Good evening. Good evening, ma'am. Good evening. So we'll be we'll be starting soon, ma'am. Yeah, yeah, we can start as soon as you tell me. Yeah. Dr. Zanki, Mr. Good evening. Good evening, sir. Good evening. This is Professor Anand Sharma of KK Handik State of the University. Good evening, sir. You are from Surat? Yes. Okay. I have a friend, Dr. Zoyesh Desai. Do you know him? Yes, he is the principal of BRCM College. Right, right, right. Yeah, I don't know the name of that fellow. Okay. You keep on meeting him? Happen to meet him sometimes? Yeah, I happen to meet him often. Okay. I'll give him your regards. Yeah, please kindly convey our regards. He has finished at my house also while completing Guwahati once. Okay, okay. Because we attended the program together as I am indoor. Okay. It's all right, right. So looking forward to your lecture. All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Sarmasar Devapathada has not yet joined. So I think we'll start, sir. Sarmasar. Sarmasar. Yeah, we are supposed to start at 6.30. Yes, it's already started. Yes. Yes. So on behalf of KK Handik State of the University and the North East India Commerce and Management Association, I welcome you all to this webinar on how to publish a research article. Okay, we have with us Professor Zanke Mistry, she's Faculty of Finance in the Department of Business and Industrial Management, Bir Narmad, South Gujarat University, Surat. Before going to the main program, I'd like to request our bison seller insurance professor and then Sarmasar to speak a few words. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Devankar Malakar. Dr. Zanke Mistry, the esteemed speaker for this webinar, who will be delivering a lecture at the same time leading the discussion also on a particular topic. And this is on research and publication opportunities. And this is mainly targeted for the area, this early career aspirants, academicians, as well as for the researchers, because these are all evolving subjects, not only the early career aspirants only would benefit. It's likely to be beneficial for all of us. So from that perspective, we sincerely look forward to the resourceful deliberations of Dr. Zanke Mistry, because she is in the Faculty of Management of Bir Narmad, South Gujarat University, Surat. And this is an initiative of KKHSU, KK and the State of the University, as well as a collaborative effort with NECMA, Notice Industries Commerce and Management Association. So esteemed members of NECMA is also present here. The researchers of KKHSU present here, the faculty members of KKHSU present here, as well as the members from the academic fraternity are present here in this webinar. So on behalf of the university would like to extend a warm welcome to all of you, and we hope the deliberations in this webinar, most especially about the publication opportunities. Though many times we have been publishing, but in order to have effective publication, so that our researchers can be viewed, can be accessed by a wide section of researchers as well as the persons who are interested in the academic pursuits. Definitely this lecture, this webinar and the subsequent discussions will definitely help us. And with these few words, I'd like to extend our warm welcome to all the participants in this webinar. And we are especially thankful to Dr. Mistry for her consent to conduct the webinar. With this, I would like to conclude and wish you all the best. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Today, our resource person is Dr. Zanki Mistry, with faculty in the Department of Business and Industrial Management in the Bidner, South Gujarat University, Surat. She is associated with the university with this teaching profession for last 15 years, and she has conducted various research and publish a good numbers of articles, research articles in various reported research journals. So joining to teaching profession, she was associated with Kotak Mohindra Bank, and she is now also she is actively associated with the corporate sector, and he's independent director to Infina Finance Private Limited. And Madam also has closely associated with research, and her area of research is stock market, then Mercer and Acquisition, and she is also a recognized supervisor, PhD supervisor of the university, Bidner Mercer University. Now I request Dr. Mistry to start his lecture. Madam, over to you. Thank you. Those of us who are in teaching would know that all of the things that I have been doing we have to do. So yeah, I've been active in research and publication, and with UGC becoming a little more strict about the quality of publications, I think all of us have become even more alert and active as to where and how we should write and where we should publish and those kind of things. So that is why these this lectures have become a little more relevant than they were for the Indian teaching fraternity before. So I am a little confused as to whether to give more emphasis on how to write or to give more emphasis on how to have the paper published. So I'm going to try and give a mix of both. And because even after you finish writing the whole process of publication also is quite tedious. Right. So I have a presentation which I'm going to quickly take you through and then also put in some real practical problems and issues which come up when we are publishing. I'm going to share with you real comments that come in after your paper is accepted or being considered for publication. Right. So at any time if you have some questions, please feel free to write them in the chat box. I will try to address as many questions as possible towards the end of the lecture. Right. I hope you can see the presentation. Yes ma'am. It's visible. Okay. So basically academic writing is a style of we all need to do academic writing which is of course different from fiction writing or you know writing or entertainment. Okay. So academic writing is a style of writing that is objective. It is unbiased. It focuses very heavily on information and we should have reliable credible data and evidence. I'll give you my own example. The first article that I ever wrote after I joined academics in 2006 was on medical malpractices. It was just an article which I wrote out of sheer passion or some experiences that I might have had. And I randomly sent it to a few journals and newspapers and not even knowing you know whether my article is of any credibility or any worth. Yeah. It was well accepted but everywhere they told me that please give the sources from where you have collected all the information. And at that time I was so naive. I didn't even know what sources meant as in I didn't know that I had to put a proper reference section in my article. Okay. So that is where I started. So a lot of you who must be feeling that oh how will we write and how will we publish and we are and if you are very new to the teaching profession. Do not worry. We all get there somehow we have to write. So credible data and evidence is extremely important while you do your academic writing. The academic writing is geared towards contributing toward a body of knowledge on a topic or a field of study. So this is the other important thing that it has to contribute even it could be a small contribution but it has to contribute to the existing body of knowledge. Okay. So there are two things. It has to draw from the existing body of knowledge and drawing from the existing body of knowledge. It has to also contribute to the existing body of knowledge. Okay. How do you go about it? So first of all you what is the purpose of academic writing? Who is your audience and what should your tone be like? Okay. So the purpose is to contribute to knowledge. Who would be your audience? So who are the people who are going to read what you have written? Okay. So they could be scholars, your PhD scholars. They could be researchers. They could be teachers, professors and practitioners. Many a times industry people refer to the papers written by academics in order to maybe implement something in their business. What should the tone be like? The tone should be professional. It should be unbiased. It should be non-conversational and it should be unemotional. Okay. Why should all academicians try to write? Many of my even senior colleagues have given up on writing. They are so frustrated with the whole process. Okay. But let me tell you one thing. This I'm telling you from my own experience. When you do research, okay, you understand your subject more deeply. Okay. You will understand theory more deeply because you have to write about it. Okay. You have to contribute to it. It will give you a firsthand empirical evidence which you can take to class. You can say, okay, I did this and I found this. So the conviction with which you will teach in the class will be much enhanced. Okay. It will give young teachers a confidence in the classroom. It definitely improves your subject knowledge. It helps you to keep abreast with the latest developments in the subject and it keeps you updated with the latest statistical tools. Okay. So why should we all try to write? These are the reasons. What is good research? Okay. So if you want to write a good paper, you have to do good research. And once you've done good research, you will be able to, all you have to do is describe it in your paper. Okay. So a good research is a research where the purpose is clearly defined. The research process is detailed. If the research design is thoroughly planned, high ethical standards have been applied. Limitations of your study have been frankly revealed. Analysis, which is adequate for decision-making need, decision-makers need should be done. Findings have to be presented unambiguously. Conclusions have to be justified and the researcher's experience has to be reflected in the paper. So in any academic writing, we follow the scientific method. Now what is the scientific method? It is basically direct observation of the phenomena. After that, the clear definition of the variables, methods and procedures, the hypothesis has to be empirically testable. Okay. The hypothesis has to have the ability to rule out rival hypothesis. Statistical justification rather than linguistic justification. And it should have a self-correcting process. Okay. So this is the scientific method. You would know that your research is rare or contemporary or if you are in the right direction. If all these points are or if some of these points are relevant to you. Okay. So you encounter curiosity, doubt, barrier, suspicion or obstacle. You struggle to state the problem, ask questions, contemplate existing knowledge, gather facts and move from an emotional to an intellectual confrontation of the problem.  