•  Title

•  Abstract
•  Introduction
•  Literature Review
•  Research questions/ hypotheses
•  Methodology
•  Results
•  Discussion, including CONTRIBUTIONS and
LIMITATIONS
•  Conclusion
•  Form the first impression for reviewers and
readers
•  In many forms of publication, e.g., online,
browsers see only title, or title and
abstract, and then decide whether to
download
•  They frame the article for the reader
•  As for books and movies, the title either
intrigues and “sells” or bores and confuses…
•  Titles should describe exactly what the paper is
about.
•  Initial part of title should be relatively short, for a
“running head” on top of journal papers
•  Frequently, there is a title, then a colon and a
subtitle
•  Do not have multiple clauses
•  For an experimental or other empirical
study with a few independent variables:
•  “The effects of variables a and b on Y”
•  For a theoretical review or paper:
something that indicates that it is not an
empirical study, such as “meta-analysis” or
“theory” in the title
•  Mobilizing Informational Social Capital in
Cyber Space: Online Social Networks and
Knowledge Sharing
–  Not clear what will be in paper
–  Multiple possibilities presented in title
–  Too long
•  Rewrite
–  Online Social Networks and Knowledge
Sharing
•  Knowledge Acquisition Through Computer-
Mediated Discussions: Potential of Semantic
Network Representations and Effect of
Conceptual Facilitation Restrictiveness
–  Too long
–  Tries to say everything that is in paper
•  Rewrite
–  Semantic Network Representations for
Knowledge Acquisition in Computer-Mediated
Discussions
•  Try to think of something catchy or even
witty; in any case, succinct
•  Frequent form = A well known idiom: real
title that translates it in a new way and
describes the study
•  BUT: it should not be too “cute” and
irrelevant
•  To Have and To Hold: Exploring personal
archives
•  (source= a novel title by Hemingway; but it
is not clear WHAT the paper is really
about)
•  Alan Dennis, master of titling- classic
empirical studies:
•  A.R. Dennis, A. Pinsonneault, K. M. Hilmer H. Barki, R.B.
“Patterns in
Gallupe, M. Huber, and F. Bellavance,
Electronic Brainstorming : The Effects of
Synergy and Social Loafing on Group Idea
Generation,” International Journal of e-
Collaboration, 1:4, 2005, 38-57.
•  M.L. Williams, A.R. Dennis, A. Stam, and J.E. Aronson,
“The impact of DSS use and information
load on errors and decision quality,”
European Journal of Operations Research
“Information
•  A.R. Dennis and N. J. Taylor,
Foraging on the Web: The Effects of
“Acceptable” Internet Delays on Multi-page
Information Search Behavior,” Decision
Support Systems
•  Dennis, A.R. Information exchange and
use in group decision making: you can
lead a group to information but you can’t
make it think. MIS Quarterly, 20, 4 1996,
433-455.
 “Breaking the
•  A. R. Dennis, T. A. Carte, and G. Kelly,
Rules: Success and Failure in Groupware-
Supported Business Process Engineering,”
Decision Support Systems, 36:1, 2003, pp. 31-47.
“A Meta Analysis of
•  A.R. Dennis and M. L. Williams,
Group Size Effects in Electronic
Brainstorming: More Heads are Better than
One,” International Journal of e-Collaboration, 1:1,
2005, pp. 24-42.
•  Purpose
•  What Should be in an Abstract?
•  Common Problems
•  Difference between Abstract and Introduction
•  Examples
–  Good abstracts
–  Poor abstracts
•  Get paper accepted
–  When a reviewer reads your paper they form an
image of what it is about from the title and the
abstract
–  The reviewer uses this impression to interpret the rest
of the information in the paper
–  If the abstract is disorganized or incomplete, this will
leave reviewer with initial impression of paper that
may be hard to change
•  Get paper cited by others
–  Researchers are busy people
–  Often they do not read entire papers, only the
abstract
–  A good abstract will help a busy researcher to
skim your paper, and possibly get you cited
–  Many search programs do a keyword in
context search so that words in abstract help
your paper to be found
•  Help readers build a good picture of what
is in your paper
–  Useful for individuals reviewing papers they
have read
–  Useful for individuals searching for a particular
piece of evidence
–  Helps with the reading of a complex paper
1.  Opening sentence or two describe the
problem or problem domain- perhaps its
importance- and your objectives.
2.  Next few sentences explain your
concepts/ theories/ approach, perhaps
research questions
3.  Your method should be described in 1-2
sentences
•  4. Your major findings need to be
summarized (related to your research
questions)
•  5. Conclusions/ contributions need to be
summarized in 1-2 sentences
•  6. Write the whole thing for the non-expert
in your domain.
•  Subjective words such as “I” or “we” or
“my”
•  Anywhere in an article: slang
•  Reference citations, since they cannot be
included in the abstract
•  Do NOT repeat exactly the wording that is
also in the opening paragraphs. Body
should be less succinct.
Go (Con)figure: Subgroups, Imbalance, and
Isolates in Geographically Dispersed Teams
(O’Leary and Mortensen 2010)
Research regarding geographically dispersed
teams (GDTs) is increasingly common and has
yielded many insights into how spatio-temporal
and socio-demographic factors affect GDT
functioning and performance. Largely missing,
however, is research on the effects of the basic
geographic configuration of GDTs. ..
In this study, we explore the impact of GDT
configuration (i.e., the relative number of
team members at different sites,
independent of the characteristics of those
members or the spatial and temporal
distances among them) on individual,
subgroup, and team-level dynamics.
In a quasi-experimental setting, we examine
the effects of configuration using a sample
of 62 six-person teams in four different
one and two-site configurations. ..
As predicted based on social categorization, we find that
configuration significantly affects team dynamics –
independent of spatio-temporal distance and socio-
demographic factors. More specifically, we find that the
social categorization in teams with geographically-based
subgroups (defined as two or more members per site)
triggers significantly weaker identification with the team,
less effective transactive memory, more conflict, and more
coordination problems. Furthermore, imbalance (i.e., the
uneven distribution of members across sites) in the size of
subgroups invokes a competitive, coalitional mentality that
exacerbates these effects; subgroups with a numerical
minority of team members report significantly poorer
scores on identification, transactive memory, conflict, and
coordination problems.
Furthermore, imbalance in the size of subgroups
increases problems.

