[Sigmet-officers] Invitation Letter sent

[Chaoqun Ni]

Dear Jonathan,

I have sent out the invitation letter to the six potential reviewers. Up
till now, I only heard from Dr. Blaise Cronin.  That is what he said.

 from Blaise Cronin <bcronin at indiana.edu> to Chaoqun Ni <chni at indiana.edu>
 date Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 3:43 PM subject Re: Invitation for Reviewing
SIG/MET student paper contest mailed-by indiana.edu *
*
Forgive me, but I think I'll decline.  Best of luck, nonetheless.

I am still waiting for other's responses. I will send you their response as
soon as I receive.


Best,
Chaoqun


On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Jonathan Levitt <jonathan at levitt.net>wrote:

> *
>
> Dear Chaoqun,
>
>
>
> It is now time that you contacted the first batch of external reviewers.  I
> paste below some of the main postings on this topic.
>
>
>
> My final suggestion is that you include in the letter the names of the five
> officers who have agreed to review (Cassidy, Dietmar, Jonathan, Judit and
> Stasa).  Hopefully this will encourage some 'borderline' reviewers to say
> 'Yes'.
>
>
>
> Could you please let the list know when you have sent these letters and
> post to the list the responses?
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jonathan.
>
> *
> From: Cassidy Sugimoto <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Reviewers
> To: "Jonathan Levitt" <jonathan at levitt.net>
> Cc: sigmet-officers at asis.org
> Date: Tuesday, 22 March, 2011, 12:48
>
> Fabulous idea, Jonathan! I would heartily support this plan.
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Jonathan Levitt <jonathan at levitt.net<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jonathan@levitt.net>
> > wrote:
>
>   *Dear Chaquon,*
>
> * *
>
> *Thanks for your list of people we could contact.  I agree with the
> suggestion that we ask in stages.  It does not seem good to have too many
> that offer: If we reject people who offer, they may be reluctant to say
> ‘Yes’ next time or be involved with the SIGH again and there is a limit to
> how many reviewers we can deploy.  I suggest that we first contact six.  In
> the unlikely event that all six accept, we could ask four to review in Stage
> 1 and two in Stage 2.*
>
> * *
>
> *I suggest that we first contact the following:*
>
> *Blaise Cronin (supported the starting of the SIG)*
>
> *Gene Garfield (attended the SIG meeting, supported the starting of the
> SIG)*
>
> *Loet Leydersdorff (supported the starting of the SIG)*
>
> *Katherine McCain (attended the SIG meeting)*
>
> *Ronald Roussueau (helped run an ASSIST informetric workshop).*
>
> *Mike Thelwall (helped run an ASSIST informetric workshop).*
>
> * *
>
> *All six have (/have had) ASIST involvement and are highly regarded in
> informetrics.  Three are from Europe and three from the US.  The letters
> could be ‘personalised’ by thanking the first four for their previous
> support of the SIG and thanking the other two for helping to run an ASIST
> informetric workshop.*
>
> * *
>
> *Best regards,*
>
> *Jonathan.*
>
>
>
> --- On *Tue, 22/3/11, Jonathan Levitt <jonathan at levitt.net>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Jonathan Levitt <jonathan at levitt.net>
> Subject: [Sigmet-officers] Paper Contest - Letter
> To: sigmet-officers at asis.org
> Date: Tuesday, 22 March, 2011, 13:39
>
>    *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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers-request@asis.org>
> > wrote:
>
> Send Sigmet-officers mailing list submissions to
>        sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers-request@mail.asis.org>
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        sigmet-officers-owner at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers-owner@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwolfram@uwm.edu>
> >
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Sigmet-officers Digest, Vol 5, Issue 13
> To: chni at indiana.edu<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=chni@indiana.edu>
> Cc: sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@mail.asis.org>,
> sigmet-officers at asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@asis.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <
> 498169351.981071.1300745251341.JavaMail.root at mail01.pantherlink.uwm.edu<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=498169351.981071.1300745251341.JavaMail.root@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=chni@indiana.edu>
> >
> To: sigmet-officers at asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@asis.org>
> Cc: sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers-request@asis.org>> wrote:
> > Send Sigmet-officers mailing list submissions to
> > ? ? ? ? sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers-request@mail.asis.org>
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > ? ? ? ? sigmet-officers-owner at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers-owner@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jonathan@levitt.net>>
> > Subject: [Sigmet-officers] the letter to external reviewers
> > To: chni at indiana.edu<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=chni@indiana.edu>
> > Cc: sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@mail.asis.org>
> > Message-ID: < 937331.60393.qm at web1208.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=937331.60393.qm@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jonathan@levitt.net>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From: Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jonathan@levitt.net>>
> > Subject: [Sigmet-officers] Paper contest: number of reviewers, letter to
> reviewers
> > To: sigmet-officers at asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=barilaj@mail.biu.ac.il>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From: Judit Bar-Ilan < barilaj at mail.biu.ac.il<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=barilaj@mail.biu.ac.il>>
> > Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Paper contest: appointment of reviewers
> > To: sigmet-officers at asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers-request@asis.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Send Sigmet-officers mailing list submissions to
> > ? ? ? ? sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers-request@mail.asis.org>
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > ? ? ? ? sigmet-officers-owner at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers-owner@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jonathan@levitt.net>>
> > Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Paper contest: appointment of reviewers
> > To: sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=sigmet-officers@mail.asis.org>
> > Message-ID: <
> <http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=403991.8284.qm@web1206.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> 403991.8284.qm at web1206.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=qm@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<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=barilaj@mail.biu.ac.il>
> >
> > -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sigmet-officers mailing list
> > Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org<http://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Sigmet-officers@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://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Sigmet-officers@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://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Sigmet-officers@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://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Sigmet-officers@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://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Sigmet-officers@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://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Sigmet-officers@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://uk.mc12.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Sigmet-officers@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/20110324/ad304cc5/attachment.html