You are able to deduce outcomes or consequences of the hypothesis. Attempt to discover what happens if the results are in opposite direction of that predicted or if the results support the expectation. You should be able to formulate rival hypothesis. So your hypothesis cannot just be one sided. Okay. Hypothesis is something which could be true or false. It cannot just be, so you cannot research something like the sun rises in the east. Okay. It is proven. It's a fact. There is no question to it. So hypothesis should be such which could be proved wrong also. Okay. Devise and conduct some crucial empirical test. Okay. This is important because if you just hypothesize something and you give a theoretical explanation for it. That is not enough. You have to back it up with real data. Okay. You should be able to draw conclusion based on the acceptance or rejection of your hypothesis. And you should be able to feed information back into the original problem. Modify it according to the strength of the evidence. Okay. Okay. So how is theory built? When we say we want to do research. Okay. So then let us say there are two researchers. A and B wants to know what caused the COVID pandemic. B wants to know if organizational structure influences leadership style. Both want a better understanding of the environment. Both want to predict behavior. Both expect a specific outcome with a specific behavior. Okay. So understanding and predicting is what is expected out of your research work. Okay. So basically there are two purposes of theory. The first researcher A allows for understanding relationship between variables. Example, a doctor may believe that older patients are more likely to get severe COVID symptoms as compared to younger patients. If this theory is verified then it would help the researcher to predict the type of treatment to be administered based on the age of the patient. So it gives a relationship between age and COVID symptoms or severity of symptoms. So this relationship age. Age is the variable. COVID symptoms is also a variable. Age is an independent variable. Severe of COVID symptoms is a dependent variable. And your data helps you to find a relationship between the independent and dependent variable. That is the purpose of theory. Okay. So theories provide explanations as to why variables behave in a particular way. So understanding helps him predict. So how do you define a research problem? See for every research paper defining the research problem is very important. For any researcher whether you are writing your thesis or you are still deciding on your PhD topic anywhere you need to define the problem. Okay. So the problem is something which you can probably get from your environment, get from your readings or it could be a problem that has been a question for you. Okay. So first it starts with a dilemma which you form into a question. Then you convert it into a research question. Then you convert it to a measurement question and then it becomes an investigative question. So this is how the question has to be framed. Okay. Now the questions are framed based on your levels of reality. Okay. So you know there is this abstraction ladder which is very famous in research theory. Okay. It says that from the abstract level you go to the empirical level and from there you go to the concept or a construct. Okay. So basically what is abstract? It is a concept or proposition. The level of knowledge expressing a concept that exists only as an idea or quality apart from an object. Then empirical level. So level of knowledge reflecting that which is verifiable by experience or observation. Then you come to the concept. So a generalized idea about the class of objects, attributes, occurrences or processes that has been given a name. Building blocks that abstract reality. So they are constructs, leadership, productivity and morale. These are constructs. Okay. Gross national product, asset, inflation. So from abstract level you go to the empirical level. Abstract levels are concepts. Empirical level is basically observation of the objects as they are the reality. Okay. So this is called the ladder of abstraction. Okay. So the reality is that you see a banana. And you see what is it? Is it a fruit? Okay. So you say okay, this is reality is a banana. Banana is a fruit. Fruit is vegetation, comes from vegetation. Okay. So this is you observe a phenomena and then you conceptualize it. So you make it more and more abstract. Then it becomes theory. So theory building is basically a process of increasing abstraction. Observation of objects, which forms two concepts, which becomes propositions, which becomes theory. I'm going to skip a little bit on the theory portion and come to the writing process. Yeah. So when we start writing a paper. Okay. So how do we go about it? So the first part is we get access to relevant in existing knowledge. We formulate concepts and propositions. We make the statement of hypothesis. We make our research design. After that we acquire empirical data. We analyze and evaluate this data and we provide explanation or state the new problem. Okay. So basically the thing is observation pattern hypothesis and theory. Okay. Now, if you look at the research process. Okay. First we discover the problem. So this is problem discovery and definition. Selection of the exploratory research technique. Okay. So this could be secondary historical data. We pilot study experience service case study from that we define the problem. So exploratory study is always for definition of problem to actually understand that what are the factors which are actually affecting your variables. Okay. Or how do you actually define your variables? That is exploratory. Then you select the basic research method to either do survey experiment secondary data observation. Then you go on to selecting the sampling design. So whether you lose probability sampling or non-probability sampling. Then you collect data, you edit and quote the data, you process and analyze the data, you interpret findings and you prepare your report. So this is how the process will go. Okay. So what are the elements of a research paper? You would all be knowing this. The first is the title page. So whenever you are submitting your paper to a good journal, you have to create a title page. Then you have to, the abstract has to be there. Introduction has to be there. Review of literature should be a part of the paper. Then measures and methods. What are the variables and which method you have used? What are you going to measure your variables and which is the method for analysis that you are using? That has to be well defined. Then you have to describe your results. And then based on your results, you have to discuss. Okay. And then finally you have to give the conclusion. So this is the format of a standard research paper that is accepted in good quality journals. Now, basically any research paper that you start writing should start with your research problem. Okay. When do you write your abstract? You write your abstract in the very end after you finish writing the paper. Okay.  The trend is that you submit your abstract first, right? But this is the reason for that is completely different. The organizers of the conference want to, you know, just include your abstract as a part of the conference program. But abstract cannot be written unless you've written the paper. Okay. So you first have to write your paper and abstract is basically drawing out the salient points of your paper and putting it in a very small brief way. So that even if the person does not read your whole paper based on the abstract and know what you have done. Okay. Now, what should the title page have? The title page should give a clear idea of what the study is about. Name of the author, affiliation, author note and details about correspondence regarding the article. Okay. I will show you one sample title page. Madam, are you there? Yes. Yeah, I'm just showing a title page. Okay. Just give me two minutes. Okay. Can you see the title page? Yes, ma'am. Yes. Okay. So this is how the title page of a particular journal looks like. This is also what should be there. There should be the title or the name of the author, your affiliation that is from which institute you are. Then there is a section on the page where you have to put the author note. You can also put your orchid if you have an orchid ID. So if your paper is published in one of the good journals, you will issue an orchid ID. Okay. So that they can refer to this ID to look at your previous papers also. Okay. Okay. Then author notice, it should say where the corresponding concerning this article should be addressed to. So it should be addressed to whoever because sometimes there could be more than one author. Okay. So if there are more than one author, one of the authors has to become the corresponding author so that all the emails regarding the paper will be sent to that author only. Any corrections or any major or minor revisions, acceptance, rejection, everything will go to that author. Okay. And his or her email ID has to be given here. So this is all there is to the title page. This is what most journals ask. Okay. Sometimes in author note, if you want to say thank you to somebody or you want to acknowledge the contribution of somebody to your paper, that can also be written on the title page. Okay. So that is about the title page. Next is the abstract. So typically abstract should be written after the first draft of the paper is done and the results are in your hands. It is a short summary of the contents of the paper. It is an overview of the paper as it contains small bits of the article. The next is the introduction. Okay. So let me show you some salient points of an abstract. Okay. So this is the general they will usually tell you how many words should be there in the abstract. So the abstract should never be more than 400 words. Okay. Sometimes they will allow you to go up to 500 words but usually the range is between 250 to 400 words. That is the limit of words that they will allow. Okay. Now another thing about abstracts is it should not be very detailed and it should not be very brief. Okay. So many times the abstract is very brief and it does not give any insight into the paper. What method you have used or nothing? What are your variables? Nothing. But and sometimes the abstract is so long and unnecessarily put things like citations etc. So never put citations in abstract. Okay. It has to give a brief understanding about your paper or your case study whatever it is. Introduction part. So this introduction has to be primary information to understand the paper. Okay. It should give the idea of the main topic. It should explain the key terms. It should also include some historical information. It should provide citation of other studies. The review of literature is usually a part of the introduction. Okay. Okay. So the introduction should also show how the study is different or rare. So this has to come right in the beginning. Okay. It's not after analysis that you know they find out that oh your study was rare. The in the first paragraph itself or in the second paragraph itself you should be able to bring out how this study is going to be different from the other previous studies which were conducted. Okay. So the research gap that you have identified should come out clearly in your introduction itself. Okay. How is it relevant to discussion? Okay. So how is how is your introduction? Your introduction should be such that at the end when you are giving your discussion of the paper that they should match. So the problems or issues that you have put forth in the introduction should be addressed in the discussion. They should have some link. Okay. So many a times we find when we are evaluating thesis etc. We find that there is no connection between the research questions and the findings. Okay. So sometimes the method carries you away from your actual problem. So that should never happen. Okay. So your introduction should properly define your problem. It should show you how your it should I properly show the gaps and those gaps ultimately have to be addressed in the discussion. Okay. And how will this study add to the literature? That is also what your introduction should be able to bring out. Next is reviewing literature. Okay.  So first of all understand what is the purpose of reviewing literature. There is a two-fold purpose. Number one, it should justify the focus of your study.  