is the time frame for reviewing??? According to the call ?Authors are invited to submit manuscripts by midnight EST on Sunday, the 10th April 2011, to the following website ... We expect to have provided feedback on the submissions by the end of April 2011 and to have selected the winner and runner-up soon afterwards.?
> ?
> Stasa wrote ?Is our reviewing process going to be open-ended (similar to Scientometrics) where one just provides a narrative, or are we going to add more structure (similar to JASIST) where one needs to ?grade? the paper on a number of criteria we collectively determined are the most important in addition to the narrative??? To me the review process and criteria need to be consistent with the call.?
> ?
> Regarding the review process, according to the call ?The contest is designed, not only to recognize promising student research relating to the SIG, but also to provide feedback from specialists in the measurement of information production and use. Students will receive this feedback well before the deadline for submissions to the ASIS&T Annual Meeting? and ?There will be a winner, runner-up and, depending on the quantity of strong papers, a number of commended papers.? ?These extracts indicate that the SIG will (a) provide feedback on student research and (b) select a winner and runner-up. ?I suggest that in order to satisfy ?(a)? the reviewers will provide narrative feedback and in order to satisfy ?b? they provide an overall score for the paper that is then normalised.? Regarding the review criteria, according to the call ?The reviewers will particularly reward well-written, original research that has potential for publication in a
> ?peer-reviewed journal or for presentation at a refereed conference?; this indicates that the review criteria should focus on (a) the quality of the writing and (b) the potential for publication of the research.
> ?
> Stasa wrote ?I agree with Dietmar's suggestion that we have two reviewers per paper and add the third only if there are notable differences between the two reviewers.? ?I don?t understand how a third reviewer would help us satisfy the stated criteria of the call and it is likely to lengthen the process.? Perhaps someone will explain.
> ?
> Stasa wrote ?Who/when is going to create a template for reviewing in case we want to go this route??? I think we need to agree on the criteria before we can create a template for reviewing.? I found my reviewer template for ISSI on the Easuchair system; I presume SIG/MET can arrange something similar.? Judit, do you know how the reviewer template was arranged for ISSI?
> ?
> Bes regards,
> Jonathan.
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
> -----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/20110320/f9ea9494/attachment-0001.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 13
> **********************************************
>

_______________________________________________
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/20110321/963f7f24/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 15
**********************************************

-----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/20110322/db216767/attachment.html 