How to Publish a Paper in Social Sciences? ECON 496 I. Hakan Yetkiner Izmir University of Economics, Izmir, Turkey Izmir

1. How to Publish a Paper in Social Sciences? ECON 496 I. Hakan Yetkiner Izmir University of Economics, Izmir, Turkey Izmir University of Economics March 5th, 2009

2. Plan of Presentation • Scientific Communication • Publishing a Scientific Paper • Topic and Title • Abstract • Introduction • The Model • Feedback • Submission • Revision • Success • Final Suggestions

3. Scientific Communication • Scientific communication is simply sharing scientific knowledge with the scientific community. • Why is it done? • Feedback (avoiding repetitions and mistakes, improving quality, etc.) • Dissemination of knowledge (public good character of scientific research; the more you share, the higher is your productivity, à la Romer (1990))

4. Means of Scientific Communication • Research journals • Books • Reviews • Seminars and conferences • Working Papers • Web sites • Newsletters • Leaflets • Extension groups • Etc….

5. Step 1: Topic and Title Any research question is interesting and important. But, some problems are outdated (e.g., money demand in US) and some are popular (e.g., global warming). Strategy: Study an outdated topic only if you think that you may develop a new insight, e.g., Romer (1986). Strategy: Do make research on hot topics if you are risk averse. You may not make a big name quickly but sure you may be able to publish your paper. Bottom line: Any topic is interesting and valuable.

6. Step 1: Topic and Title Title must tell the reader what the paper is about. Title must be concise and comprehensive in expressing the content of your paper. Title must be consistent with the abstract and paper. Bad titles _cause immediate negative replies from the editor and referees _attract less interest from the audience _draw wrong audience. Bottom line: Bad titling is costly.

7. Step 1: Topic and Title Examples: (key words: inflation money supply unemployment) 1. Inflation function of the money supply and level of unemployment under equilibrium conditions in a market system (Cybernetics and Systems Analysis, Volume 43, Number 4 / July, 2007) Suggestion 1: The Impact of Money Supply and Unemployment on Inflation: The Ukrainian Case Suggestion 2: The Ukrainian Philips Curve 2. Long-Run Inflation-Unemployment Dynamics: The Spanish Phillips Curve and Economic Policy Suggestion: Dynamic Phillips Curve: The Spanish Case

8. Step 2: Abstract An abstract is a brief summary, or the “nutshell” of a scientific paper. Itallows one to quickly preview the content of a scientific publication It generally includes: _The hypotheses tested _A brief description of the methods used _The findings An abstract must be clear and sharp in its statements, methods used, and description of findings.

9. Step 2: Abstract—A good Example to a badly written abstract!! • Inflation function of the money supply and level of unemployment under equilibrium conditions in a market system Abstract Based on a mathematical model of market self-regulation of inflation, it is shown that a positive inflation rate is the necessary condition of annual economic growth. Inflation is less by one than the product of money deflator and production deflator. The money deflator is proportional to the money supply in annual circulation, and it is inversely proportional to the cost of the capital invested in production sphere. The production deflator is an increasing function of the level of unemployment. An analysis of market self-regulation of inflation is illustrated by the example of the Ukraine economy.

10. Step 2: Abstract—Another example to a badly written abstract!! 2. Long-Run Inflation-Unemployment Dynamics: The Spanish Phillips Curve and Economic Policy Abstract This paper takes a new look at the long-run dynamics of inflation and unemployment in response to permanent changes in the growth rate of the money supply. We examine the Phillips curve from the perspective of what we call "frictional growth", i.e. the interaction between money growth and nominal frictions. After presenting theoretical models of this phenomenon, we construct an empirical model of the Spanish economy and, in this context, we evaluate the long-run inflation-unemployment tradeoff for Spain and examine how recent policy changes have affected it. Which technique is used? Which period is covered? What have been found?

11. Step 2: Abstract—An Example to a well-written abstract!! 3. Endogenous Determination of FDI Growth and Economic Growth: The OECD Case Abstract This paper tests the endogenous relationship between FDI growth and economic growth using a panel dataset for 23 OECD countries for the period 1975-2004. In particular we estimate a two-equation simultaneous equation system with the generalized methods of moments (GMM) that treats economic growth and FDI growth as endogenous variables. We find that FDI growth and economic growth are significant determinants of each other. We also find that export growth rate and human capital are statistically significant determinants of both FDI growth and economic growth. Our findings lead us to conclude that FDI growth and economic growth have an endogenous relationship.