That you have come to this hypothesis is based on so many studies conducted in the past and then you have drawn your understanding from those concepts and you are bringing something forward. Okay. So see this whole process of scientific method has been a very difficult one. You see people like Galileo have lost their lives when they could not prove their hypothesis. Okay. So Galileo actually found out that the earth was round. He made observations, he made calculations and in his own way he knew that the earth was round but he could not prove it. Why? Because past data on the historical data which was there was all about which was all saying that the earth is flat. Okay. So there was no way in which he could give any citation or any reference saying that yes this guy also said this, this guy also said this, this guy and we all together are now proposing that the earth is round because he could not do that. He was actually nobody believed him when he was alive and ultimately after his death it was proved. So basically your review of literature will help you to justify that you are in the right direction. Okay. And it will help you to provide a rationale for your methodological approach. Okay. So it will help you to rationalize that you have taken this approach in the past also somebody has taken this approach and that is why your approach is correct. Okay. Synthesis. Okay. So the what is what should your review of literature actually help you to do? It should help you to synthesize. All the past publications or researches which have been done synthesize needs make brief and draw a draw a kind of a conclusion conceptual clarity from all the past papers. Okay. So it should help you to synthesize all the past knowledge. Right. It should address inconsistencies or deficiencies in the existing research means whatever has happened till now it should be able to bring out certain deficiencies with respect to the existing research. It should also shed light on contradictions. Okay. It should avoid you should avoid summary of individual studies. See many a times what we do is we just keep on doing read 100 papers and all 100 we just put one by one in the review that is not how review should be done. Let us say there are five papers which are all around talking around the same concept. Okay. So those five papers should be all synthesized. They should all be read and the actual content of those five papers what they are trying to say should be brought out and then all of those five should be cited together. Okay. So do not put summary of individual papers rather do an analysis. Analysis means you have to bring out many strengths weaknesses or you have to bring out contradictions or what are the good points of this or what are the points which are lacking in the research. Okay. All that you should be able to bring out. It should drive an idea based argument for your study. Idea based argument. Okay. Critical analysis. It should help I explore strengths and weaknesses of recent studies in the field. So your review should also give a critical analysis. Now what are the steps in writing a review of literature? First is you search for relevant literature. Of course you evaluate the sources whether this is coming from the right source. So when you are using internet very we all use internet a lot these days but from internet where are we taking the articles the sources have to be credible. Identify themes, debates and gaps. See when you are reviewing literature it is very important that you cite some very very important papers in your area of study. So let us say if my study is based on finance. Okay. It is based on relevance of dividends. Then if I don't quote the paper written by Modigliani and Miller. Okay.  Okay. So your source if you put such sources. So you put the genesis where did this theory start from. From that point you start and then the latest developments on that theory. Okay. When you are able to bring from history to contemporary. That is when your review of literature is really rich. Okay. Okay. Your review should also help you to identify themes, debates and gaps. Okay. There would be certain group of researchers who have worked on a particular theme. Others who have worked on the same topic with a different perspective. Okay. So coming back to let us say some finance theories.  Okay. So when you sit to write down your review you have to talk about both. Then you have to see how they are contradicting. Okay. And then you have to say okay based on all this also what is the gap? Who all have worked on the gaps? Okay. And still what gaps are remaining? That is how you can logically design your study. Okay. You have to outline the structure and then you have to write the review. Now what do I mean when I say I outline the structure? Okay. So review of literature can be done in four ways basically. Either you do it chronologically. Okay. You do it theme based. Okay. You can do it as a theme based meaning. Let us say if your topic has two or three variables. Okay.  Okay. And then you can do a time based chronology based meaning you start from the beginning and come to contemporary times. Okay. Now research question. Okay. So the research question is the most important part of your research paper. Okay. So let us say an example of a research question is should a retail chain offer shopping via internet. Okay. So if this is my question, first I will identify the keywords such as online shopping, internet, e-commerce, digital media, retail chain, sellers, marketers, marketing, digital marketing, millennials, generation Z, generation Y consumers. Okay. So retail chain offer shopping via internet. Okay. So shopping via internet means online shopping. Okay. So one variable is online shopping. So what all will shopping via internet? What all what are the variables which will define shopping via internet? You will need e-commerce, you need internet, you need digital media, digital media means digital advertisements and then the online shopping experience. Okay. Retail chain. So we have to talk about retail chains. We will talk about sellers, marketers, marketing, digital marketing. And then what type of consumers will opt for shopping through the internet? Your millennials, generation Z, generation Y. Okay. So start searching relevant sources. So your review, we are still on the review of literature. Okay. So when you define your research problem, now you will use these keywords to start searching for sources from where you will get your information. Where from where you will be able to define your concepts. Okay. So use the keywords to start your search. What are your sources? So your university's library catalog, Google scholar, JSTOR, EBSCO, project Muse for Humanities and Social Sciences, Medline for Life Sciences and Biomedicine, Unlit for Economics, Inspec for Physics, Engineering and Computer Science. So what are these places? These are repositories of past research papers. Okay. You can look at, of course, you can look at Scopus also. You can look at JGate for India for Indian researchers. Okay. So all these are good repositories from where you can find good research papers. Okay. Read the abstracts and see if the article is relevant for you. Okay. So you start with reading the abstract. Every article written on digital marketing may not be relevant to you. So whether that particular article is relevant to your research. Go to the references and find other relevant papers. So if you find that there is one paper which is very relevant to your research. You take that paper. You go to the reference section of that paper. And you find other references, other papers which are relevant to that because if that paper is relevant to your paper, it would have used references also which would be relevant to your paper. Right. And you keep taking note of recurring citations. This is very important. Recurring citations meaning those papers who are being cited very frequently. Okay. If they are being cited very frequently, that means that these papers are through papers in that particular area. Okay. That means everybody is citing that paper. That means that that paper has actually come out with something very important in that particular field. Okay. So make sure that you are also citing those recurring citations. Okay. Now your sources have to be credible. You should look for landmark researchers. Landmark researchers again, they are important researchers in your area. Major theories. In humanities, you need to have a long historical perspective. And you start the writing process as you need. So as soon as you start reading papers, you also start writing. You know many research scholars, I tell them to start making a table of all the review of literature that they are doing. Okay. Keep on inserting citations for whatever you write. So keep on inserting citations as soon as you start writing because at the end, it will be very difficult to cite which paper you have taken this concept from. Okay. It is helpful to make an annotated bibliography. So what is an annotated bibliography? So let us say you have found a paper which is useful to you. You take the basic concept from it. Okay. You write in brief what you read from that. And then you put the citation at the top of it. This is just an annotated bibliography. You're just making you're just making a list at the end. You will read all of this and then try to synthesize it. Try to bring together papers or books which are delving on the similar concept. Okay. So you will not be able to select read everything available on the topic. Okay. So select those articles which are most relevant for each publication. Ask yourself what question or problem is the author addressing? What are the key concepts and how are they defined? What are the key theories, models and methods? Does the research use established frameworks or takes an innovative approach? What are the results and conclusions of the study? How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm add to our challenge established knowledge? How does the publication contribute to your understanding of the topic? What are its key insights and arguments? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research? This is how you will each publication that you read for your review. You will ask these questions. Okay. So first of all, what is the problem? If this problem is making any sense to your study. Okay. Only then you go forward. Okay. Then once you think that yes, this problem is related to your problem. You see which are the variables, which are the key concepts. Okay. Which method have they used? Which theory are they using? Which theory is backing their research? Okay. Is it using a established framework or is it taking an innovative approach? Okay. So is it using some age old model? Okay. What are the results and conclusions of the study? What does the publication? How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Okay. All these questions you ask. So identify themes, debates and gaps. So you first identify trends and patterns, themes, which different questions recur in the literature, debates, conflicts and contribution, contradictions. Where do the sources disagree? What are the pivotal publications? Are there any influential studies that change the direction of the field? What are the gaps? That is what is missing from the literature? Are there any weaknesses that need to be addressed? Okay. Outline the review structure. So the review I told you can be of four types, either chronological, that is time-based, thematic. Okay. So if they are recurring central themes, organize into subsections and address different aspects of the topic. Okay. So let us say the review, the question that we say, should the retail chain going for online shopping experience? Okay. Retail will analyze all the literature about retail marketing. Okay. Then we'll go on to analyze literature about online shopping. Okay. So these are two themes. There are two themes in this. Right. And then we bring a literature wherein researchers have been done about retail chains using online shopping experience. So there will be, this is called a thematic review of literature. Okay. It should be methodological. Okay. So