( vs…. Furthermore, imbalance (i.e., the uneven

distribution of members across sites) in the size
of subgroups invokes a competitive, coalitional
mentality that exacerbates these effects;
subgroups with a numerical minority of team
members report significantly poorer scores on
identification, transactive memory, conflict, and
coordination problems.)
•  Too long
•  Too much detail
•  Too short
•  Failure to include important information
–  Objective of research
–  Methodology
ABSTRACT
–  Main purpose of abstract is
to summarize paper
–  Abstracts should be short –
should only contain
summary information
INTRODUCTION
–  Main purpose of
introduction is to present
context or background for
paper
–  Introductions are longer –
often contain guides to
reading paper
•  To situate the research in its research field
•  To document why the research being
presented is important
•  To state the research problem the paper
will solve
•  To present the steps that will be taken to
solve the problem
•  Introductions create a cognitive structure
for the reader which helps this person
understand the research being presented
– The cognitive structure is then used to
store each new item of information
presented in the paper
•  Introductions let the reader know if the
work presented is relevant – what they are
looking for
•  Context / background for the research
•  Rationale for conducting the research
•  A description of the problem being solved
•  The steps the researcher will take to solve
the problem
Design is a fundamental part of the product
development process. Conceptually, design is viewed
as a structured, multi-phased, iterative process which
transforms a need into a product. Because modern
technology is complex, it is unusual for an individual to
tackle a complex product design alone. Often, a small
team is gathered at the initial stage of the design
process. However, group work often introduces
problems of organization, coordination and
communication. Communication inadequacies existing
among team members is a major impediment to the
orderly and effective progression of the design process,
especially when they are not meeting face-to-face.
Design is a fundamental part of the product
development process. Conceptually, design is viewed
as a structured, multi-phased, iterative process which
transforms a need into a product. Because modern
technology is complex, it is unusual for an individual to
tackle a complex product design alone. Often, a small
team is gathered at the initial stage of the design
process. However, group work often introduces
problems of organization, coordination and
communication. Communication inadequacies
existing among team members is a major impediment
to the orderly and effective progression of the design
process, especially when they are not meeting face-to-
face.
As more collaboration occurs across geographically
distributed locations, applying technology to support
synchronous remote collaboration is being explored
(Tang and Minneman, 1990,1991; Minneman and
Bly, 1990; Greenberg and Bohnet, 1991; Ishii,
1990). The emergence of computer supported
synchronous shared drawing tools has made it
possible for designers to collaborate on a design
when they are not meeting face-to-face. These
tools allow users to draw simultaneously on a
shared workspace. Although these tools are
exceedingly useful, we believe that the
management of multiple inputs remains a significant
issue in their design.
To understand the group idea management
behaviors, we studied videotapes of drawing
space activities collected by various researchers
and reviewed findings on prior research in group
design studies, group communication, engineering
design studies, and social psychology. Findings
from these studies provided valuable insights to
shared drawing activities.
These insights allowed us to define requirements
of shared drawing tools to support the shared
drawing activities. We illustrate the requirements
in the design of a prototype, CaveDraw and
evaluate its usability through user testing.
•  The scope of the problem – what the
research will not address
•  The limitations of the research
•  The methods, models, approaches that
will be taken in the research (assumptions)
 Our approach differs in that our goal is to help
users navigate to, not detect, recognition errors.
This shift in focus is motivated by the following
reasons:

1. data confirming that the error detection and

navigation can consume as much as one-third of
the time experienced users spend creating
•  Set the context
•  Define the research problem
•  Propose a solution
•  By claiming centrality – why the field is
important
–  AND / OR
•  By moving from general to specific
–  AND / OR
•  By reviewing relevant items in prior
research
•  Minimum safe low temperatures (above freezing)
and high humidity control are the most important
tools for extending shelf life in
vegetables." (Barth et al., 1993)

•  “most important tools” indicates that these two

factors are crucial
The question we address here is how
technological change occurs when it is the
overall system that needs to be changed.
In particular, how can we begin and
sustain a technological transition away
from hydrocarbon based technologies?
(Street and Miles, 1996)
•  By outlining the purpose of the work
–  AND / OR
•  By describing present research and methods
that apply
–  AND
•  By describing principal findings, results
–  AND
•  By indicating the structure of the research
•  This paper is organized as follows. Alternative
representations of demand and supply are
discussed in sections 2 and 3 respectively. The
model is described in section 4. Section 5
presents an application of the tool to a gas
reserves development timing problem in
Indonesia. The final section presents
conclusions, limitations, and contributions. The
full set of equations is given in the appendix and
is referred to throughout the text.
(Boucher and Smeers, 1996)