12. Step 3: Introduction and Literature Survey Introduction firstly answers “why you did this work?” Introduction secondly answers “What has been done until your work?” Introduction thirdly answers“What did you find?” In short, in the introduction you are trying to persuade the reader that your paper is original and worth to read.

13. Step 3: Introduction and Literature Survey Example to “why you do this work”: This paper examines a channel that has received little attention (…)

14. Step 3: Introduction and Literature Survey The question “what has been done until your work?”bridges between “why you do this work?” and “what did you find?” This question is called Literature Survey. Warning: Literature survey costs a lot time but unavoidable. The cost of an incomplete survey is more than its time cost. Incomplete survey bears the risk that somebody has already done what you are planning to do. That makes your work and labor worthless.

15. Step 3: Introduction and Literature Survey Example to literature survey:

16. Step 3: Introduction and Literature Survey Example to literature survey:

17. Step 3: Introduction and Literature Survey Example to “what did you find?”:

18. Step 4: The Model—Theoretical Framework Every research must be based on theory. The paper must set out the theoretical framework very clearly.

19. Step 4: The Model—Theoretical Framework Example:

20. Step 4: The Model—Application (Empirics) Data Use/Collection _Collected data sets _Own data collection Empirical Techniques (be up-to-date!) _Econometrics _Statistical Techniques _Questionnaire Computer literacy (34 commercial, 17 open source) _Microfit, EViews, SPSS, Stata, GAUSS, etc…

21. Step 4: The Model—Application (Empirics) Example: Data Use/Collection

22. Step 4: The Model—Hints during writing • Write the abstract the last • Keep the introduction draft until you finalize your research • Take notes on your readings to use in the literature survey • Add references as you read • Prepare a template file • Use double size line spacing • Use a specific font (e.g., times new roman) • Etc…

23. Step 5: Conclusion Conclusion is not only a summary of what you did find out of your research. Obviously, you will present all your findings in a consolidated nature in the conclusion. Set policy implications of your findings More than this, you must discuss what your findings does imply in terms of future research.

24. Step 5: Conclusion Example:

25. Step 6: Feedback • Informal talks • Seminars • Working paper • Conferences

26. Step 6:Feedback-Informal talks Use all opportunities to persuade your colleagues (in the same department) to read your work. Their feedback 1. will give confidence to you to share your results in more formal environments 2. will inspire additional ideas that you may add to your paper

27. Step 6: Feedback-Seminars Do present your research results in your department and in close-by universities. As you discuss your paperyou get serious feedback from the audience (especially when you have a discussant). This makes you more confident (or diffident) on your results

28. Step 6: Feedback-Working papers Publishing your research in the form of a working paper has two important advantages: 1. You may always claim that you are the first that advanced the idea 2. If you are lucky, you may get some feedback from people working in the same area.

29. Step 6: Feedback-Conferences This is the formal and ultimate feedback marketplace before you submit your paper. You will get professional feedback if you are in the right conference. The feedback will signal you whether your paper is interesting and worthy to submit to a journal. If you are lucky, you may even be invited to submit your paper to a (conference) journal. Be selective on conferences

30. Step 7: Submission Journal selection -General Journals -Specialized journal Cover letter -Who you are. Online submissions -Be patient and careful Tables and figures -Organize well -use good captions References -Be complete

31. Step 8: Revision Referee reports Editor notes

32. Step 8: Revision Example to referee reports: General remarks 1. As a first general remark, I think the article as a whole is somewhat short, and at present too much in working/conference paper format. For publication in REE, it should be expanded, and given more substance. This applies in particular (but basically everywhere) to the Introduction and Discussion/Conclusion: the paper should, and could, be significantly improved by enlarging these sections. 2. For the Introduction, more attention can be given to why precisely it is relevant to expand the Romer model in the way as suggested. The way the model is expanded can be more extensively described, as well as the way it is embedded in the larger literature on (endogenous) growth analysis. Also references to how the proposed approach relates to recent literature and issues, more practically, in the energy field should be made, in order to point out more its concrete relevance and applicability. What are practical and real-life merits of expanding the Romer model in the way suggested, and what can be expected and/or what is intended with such an expansion? Could this model be used to derive policy conclusions with respect to the innovation and dissemination of renewables designed to combat global warming?