method, if the sources are from different disciplines, look at what results have emerged in qualitative and quantitative research, how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical research and divide the literature based on sociological, historical or cultural source. Okay. So see, if, if your topic is such that some of the researchers are qualitative and some are quantitative. Okay. And you have included both in your review, then you make two sections, one of qualitative, one of quantitative or you can take again, empirical or theoretical or, and you can also differentiate the themes based on social, historical and cultural sources. Okay. So this would be more app for researchers in say arts or languages or, you know, social sciences to some extent. Okay. Your review can also be theoretical. That is foundation for theoretical concepts. Use it to discuss theories, models and definition of key concepts. So many times we just do a theoretical review. It is called meta-analysis. Okay. So that is just a review of literature off. So you are basically bringing an extensive review. Your whole paper is only about what all researchers have been done on this topic in the past. You can use a combination of various approaches. Like you can use a theme based approach and in that you can use chronology. Okay. So let us say you take retail marketing review of literature for retail marketing topic and you start from 1965 and come up to 2022. Okay. So that is chronology within a theme. Okay. So you can take a combination of two approaches. Okay. Writing the review, the introduction. So it should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the review of literature. Okay. The main body. So you don't give it a title as introduction of review of literature. No. The first two, three lines or the first paragraph should be about what is the main theme of your review? What type of literature have you reviewed and what are you trying to establish from the review? The main body should summarize and synthesis synthesize that is given overview of the main points on each source and combine them into a coherent whole. It should analyze and interpret. So do not just paraphrase other researchers and your own interpretations where possible discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole. Okay. You should also critically evaluate that is mentioned the strengths and weaknesses of your sources. It should be written in a well-structured paragraphs. Use transition words and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts. Okay. So transition words are like suppose you are bringing out a contrast. You should use words like however. Okay. Contrast in contrast to this. Your sentences should start like that. Okay. If you are adding something more to what you have already, you can say more over or adding to that. Okay. So you use these type of transition words while you are writing and the final conclusion of the review should talk about and it was a summary of the text and then it should talk about the gaps which you have identified. These gaps will ultimately help you to form your research questions. Okay. What is the difference between dissertation review and a standalone paper? Okay. So you can see this in dissertation. You reiterate your central problem or research question in a research paper. Some background on the topic and it's important should be given. In a dissertation, you have to give a brief summary of the scholarly context. In your research paper, you discuss the scope of literature you will review. Okay. And in dissertation, you emphasize the timelines, timeliness of the topic. In your research paper, you only state your objective. You highlight the gap in literature in a dissertation and in your literature review, what new insight will you draw from this literature? That is what... So basically the review on literature of a research paper is more focused and smaller than a dissertation. Okay. Always understand that. For a PhD dissertation or a postgraduate dissertation, you have to do an extensive review. Okay. In a research paper, your audience does not need extensive review because they are... It is assumed that they are academicians who know a lot of things. So you can only do review which is focusing on your... Okay. But in a dissertation, you have to prove that you have read all of this and then come to your research question. So it has to be more extensive. Okay. Basic questions and problem definition. So what are the basic... How will you define your problem? So now we come to the methodology part, right? So what is the purpose of the study? How much is already known about your topic? In addition, what background information is required? What is to be measured? How will it be measured? Can data be made available? Should the research be conducted? Can a hypothesis be forbidden? Okay. So these questions are important. That should... Sometimes you want to measure something but it is not possible to measure. Okay. Sometimes you do not have any statistical methods to measure certain phenomena. Okay. Can data be made available? Sometimes you want to measure something but no data can be made available. Okay. Should the research be conducted? Okay. So sometimes you might have a question but that might be a question only relevant to you. For example, should research be conducted on topics like does GDP growth affect stock markets? Okay. So it is such a... A lot of people still do dissertations on this, still do right thesis on this. Yeah. But is it needed? What is it going to add to the literature? It is already established that GDP growth affects stock market performance. Okay. So how many more times will you reestablish that? Okay. So sometimes it is not necessary to research that question. If you read enough about that problem that you think is a problem, you will find enough literature saying that okay, this is well researched, you don't need to research it again. Okay. So the topic should not be such that it is heavily researched. Okay. There should be something rare about your problem. Okay. And can a hypothesis be formulated? So what is a hypothesis? A hypothesis is something which can be proved or disproved. As I told you, it cannot be a fact. Okay. That price affects demand. I want to prove that again. No. It is already proven. Okay. Many, many times. Okay. So should such research be conducted? No. Okay. If can price affect demand? Yeah. It has now it has become a law of demand. So can you form a hypothesis there and say no price does not affect demand? Yeah. Maybe in some cases, if that product is a niche product or something very different and let us say price does not affect demand, you can prove something like that. Establish the concept very, very formally. After that you can form a hypothesis like that. Research question. Now research question should start with the research problem. So there should be a problem. This problem should be such that it is it can be broken down or it can be converted to a question which can be researched. Okay. And this question, we should be able to break it down into research objectives. Okay. So problem is, let us say the same problem that we discussed earlier. Should a retail chain offer in-house shopping via the internet? Okay. So the question is, are consumers aware of internet home shopping systems? Okay. What are the consumers reactions to internet shopping? These should be your questions. No. The chain offer is the problem. That is what the chain is considering. Okay. To be able to answer this or to be able to bring a solution to this problem or this dilemma, it has to find out whether people are aware of how to do internet shopping. Okay. And how will consumers react to internet shopping? These two questions it has to answer. Okay. So if it gets the answer that yes, people are aware of internet shopping systems. Secondly, yes, they will be happy to shop on the internet. Then the answer to the question will be resolved. No, that yes, they should offer in-house shopping via the internet. Okay. Now research objective would be to determine consumer awareness about online shopping with eager recall or to measure attitudes and beliefs about on home shopping systems. Okay. We need to know consumers awareness about online shopping and we need to measure their attitudes and beliefs about online shopping. Okay. So your research question has to be properly formulated into research objectives. Okay. How to the second question and second example is let us say how to increase employee retention in the unorganized sector. Okay. So this is a problem. The research question is can some practices be adopted which would help factories in unorganized sector retain employees for longer periods of time. Okay. So can some practices be adopted? Now what are those practice? So then you have to start researching that what are those practices? Okay. And then you identify that okay, there is a practice called talent management practice and the objective would be to determine whether talent management practices help motivate employees to remain attached to their organization. Okay. So if we adopt talent management then employee retention can be increased. So your problem can be addressed. Can talent management practices improve performance of skilled or unskilled labor? Okay. So these are the research objectives then. So these are once you find answers to these objectives, you will find some answer to your research question and that will help you to solve the problem. Okay. So the first stage will be to do a pilot or a case study, get some secondary data and do an experience survey. This is called exploratory research. Okay. So in social sciences we do exploratory factor analysis that is exploratory. You are identifying what are the factors which are affecting your variables. Okay. The next step is hypothesis building that is a formulation of the problems. Okay. So the statement with that can be refuted by empirical data. Okay. So then you make the research design which is like the master plan for your research paper. It is a framework for action. It specifies methods and procedures. So what the basic questions are what type of questions need answering. Are descriptive or causal findings required? What is the data source? Are objectives, objective answers available by asking people? So if you do a survey, you should know that, you know, will you get correct answers if you ask the people? How quickly is information needed? How should survey questions be worded? And how should experimental manipulations be made? Okay. So basic, this is your basic research design. Then you select a sample. So who or what is the source of data from where are you going to select a sample? Okay. So suppose if we take the first, the second example, say employee retention. So can you ask housewives this? Can you feel your question as to people who are not working in the unorganized sector? No. Can you give your question to people who are working in the organized sector? No. Okay. So it is important to identify and define your sample. I can only feel this question as to people who are working in the unorganized sector. Okay. Can the target population be identified? Is the sample necessary? So should you do a sample survey or should you do a population study? Okay. How accurate must the sample be? Is probability sample required? Okay. So you know what a probability sample is, right? A probability sample is a sample which wherein every person or every element of the sample has equal probability of being selected in the sample. Every element of the population has equal probability of being selected in the sample. Okay. So is a national sample necessary? Yeah.  