that's Elsevier! hahahah

@[PF] T.J.
Try targeting at non-ISI journal if you thrive for the feeling of getting your paper published. By the way the comments given by international reviewers are useful in your PhD writing too =)

Remember don't publish the whole idea to journal prior to submission of your PhD.

hurm, for me it is OK to target a non-ISI journal; easier to publish, less strict editor/reviewer. but my supervisor keep on insist to publish on those ISI journal. wants to keep up his records, don't want to publish in those journal without  a high impact factor. pity for us students attempt to publish into those high impact factor journal usually resulted in paper rejection. as a result ---> morale down...

gogo tj sifu +u+u!

wanna read ur paper arh.... giv me link when u publish.. hehe...

though i may not understand.. lolx....\
i think he means dun publish whole idea in journal before final phd cz scare people steal idea.....

yeah Ivan helped me to convey the meaning of that sentence.

Normally a PhD would have several 'research objectives'. I have seen comments from other forums saying they are producing 3 separate journals out of their PHD thesis.

My currently targeted journal "Journal of Accounting Education" doesn't carry an impact factor, and their reviews were sharp and piercing to heart lol... but at least they do expressly encourage the writer, otherwise submitting a phailed journal will result in humiliation =D

humiliation, rejection, sharp piercing to the heart comment;
that the barrier we authors need to face if we want to publish international papers.

surprised to see me lurking here also leh? 

lolx..... blink blink ha eyes adi past few years.. lolx... nt looong way leh...
 
  wanna steal ur paper aso hard.. cz dun und..lolx....

whut is salami slicing??    a kind of fish?? 

means that 1 part of the research were split into few papers instead should be 1 part = 1 paper.
some kind of shortcut way to publish more papers but with limited data/experiment...

correct?

owh... ok.... haha...

nw clearer abit,,.. hehe... thx.... wish u all the best in publishing ur papers! 

aiks, I just received an email from HR department saying my scholarship letter is ready for collection.

Officially start my master of philosophy =/

welcome BatuItu.

may we encourage you in your journey of obtaining your Master degree.

Strike a balance between research and your personal life too. Other than that we will need enthusiastic and unwavering commitment in completing the journey =)

Hmm, I'm just wondering. Is it true that some people who are doing their thesis only take references that supports their research and not those that may be able to disprove their research?

That was what my lecturer told us during a lecture.

Is this the way they do things in Malaysia???

No... you should instead try to explain the observed differences between your results and others - why your results don't agree with others. Maybe they used different methodologies? What, then, are the merits of your methodologies and how your results can fit into the big picture (ie. the collective knowledge of your research topic so far).

Yeah, I thought so too. But isn't there lecturer whose focus is solely on teaching and not researching? (Other than applying new knowledge, that is)

Lecturer in college.

Depending on some fields, doing the PhD itself is considered a "working experience".

For example, a psychologist doing a PhD research, that itself is a working experience for the psychologist. Or those in the pure science field, doing their PhD research is already an experience by itself.

I know that many tend to think that PhD is all about theory which is not true at all. PhD involves intense research, including both primary (field) research (this is where you have to go out and meet people or the object of your research) and secondary (library) research.

Being able to challenge and explain why others' results not agreeing with yours give so much more credibility to your research, providing that your data is solid enough. This is what science is about, after all.

A literature review that supports the hypotheses can be a double-edged sword - it can strengthen our hypotheses, and at the same time decreasing the novelty of research paper. Since so much research already shown positive results, there's little value to conduct studies on similar issue.

you may conduct similar topic, even with large amount of literature review in such area. As long as your justification is logical, arguing that

why your study is different, or why theirs are different from your objective
and why your study will fill in the gap of knowledge

In social science, it boils down to the ability of a researcher to justify. Of course, with sound and critical literature review and valid and reliable research methods.

background review- state what researcher did, and their result.
critical review- criticise their work (not person, be careful), comment on their result, find their flaw, highlight the loopholes. The best way to aim is their sampling technique.

Good to see a discussion going on =)

---

Added on April 4, 2012, 11:58 pm
On the contrary, I find that review papers are very difficult to write because it involves very profound understanding on the subject matter. Get one good review paper published, your citation will soar too 

Does it means they are the publisher, editor and reviewer of the journal? I do notice before, but since they hold position as associate prof, so nobody questionized it..

Some they are the editor of the same journal, but i would think that the paper will be reviewed by the assoc editors

On a related note, anyone here is a reviewer? i think one should get involve in peer-review as well.

I believe that the 'review paper' we are discussing here is also referred as 'conceptual paper' in my field. In social science/business, I've seen a PhD candidate secure her proposal defense because she published one conceptual paper to lock her model.

I wish to write a review paper too. But what is said, it requires deep knowledge in one subject area. I've been looking into my field 'communication apprehension' for at least 2 years. So can I write?

Possibly no, because I am no assoc. prof D=

i am working with fungal protein at the moment