33. Step 8: Revision Example to referee reports: Detailed remarks ___The English style and understandability of the entire text should be improved. To give just a few examples: In the Introduction: (1) Explain "creative destruction as a disincentive"; (2) Be more clear as to what "The latter..." refers to; (3) "Differences between intermediates that are embodied in those intermediates"is not understandable; (4) Keep symmetries in "First, ..." and "Second, ..."; (5) explain "horizontal"; (6) "More in particular" should be "In particular...". In the last section of the Conclusion, (7) "...The final output producers..." is a sentence that derails. ___On p.1 "weakly handled" is an odd expression. Moreover, and more importantly, this statement should be expanded and explained significantly. In the first sentence of the first section of the Introduction, the use of "i.e." is incorrect.

34. Step 8: Revision Example to referee reports--Answers General remarks As a first general remark, I think the article as a whole is somewhat short, and at present too much in working/conference paper format. For publication in REE, it should be expanded, and given more substance. This applies in particular (but basically everywhere) to the Introduction and Discussion/Conclusion: the paper should, and could, be significantly improved by enlarging these sections. Our response: The paper has been revised and significantly extended. In addition, we have added more discussion concerning (endogenous) growth theory, energy-economy and environment-economy models and induced technological change, as well as discussions of important technical details (with three appendices), and policy analysis.

35. Step 8: Revision Example to referee reports--Answers General remarks Our response: In the Introduction, we first argue why the Romer model is a natural candidate for incorporating energy into an endogenous growth framework (see p.5). In addition to this, we discuss the endogenous growth literature and especially the endogenous technological change literature and identify the place of our work in that literature (see pages 5-7). We also cite two of a very limited number of studies that have also attempted to incorporate energy or non-renewable resources into an endogenous technological change framework (see first line on page 3 and following lines). We then point out the relevance of our work to the energy and environmental models (see pages 3-4). We indicate that the recent focus of several studies on induced technological change has some relevance to our work, although these studies focus very much on the energy-sector and technological change in that sector, in contrast to our macro positioning. We discuss in the introduction (and also in the text in many instances) at a fairly detailed level the implications of capital-energy substitutability, and a Hicksian productivity variable (subject to change) in intermediate good production function (see, e.g., page 9). We stressed that our model captures both horizontal product differentiation and vertical quality differentiation, both are very much supported by casual observation. This model has a very strong policy implication that has been stressed openly, especially in the conclusion. Basic research is driven by market incentives (profits). Contrary to expectations, rising energy prices may not be sufficient to induce energy-saving research; and consequently, rising energy prices may limit technological change. Hence, an energy-specific research policy is necessary for directing research to innovate energy-efficient and environment-friendly energy resources.

36. Step 8: Revision Example to editor reports: As you are revising the paper, we would also like you to consider making the connection with other papers published in the Applied Economics journals more strongly, if at all possible. We are asking you to do this for two reasons. First, we want work published in the journals to form a consistent body of research, and making the connection with other papers published in the series (even if, in the spirit of healthy scientific debate, you take issue with them) is one way of ensuring that this is the case. Second, the AE journals are their own best ambassadors in highlighting and bringing to the profession's attention the excellent work, which has been published in the journals.

37. Step 8: Revision Example to editor reports—Our reply Our reply: Since the technique we use has not been done before, we had difficulty to find further works, even in the literature. Among the new references we added, it includes Glick, P. and Sahn, E. 1998, “Health and Productivity in a Heterogeneous Urban Labour Market”, Applied Economics, vol. 30, pp. 203-16. We would like to emphasize that our motivation to this work is due to Rivera, B. and Currais, L. 1999, “Economic Growth and Health: Direct Impact or Reverse Causation”, Applied Economics Letters, vol. 6, pp. 761-64. In that respect, we are grateful to Applied Economics Journals.

38. Step 9: Publication (hardcopy) Errors are irrecoverable. Read many times before you make the final submission. Be patient! Be patient! Be patient!

39. Conclusion Publishing a paper is an art and craftsmanship. The more you are getting experienced, the quicker you would be able to publish (new) journal papers. Good Luck in your scientific journey.