So if you are studying, your study says that, okay, I want to see, I want to see whether, say something like sharing economy practices in India. Okay. How have people adopted? India-wide. So if you want to do India-wide study, your sample should have a national representation, right? Is a large, how large is a sample necessary and how will the sample be selected? Okay. Now how large is a sample necessary? To answer this question, we use the Quotrans formula for sample size. Okay. There are other formulas also, but in social sciences, the Quotrans formula will, a lot of good journals will want to understand your study sample size adequacy. Okay. So the Quotrans formula allows you to calculate an ideal sample size given a desired level of precision, desired confidence level and the estimated proportion of the attribute present in the population. So Quotrans formula is considered especially appropriate in situations with large populations. So this is the formula where N0 is the number of elements in the sample is equal to Z square PQ upon E square. Okay. So what is, what is E? It is the margin of error, desired level of precision. So when we say 95% or 99% confidence level, right? P is the proportion of the population which has the attribute in question.  Okay. So there might be a lot of people who have hot breakfast. There might be a lot of people who have cold breakfast like cereal. Okay. So let us assume that 50% have. So in that case your target population is not known. Okay. So if it is not known, then you can take some arbitrary number like 50%, we assume that 50% eat hot breakfast. So you take P as 50%. And so Q will also be 50%. Okay. Z square is the Z value, tabular value of Z at 95% confidence. Okay. So that would be. Let us say suppose we are doing a study on the inhabitants of a large town and want to find out how many households serve breakfast in the morning. We don't have much information on this object to begin with. So we are going to assume that half of the family serve breakfast. This gives us maximum variability. So P is 0.5 and let's say we want 95% confidence and at least 5% plus or minus precision. Okay. So 95% confidence level gives us a Z value of 1.96 according to the normal value tables. Okay. So we get the formula is 1.96 square Z square into PQ divided by 0.05 square. So that is 385. So our random sample of 385 households in our target population should be enough to give us the confidence levels that we need. Okay. What is target population that is important? This is an informal term used in certain types of research. It is generally defined to mean a group or set of elements that you want to know more information about. So most of the time target population and population are synonymous. However, adding the word target emphasizes that sometimes we miss the mark in sampling and don't always hit the mark. Samples can be unrepresentative of the population that you originally entered. For example, you might want to survey all the management students in India. That is the target population. But budget constraints limit your survey to only a few educational institutions in just four cities in India. And the sampled population and target population in this scenario are likely to be quite different. Okay. So the Co-trans formula can also be modified for smaller populations. And this is the modification that is given for Co-trans formula. Okay. So all this, I'm just kind of sensitizing you to all these things. It is not that you will be able to grasp it in this presentation itself. But when you sit down to write a paper or rather when you send your paper for publication, these type of questions, these are very, very, you know, basic fundamental questions that might be asked to you. So research methodology and measures and methods, what you did. This is what you have to write in research methodology. How you did it. Okay. So reliability and validity are the two things that you need to show in your methodology. So it should include the type of research you conducted, how you collected your data, how you analyzed your data, any tools or materials you used in the research. You are rational for choosing these methods. Okay. So you explain your methodological approach. Was the data qualitative or quantitative? Was it primary or secondary? Was it experimental or observational? Were there any ethical or philosophical considerations? Okay. Then you describe the methods of data collection. So if they are quantitative, you would have done surveys, experiments. Okay. So if you did surveys, how did you design the questionnaire? Where did you take the questions from? What sampling method did you use to select participants? Did you conduct surveys by phone, mail online or in person? What was the sample size and response rate? All this you have to display. Okay. So you have to say that, okay, the questions were taken from a standard scale. Okay. Or what sampling method did you use to select? So you can say that you use the non-probability, the median sampling. Okay. Did you use, did you conduct survey by phone, mail or you can say you created Google forms and you conducted the survey by snowballs, the method. Okay. And then what was the sample size and response rate? So you say, okay, we fill in 1000 questionnaires and the response rate was 70%. We got 700 questionnaires properly filled out. So that is how you have to describe it. Okay. Suppose it is an experiment. So how did you design the experiment? How did you record participants? How did you manipulate and measure the variables? What tools or technologies did you use? Okay. So all this has to be described. If you are working with existing data, so where did you source the material? How the data was originally produced? What criteria did you use to select the material? So if you are using, let us say stock market data, then you have to see how the data was produced and where you got it from. What is the date range that you have used? All those things. Okay. If you have used qualitative methods, you have to reflect on the approach since the methods are flexible. You have to show the criteria that you use to select the participants, the context where the research was conducted and the role that you played in collecting the data. Okay. So these are the different ways of collecting qualitative data. Okay. I'm not going in detail into that. After that, you have to evaluate and justify your methodological choices that why did you use this particular method? Why was it relevant or suitable for your structure? Okay. Why did you not choose a particular method and discuss how the approach contributed to new knowledge or understanding? Okay. What are the tips for writing a strong methodology? You focus on the objectives and the research questions. You cite the relevant sources. Write for your audience. Don't go into unnecessary detail. Okay. Discuss the obstacles that you faced in collecting and analyzing data. Demonstrate that you made the research as rigorous as possible. Okay. Now data. Okay. So determine the units of analysis. Whether you are analyzing households, individuals, organizations, companies. Determine the type of data, primary, secondary. What type of data will contain numerical values? Okay. Whether your data is categorical, continuous, dependent, independent. Okay. What are the research methods? Okay. So your research method is experiment, survey, interview, observation, literature review, case study. So in that case, your data could be, if it is experiment, your data has to be primary and quantitative. If it is survey primary and quantitative, it is interview, focus group, primary and qualitative. If it is observation primary and it can be qualitative or quantitative. If your literature review, then your information is secondary. If it is case study, it could be either primary or secondary. Okay. So I'm not getting into the qualitative, I'm not getting into the methods. I want to start talking about writing. Okay. So writing the discussion, you have to give meaning, importance and relevance of your research. It should focus on explaining and evaluating what you found, showing how it relates to literature review and research questions. I told you that now you have to go back to your introduction and literature review and show how your findings are matching or adding to the existing literature. Okay. And making an argument to support your overall conclusion. Okay. So this is what you write in your discussion. Now, the four key elements of your discussion are interpretation, implication, limitation and recommendations. Okay. So what do the results mean? Okay. What have you actually found? What are you trying to say? Okay. Implications. Why do the results matter? What do you have found? Why do they matter? Why? What is the need to do it? What is the need to find it? Limitations. What can the results tell us? What cannot the results tell us? Okay. So what are the limitations of your study and recommendations? What practical actions or scientific studies should follow? Okay. Now summarize your key findings. Write your overall result in a paragraph form. Don't write findings as bullet points in not in research papers. You never do that. Do not repeat your findings point by point. So the examples that you can start like this, the results indicate that other study demonstrates a correlation between the surface. This analysis supports the theory pad. Okay. So this is how you can summarize your key finding. Give your interpretations. That is a meaning of the results. My seem obvious to you, but it is important to spell out their significance for the reader and show exactly how they answer your research questions. Identifying correlations, patterns and relationships among the data. Discussing whether the results met your export expectations or supported your hypothesis. Contextualizing your findings within previous research and theory. Explaining unexpected results and evaluating their significance. And considering possible alternative explanations and making an argument for your position. Okay. So you start with in life with the hypothesis. This is what you found contrary to the hypothesized association. The results contradict the claim of so and so. The results might suggest that X, however, based on the finding of similar study, the more plausible explanation is why. Okay. So this is how you present your final discussion discussion. Discussion is basically your findings, conclusion, limitations and recommendations all put in one. Okay. So make sure to relate your results back to the scholarly book that you surveyed in the literature. The discussion should show how your findings fit with existing knowledge, what new insights they contribute and what consequences they have for theory or practice. Ask yourself these questions. Do your results agree with previous research? If so, what do they add to it? Are your findings very different from other studies? If so, why might this be? Do the results support or challenge existing theories? Are there any practical implications? So your overall aim is to show the reader exactly what your research has contributed and why they should care. You have to acknowledge the limitations of your study. Okay. So even the best research will have limitations. Okay. So you have to bring out those limitations. What to leave out of the discussion? Now, this is very important. Don't introduce new results. You should only discuss the data that you have already reported or what you have actually found. Not something that you intend to find or you think that, you know, this could also be true. Okay. Don't make inflated claims. So avoid over interpretation and speculation that isn't supported by your data. Don't undermine your research. Okay. So the discussion of limitations should aim to strengthen your credibility, not emphasize weaknesses or failures. Okay. So what is the checklist for discussion? You have concisely summarized the important findings. You discussed and interpreted the results in relation to your research question. You cited relevant literature to show how your results fit in. You clearly explained the significance of your results. If relevant, you considered alternative explanations of your results. You stated practical and theoretical implications of the results and you have acknowledged and evaluated the limitations and you made recommendations for further research or action. Okay. So how to write? You know, you have to write in paragraph structure because paragraphs are the basic building blocks. Each paragraph should focus on one single idea and then you while you are writing, you keep citing sources. Okay. Okay. Before we go to this. See now, many of you might have the questions as to where to publish. What are the journals of repute? Okay. So what are journals of repute? Okay. When we say we want to publish in good journals. Journals which are indexed in scopus. Okay. So scopus is a list of very reputed or journals which have a credibility for long period of time. Okay. Journals indexed in the web of science or PubMed. UGC care listed journals for India. Journals of some reputed universities or institutes and peer reviewed journals. Okay. So these are journals of repute. Okay. So there could be an ILM journal which is not a part of UGC care. But that's okay. It is still a reputed journal. Okay. However in India, we should try that the paper that we publish in is either in UGC or it is in UGC care list one or two. Okay. List one is mostly Indian journals. List two are reputed foreign journals. Okay. List two is more difficult to publish in than list one. Okay. Now your journal many times you say it should be indexed and abstracted. Okay. So what does indexation mean? It means it is listed. The more places a journal is indexed the more it is readable. So more people will have access to it. The more chances of it being cited. So if it is listed in many, many indexes then more people will have access to it and more people will be able to cite your work. Now see for an author it is very important to be cited. Okay. So the more citations you get. You are that popular or you get that much credibility. Your edge index will increase and so on. Okay. The, the more number of libraries it would be available in if it is cited in many places. Indexed in many places. Many of us have heard the names. Okay. So why are we so crazy about scopus? Scopus is the name that we have all come to rework. Why? Because most universities want papers published in scopus index journals. But why this arbitrary selection of scopus and especially for social science? So scopus abstract and citation indexing database of peer-reviewed literature. Scientific journals, books and conference proceedings all can be there in scopus. Why is scopus so important? Because it has journals which have academic reverb. Okay. So there is diversity in geographical location of editors and authors. Academic contribution to the field is prominent. The quality of content is very good and the regularity of publishing is also to be seen. So, you know, there are some journals which publish one or two issues and then they are nowhere to be seen. So such journals are, you should be wary of such journals. Why does the list keep on changing? Because the journals are re-evaluated every year and journals not fulfilling the requisite criteria may be available. What are the things that you should keep in mind as an author? As an author, you will need to consider placing your articles in journals where the aims and scope mesh with your topic. If you are in a very new field, okay, and you may be hard-pressed to find a journal indexed with scopus as this is a two-year minimum process, at least three published issues are examined in the selection process. Okay. Furthermore, manuscript submissions to scopus journals tend to be heavy and the publication process highly competitive and sometimes limited. So there are predatory journals out there but not all scopus index journals are predatory. Okay. So, things to keep in mind. See, it is difficult to have your paper published in scopus index journal but you should always aim to have it published there. So, if you aim for scopus index, you will easily be able to publish a UGCK list. Okay. What is impact factor and why is it important? Many a times universities ask for you to pay or even NAC asks you to publish papers which have an impact factor in a journal which has an impact factor. Okay. So, impact factor is basically a scientometric index calculated by a company called Clarivate which is also owned by, which also owns scopus by the way. It reflects a yearly mean number of citations of articles published in the last two years in a given journal. So, it basically indicates how important a journal is in its peak. Okay. So, if in 2021, the total number of citations divided by articles published in 2020 and articles published in 2019, that is how impact factor is calculated. And 2021's impact factor will be reported in 2022. Okay. So, for a journal to have an impact factor, it should at least be four years old. Okay. That itself proves its credibility. Okay. Now, many of us are interested in getting a high edge index. So, what is this edge index? It is a measure of a scientist's impact in his peak. Okay. So, it is determined by the number of publications and the number of times those publications have been cited. So, it was created by John Hirsch in 2005. Okay. So, what is, how is edge index calculated? So, suppose you have six, you have 10 papers. But the number of citations in the first paper of 102 is 78, 62, 43, 32, 80. Okay. So, now six, but in the seventh paper, you have only three citations. Okay. So, when this number becomes smaller than this number, that is your edge index. Okay. So, at 18 is larger than six, but three is smaller than seven. Okay. So, your edge index is six. Okay. How do you increase your edge index? The basic formula is try to collaborate with as many people as possible for writing a paper. So, have at least three or four people write a paper together. Okay. Try to bring in a prominent writer on your, this thing. Try to collaborate with someone who already has an high edge index. When you, when you are, when you do that, it will give you also a boost because his papers would be read and you will also get the benefit of his citations. Okay. Okay. Choosing the correct journal. So, you should keep in mind these points. First, ensure your indexation preference. Okay. So, whether it is, which, whether you want it in, whether it's a scientific paper or a social science paper. Okay. So, this is finding the indexation. Make a list of available journals in your subject area and survey the type of articles published in them. Compare the quality of your articles to those published in these journals and then make a list of journals with a suitable impact factor. Okay. Make sure that the aims or scope of the journals match that of your study. Check for the types of articles published by the journals. Check all the other aspects of the journals such as peer review process, instruction to authors, open access options. Okay. So, it's good to have your paper published in open access journals. However, the good open access journals charge heavy, some they charge say $200, $300. Not even that. Sometimes they even charge $1800, $1900 to publish your paper in open access. Okay. See, there is a difference. There are some journals who charge money. They are predatory. Don't go for them. But there are some very good journals who do not charge any money to publish your paper. But if you want that paper to be published open access, then they charge a heavy fee. Open access means everybody can download your article for free. Okay. So, these are the points that you should keep in mind while choosing the journal. Okay. Now, when you, who would be predatory publishers, meaning many a times you will get emails that you know we would like to publish your paper this, that and then in the end they will ask for a fee or the journals which tell you that you know we will publish your paper in one month flat. Right. So, those type of journals please do not go in for because these journals will not add anything to your resume. They are fake journals or predatory journals and these type of journals do not give you any credibility as an academician. Okay. So, UGC now also publishes a list of predatory journals. Okay. For Indians. And if you want to see a list of predatory journals internationally then it is called you can look at the years list. Okay. If the journal is well not well indexed do not go for it. If it has poor online presence this is a problem because if the journal does not have online presence that probability of your paper being cited is going to be poor. Okay. Now, the publishing process. Okay. So, when you submit a cross paper see many a times we get frustrated that oh when was the paper going to be published. Okay. Many of us give up in between. Right. Because the paper there is no there is no word from the publishers. Okay. Sometimes you are outright rejected. Okay. One thing that you all should keep in mind that publication is a process which requires immense patience. Okay. It requires you to be ever wanting to learn. Okay. So, just because you have written a paper and you think it is good does not necessarily it could be a good paper but it might not fit with the requirements of a journal. Okay. There might be some elements of the writing which the journal will not accept. Okay. So, that is why in the beginning only I told you that academic writing is very different from your usual creative right. Okay. So, academic writing is as a proper structure to it and you have to follow that structure. If that structure is not followed even though your research might be good it will be difficult to have it published. Okay. So, the problems of grammar or sentence structures all that need to be rectified. No good journal will tolerate even the slightest grammatical error. Okay. So, in case you have difficulty with English or grammar, you should have a collaborator who can help you correct the English and grammar of your paper. Okay. So, when you submit what is the process of publication. It takes too long. It takes six months, eight months, one year, two years. Okay. But always remember that if your paper is well written, if your paper has followed a proper methodology, if your data is good, okay, if your conclusions and results are credible, then your paper will be published in some or the other journal. Okay. You might have to change the journal one or two times but in the end it will be published. It will take a lot of sweat and blood but it will be published. Okay. So, do not lose hope. That is the first thing. So, when you submit a paper, it is first read by the initial editor. He will then assign it to the associate editor. Okay. Who is knowledgeable in your field? Okay. This editor is responsible for finding at least two peer reviewers who will agree to offer feedback for your paper. Okay. In the stipulated time frame, this takes 30 to 60 days. Okay. In many cases, reviewers are unable to get back to the journal in time, which also delays the process. Okay. After receiving the reviews on your paper, the associate editor then has to take a decision about your paper. If your paper is rejected, you will have to start finding another journal. Okay. Do not discard that paper. Find another journal. Otherwise, the editor might send back the paper with recommended revisions, which can take another three months. Okay. Once you submit your paper with changes, it will again be sent to the editor for reread. This takes a couple of more weeks. The paper is then copy edited, sent back to the author for checking and type set before it is published either online or in any journal that claims that it can publish your papers in six weeks is a scan. Okay. So this process, first we'll go to the chief editor who will assign it to the associate editor. The associate editor will send it to two peer reviewers. Peer reviewers could be people like you and me only who have published work. So I am a peer reviewer on two or three international journals. So I get papers to be reviewed. I send my reviews and those reviews, the paper writers will take note of those suggestions and they will make changes to their paper based on the suggestions given by the peer reviewer. Okay. And then again, it will go back to the editor. They will again check the paper based on the corrections that have been made. Then you will get a response saying that okay, your paper has been accepted or you might get a second set of revisions to be done. Okay. And after that, if they accept your paper, it will go for copy editing. Copy editing will be, you know, certain problems in citations that they might find if they are not able to find certain citations, certain problems in grammar or, you know, paragraph structures, comma, etc. That they find or certain even spelling issues that they might highlight. Okay. It will go into copy editing, certain paragraph. It has to be written in a certain format. You know, certain space has to be left, not left, all those things. Okay. And then it will finally go for print. Okay. So when I had one of my papers published in a very reputed springer journal, it took at least one and a half to two years to have it published. Okay. And I will show you the type of revisions that I was told to do in my paper. Okay. That will, I'll just show it to you. So when you submit the paper, you have to give a cover letter. Okay. So when you submit your paper, you have to give a cover letter that, okay, I am writing this paper submitting my manuscript entitled so-and-so for consideration in this so-and-so journal. Okay. What is the paper about that I should write in my first paragraph? What are the important aspects of the theory that this paper will cover that I will write in the second part? Who will this paper be useful for? So that is my target audience. I'll write in the third part. Okay. And I will also write that it has not been sent for printing anywhere else, etc. Okay. So I request you to consider the manuscript. So this is a covering letter that you will write to the editor of the journal, the chief editor of the journal. Okay.  Okay. So I will share with you what type of corrections they give. Okay. Okay. So in my paper, one of my papers, okay, these are all the corrections that were given to me. Okay. So, okay, I will show you the, I'm sorry about this. Just give me. Okay. I'll just show you. Okay. These were the type of corrections that they were asking me. Now tell me how did, how can you justify your sample size? Okay. You should explain the rationale of your study. Okay. The path diagram is not clear. Okay. So this is to do with the method. Okay. Then convergent and discriminant reality please explain further. Okay. You should, they also tell you that you should cite this particular paper in your paper because this is an important paper on your topic. So that was, then what is the, who are the samples? Give additional information about the samples. Okay. Then content validity. Okay. So you show your content validity property. Okay. And improve, improve the abstract. So these were the suggestions given to me by the first reviewer. Okay. Then there was a second reviewer who said that you should give a clear and valid research question. Show, describe the soundness and methodology of research. So properly describe how you have done the whole method. How is your research going to contribute to literature? Okay. So they said also do proofreading of grammar and to plagiarism check and improvise the abstract. Okay. So I did all the corrections that they suggested. Now once you make the corrections you have to write the rebuttal letter. Okay. You have to send this rebuttal rebuttal letter along with your corrected paper to the journal. Okay. So all for all good journals this process is required. If you do not write the rebuttal letter they will not consider the revisions. Okay. So you write the revision rebuttal rebuttal letter saying thanking the editors. Okay. So the first part this is you are the editors for their time comments and their time. Okay. So talk about the comments of the chief editor. Okay. So that so the chief editor will also give you comments and the reviewers will also give you comments. So you tell the editor that okay I am reviewed and I am positive. Thank you for the changes that you have suggested and the above mentioned the suggestions will help me improvise my paper better and all that you write and then you say that I have given response to each of the comments. Okay. So you make us something like a table and you say that okay the first comment what is the combat was the comment and what was the response given to you and on which page did you make the change. Okay. Second what was the comment or what was the revision that you made and on which page were the revisions made similarly you do it for the second reviewer also. Okay. And then you say that I have made the revisions to the best of my abilities and understanding and keeping in mind the constructive comments of both the reviewers I request the editors to use the manuscript and consider it for publication. So you wind up the letter at the end. So this is how you write a rebuttal letter along with the revisions and finally if they think that all your revisions are okay they will accept it in principle and then they will send it for copy editing. Okay. So for copy editing also there are many changes that will be recommended that you have to do and then finally your paper can be published. Okay. So usually I take this workshop as a three day workshop of two hours each so around six, seven hours goes into this workshop. This was a very short brief workshop on how to publish but I hope I have added some value to what you already knew. Okay. So I am now going to address some questions. Okay. Level of significance. I think I have explained that level of significance is basically let us say 95% confidence. That is your level of significance because you sometimes take 99% so 5% chance of error if you take 95% okay. Will we get recording of this live session that you have to ask the yeah I think it is put here. Okay. Is it possible to get PPT? We will we can try that. How to publish in journal with high APC? What is it? Even up to 3000 US dollars. I do not have so much money. You do not try to publish in those type of journals always try to reputed journals will never charge any money for publication. Okay. Okay. So you just keep on trying in journals. Which are reputed. We do wish to not charge. The only problem with these journals will be that your paper your publication will not have open access. That will not be freely available to anyone who wants to read it. So this will affect your citation score. But that's okay. At the moment your citation score is not so important as you know, you know, your citation score is not so important as as your or your index is not as important as the quality of publication that you publish. So your first this thing should be to have quality publications and quality journals. Is there any word limit to a research paper? It depends from journal to journal. Good journals do not have any word limits. But around 5000 to 8000 words are a good is good enough for a good paper. Okay. Are there any other questions that the participants would like to ask? Participants, if you have any queries then you can ask directly or if or you can raise your hands or I think there is no queries. Okay. So basically writing the paper or listening to this presentation would make more sense. If you are actually trying to write something at present and then you might be facing some problems or issues. Then it will make more sense. So my suggestion to everybody is just start writing. Keep on writing. If you finish one paper, start another one. Don't wait for one to be published and then start writing another one. Okay. So with every paper you will improvise. So the paper that I wrote in 2007.  But had I not started the process, I wouldn't have been able to publish and scope us in next today. Okay. So the whole point is to keep on improvising your previous work and do not get deterred by rejections. That is going to happen. Your papers might be rejected. That's okay. You keep on improvising the paper and try to have it published. That's all. Okay. Thank you ma'am. Actually it's a publishing a paper or doing a good research is a very rigorous process and it needs lots of patience. And as you can see that at the time of joining there were more than 55 participants but it reduced to 42. So I think the participants who were listening till now they will be able to publish in one day or sometime they will get their paper published or if there might be many who have already published their papers and those who have not yet able to publish or who are trying to publish they will get some courage or get some tips. Our motto was that only so that those who are trying they can get a chance or they get some courage or those who have already good papers they get encouragement to publish more good work and we were having more than 200 registered candidates actually but this is what research actually that's why that is the I think characteristics of doing good research so more than 200 registered 55 participated and now we are 42. So thank you ma'am for your precise and very informative session. Now I would like to request our Smiti madam to offer photo of thanks. Smiti madam. Thank you. I am Dr. Smiti Sikha Chaudhary on behalf of Manilam Devan School of Management KK Handic State Open University and noticed India Commencement Management Association. First of all extend most sincere thanks to our resource person Dr. Janki Mistry faculty from Department of Business and Industrial Management Veer Naramath Saad Kuchrat University Surat who spared time from her busiest schedule to grace the occasion. Today we had an opportunity to hear your thoughts on research and publication opportunities. I will probably be going to help us in academic writing and will be really helpful for our young researchers. I extend a really hearty vote of thanks to our Honourable Vice-Chancellor in Charles, Professor Nipindranoyan Sirmasur for his constant support and encouragement in organizing the webinar. My sincere thanks to all the members of North East India Commencement Management Association for making this event successful. I extend my hearty thanks to all the faculty members of different educational institutions research scholars and students from various institutions present here for their active participation. I would like to thank the coordinator of the program Dr. Deepankar Malakar for the smooth conduct of the program. At last but not least I would like to thank Dr. Navankar Pathak and the technical support team for their help and support. Thank you all. Thank you ma'am. Thank you for inviting me. Thank you Deepankar Sir. Thank you VC Sir. I will surely convey your regards to Dr. Jareesh Desai and it was a great experience to be here with you and all the participants. It was a nice session. Thank you all. Thank you ma'am.


Welcome to Access to Trader, the number one community for those who are committed to taking control of their trading in order to achieve success, profitability, and longevity. Thank you for joining us. Here's Dan Shapiro to help you find your edge, master your process, and own your future. Hey guys, good evening everybody. Welcome to another edition of theAxisandTrader.com nightly wrap up show. Hope everybody is doing well. Hope everybody had a good day of trading. If you are brand new to the channel, thank you very much. Thank you very much for spending a couple of minutes with us. Only thing I ask is, right, just like, share, subscribe, leave comments, whatever you feel. Whatever you feel to interact with the community and we will try to continue to bring you unbiased technical analysis. So let's talk about it, right? So a few days ago, we reclaimed the 50-day moving average. Again, if you are brand new to the channel, pretty basic stuff. Anything over the 50-day is bullish. Anything over the under the 50-day is deemed a sell signal and it's bearish. So we reclaimed that 364 levels several days ago and all we've been doing is putting in higher highs and higher lows. And ever since we reclaimed the 50-day moving average, all of a sudden the people who was screaming, markets oversold, markets oversold from like a month ago, we're now screaming the markets overbought, markets overbought. I'm going to be looking to all in, bro, right? I'm going to be looking to zero data expiration puts right at the open because there's no way, right? Like we discussed last night, yet last time in the video, there's no way the market go up again. There's no way, right? No way. We had this whole conversation yesterday about, hey, just all you have to do is just wait for kind of a backside trade to start and wait for the previous day's range to lose instead of guessing, right? That's how we kind of finished off yesterday. And guess what? This is what the market did today. And guess what? All the bros that woke up this morning starting to say, I'm all in on puts at the open because the market can't go up again. Well, they got hammered again. And the reason why they got hammered again is we continues to build above the 50-day moving average. You can see here for the last all one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, seven days in a row that we are up. We're putting in, again, higher highs, higher lows. And there is no signs, right? There's no signs. We'll get to that in a second. That's kind of the surprise. There's no signs of a potential slowdown. We'll get to that in one second. However, the question is, well, how high can this market go? There's finally at least an answer. So at least waking up, at least tomorrow waking up in the same, I'm all in, bro. Market's going to bleed instead of having that same personality and having the same conversation with yourself, hoping this is finally at the top.  Okay, okay, it's your world, your diamond, your dance floor. But at least now you have a point of reference. And let me give you that point of reference. Again, it's kind of like my thank you for all you guys tuning in for your viewership. These are very specific numbers. Again, you guys know I'm all about technical analysis, not about guessing. At least now, if you believe that the market is going to have a pregnant pause, a stall out, right? At least a stall out at these levels, at least going into tomorrow, you finally have a point of reference. Write this down, right? Let's write this down. Look at the highs from October the 12th on the queues, right? You see the highs here, guys? The highs from October the 12th on the queues are $373.74. Everybody, write that down. $373.74, that's the highs. Look at today's highs, right? Today's highs is $373.58. On the surface, right? On the surface, it's a double top, right? On the surface. Here's the key for tomorrow, right? Here's the key for tomorrow. If you believe tomorrow is finally the day that if we gap up, we're going to reverse and crash down to the earth, or at least where my mother-in-law lives, right?  But the point is, at least tomorrow, if we can't take out, right? If we fail on the October 12th highs and we can't reclaim today's highs, at least then you can put on a position and say, alright, I know my max pain, right? I know my max pain, and if it starts building over the October 12th highs, I could get out of my position.  I forgot who said it in the room today. I think it was Goose. Yes, there's somebody in our webinar named Goose. They shout out to Goose. He said, everybody has an opinion, right? There's over a million opinions. There's only one confirmation, and that's a great line. And Kudos to Goose, that's a great, great line stuck with me for the whole day. And he's absolutely right. Everybody has an opinion. The market's going to go up, the market's going to go down. There's only one point of reference, what we call the confirmation. So at least you have a point of reference going into tomorrow, right? 373.75, that is the pregnant pause, the stall-out potential of the area. Yes, if the market hits that area or gets rejected over the area, is it possible we finally turn around and start getting a pretty good, deserved, well-deserved back test back into the rising five-day support? Absolutely, that's on the table. However, there's also another side of this coin is, well, the market can still keep on going, and that's the most important part to understand. What you think is irrational, what you think doesn't make sense. You're right. On the surface, you're absolutely right, but the market doesn't care what you think. Like I said, like Goose said, a million opinions, one point of reference, one confirmation. So if we start building above that level, right? If we start building above that level, 373.83, 374 level, then we can find ourselves all the way up to the upper bowl in Japan at 378. That's the official line of the sand. The bulls need to reclaim 373.75, 374, the bears need to make sure they get rejected there, and that will at least confirm for a very, very short pregnant pause a double top in this magnificent, wonderful seven-day route. That's it. There's nothing else. There's nothing more subjective to have a conversation about what I think is going to happen tomorrow. We're either going to get rejected at the top of the range and fade, or we are going to reclaim that top of the range and rally potentially to that 378 level at 378, then there's obviously another potential for a blow off top. But again, everybody wants to bull market until the market starts to rally.  What's going to make everybody so happy when the market goes down? Coush is a position, bro. You got to sit on your hands. When the market's going up, market can't rally. The market's overbought. My God, what is going to make some of you people happy? Go with the flow, man. Go with the flow. Let down your hair, right? Let down your curlies. Let down your hair. Go with the flow. Go with the price action. The market's strong. Get on the wave. The market's weak. Write it down. But the point is, let the market dictate your career. You don't dictate your career. Price action does. If you start to get into these really awful habits of trying to be in the prediction game to show everybody, especially on social media, which, oh my God, that you have to be so eloquent and you have to be so brilliant because people won't take you seriously, right? If that's your game, you have a very, very tough time in this business. If you believe in price action is king and everybody has an opinion, that's cool. But price action is king. And then the end of the game, that's going to determine whether you're in this business or you're going to be mosey along in that proverbial rotation door, whatever it's called, revolving door, right? So it's very, very important. Obviously, if you tried it today, you can see and kind of we talked about last night's video. There's a lot of really good aggressive price action today. As you could possibly imagine again, another series of higher highs and higher lows. That is the key. That's what we talked about last night's video. Remember what we talked about last night. If the stock wants to go higher, it needs to take out the previous day's high. If the stock wants to go lower, it needs to take out the previous day's low. Look what happened, right? The Q's took out the previous day's high, started building off this channel and started going nuts again. And here we are going into the pivots. So let's talk about today's pivots. Again, as you could possibly imagine, really, really strong session, right? Really strong session. So let's start off with Meta. Meta 319 needs to build. Here is Meta, right? Took out 19, took a while, man. Really, it really, I think we talked about Meta last night in the video. I think I gave you guys Meta last night in the video. So Meta, the 319 pivot, it sat there, sat there, finally exploded the 321. If the market continues to go higher tomorrow, I still like it above today's channel. But we'll see. We'll see. I might start sipping my own Kool-Aid and say, hey, maybe there is going to be a potential rejection, which I will be watching. But again, if the market starts reclaiming that level we talked about, I think there's a shot that Meta extends. The video was, again, really, really good today. 459.35. We caught an instant move on this thing very, very quickly. 439.35. Put an initial high of 460. And once it got above 460, I think we got like two bucks out of this thing. Man, it felt like 40 seconds. But boy, oh boy. You see that spike here? This was the spike from 360. You see the 460 spike? 460 to 462 was like 30, 40 seconds. Really good. They took out a lot of liquidity off that 360. Again, stock continues to go higher, continues to put higher lows. Maybe they start running this thing into earnings, into the upper channel of 477. Again, if the market continues, and the video is strong. But again, names like Nvidia, you would definitely want to know, because now it's a little bit stretched out in the last three, four days. But consider taking into weakness then into strength. Apple, we talked about yesterday, broke out yesterday above the 150-day moving average. Today continued. 179.45 needs to build. Here is Apple, right? Apple, beautiful, right? Confirmed the 150 SD, confirmed taste price channel, and got right into the 100-day moving average. Now it just needs to confirm the October, the 12 highs. You see how it's correlating? The cues in Apple, right? So October, 12 highs will be very, very important for a lot of names going into tomorrow's session. Zoom, again, got rejected at 63.61, never triggered. Crowd, right? DDOG came out really strong earnings. Crowd is obviously in the same group, 192 needs to build. Here was Crowd, right? Here was Crowd. Took out the 92, went almost to 95, nice move there. And the last one I believe was, well, there was two more. Now, NET, again, same group as Dog, 64.60 needs to build. Here was NET, right? Took out the 64.60, traded all the way up to 66 and change, which closed pretty much at the highs. And the last one was AMD, AMD 1340 needs to build. If you guys remember, we talked about yesterday's Shopify, AMD resting, right? Resting after earnings, and today it took out the 1340. Here's AMD, took out that 1340 and went all the way up to almost at 15 levels. That's it, guys. The stage is set for tomorrow. Again, we'll see if this market keeps on going. But if not, again, we are prepared on both sides of the market. That's 7370s, 374 level. Let's see how the bulls handle that. Because again, if they do get rejected, then yes, this will confirm a little miniature double top. It will signal a short-term sell signal, at least maybe a day or two. But again, the flip side, if these bulls start building off that level, we could start continuing to stretch the 378. So that's it, guys. The screenplay is written. The cast of Actors is, I guess, casted, right? Now we just need to see how the movie ends. Guys, have a great night, everybody. God bless. And I'll see you on tomorrow night's video. Take care.