Our goal at the International Journal of Current Research is to generate new knowledge. However, we don’t need just any new knowledge; it must also be useful and effective.
In academia, we usually measure impact by how frequently new knowledge is transmitted and, more importantly, how frequently it is referred to by others or used productively.
Most researchers are always on the lookout for fresh ideas (articles) that will pique their interest and have an impact.
However, the source of accurate thoughts isn’t always clear. When we try to remember how we came up with our most innovative and influential ideas in the past, it’s frequently no longer obvious, even to ourselves, how we did it.
And there’s evidence that accurate thoughts are becoming more difficult to find and display, as evidenced by the fact that in a wide range of financial sectors (agricultural, clinical, and Scientific Journal Articles), increasing research effort has traditionally been required to generate less and less innovation, indicating a sharp decline in research productivity.
We use data from over 19 million courses over five years to show that the method of knowledge creation has fundamentally changed, with the majority of high-effect studies now being produced by groups rather than individuals.
Even Nobel Prizes are increasingly being awarded to a small number of people at a time, with the average age at which they made their most important discoveries having significantly increased in recent years.
Given the increasing difficulty of creating the desired effect, it would be advantageous if there were reliable tips or techniques for generating new ideas and innovations.
There are numerous books, videos, lectures, specialists, programmes, publications, and projects in all fields and sectors that attempt to answer that question, but they are no longer all of excellent quality.
At International Research Paper, we look at studies that have effectively contributed to our understanding of where accurate ideas come from by analysing hard data from a variety of creative industries, such as technology, academia, music, and patents.
Despite the fact that this study no longer finds the name of the game system for innovative success, it does include a substantial sample that provides some insights into how innovation and effect are created.
Character researchers, corporations, and government policymakers may benefit from understanding this.
The lone genius pulling brilliant ideas out of thin air is a common place view of where innovation comes from.
However, extensive research has shown that the manufacturing of recent knowledge is inherently a method of recombination of current knowledge, whether in the context of generation and technology, or in a variety of other areas.
Recombination is, of course, the most important way for in-dwelling creatures to generate novelty (Darwin,1859)
The fact that recombination of current knowledge is a great way to create novelty is exciting, but it doesn’t tell us much about which styles or techniques for combining what we already know are more fruitful and impactful.
What indicators emerge for character researchers, corporations, and public policy if one accepts the belief that accurate thoughts disproportionately observe a signature that combines both novelty and conventionality?
On a personal and organisational level, these outcomes suggest finding a balance between exploitation (learning about your core area/subject matter and using your standard set of methods in journals like Journal of Engineering Research, etc.) and exploration (venturing to new topics and methods).
At IRPP, we continue to focus on high-quality work
We receive several manuscripts at the International Research Paper Publication (IRPP) that we must sadly table reject.
Some of the rejected manuscripts simply fall outside of the scope of the magazine and are thus no longer sent out for evaluation, and others are simply theoretically or methodologically undeserving of being considered.
However, it’s a frustrating situation for both editors and authors when a paper that has the potential to make a significant contribution is rejected because it’s so poorly written that we can’t see the paper’s potential.
We believe that this is a problem not only for the IRPP, but for all other educational journals with a strict editor-led peer-review policy.
So, why do authors send papers that are unfinished or poorly written? One reason we don’t spend more time proofreading to ensure accurate and concise language before filing is that we’re all under increasing pressure to publish more in shorter cycles.
In the world of education, a researcher’s, professor’s, department’s, faculty’s, or even a college’s (Engineering Research Paper) accomplishments are measured by the number of best courses they produce.
As a result, our supervisors, professors, and deans must examine a growing number of courses as indicators of task performance.
We will hardly ever spend twenty years for facts series and writing as Charles Darwin did while writing his traditional work “The Origin of Species” in our modern educational society.
So, how do we maintain sufficient excellence in our academic courses while under increasing pressure to have our works published?
In this commentary, we hope to provide some guidance on how to write precise academic articles such as Journal of Engineering Research within the discipline of Information Systems (IS) that have a chance of being evaluated and living on through the process.
Our goal is to provide doctoral college students and early career students with recommendations on what to look out for when writing articles.
However, we hope and believe that we will be able to provide some recommendations and ideas for more senior researchers.
The topics and ideas that we contribute here are primarily based on our extensive experience as authors, reviewers, editors, and teachers in the field of educational writing.
The following sections begin with a high-level overview of the building blocks of educational writing.
Then, moving from the title to the conclusion, we go over the overall definition of an educational article within the discipline of IS by providing a high-level view of the most important issues in each section of the paper.
We also provide examples of reviewer feedback that we’ve received as authors and editors in relation to specific sections of the paper.
The macro degree of your manuscript can be influenced by the shape of a paper. This shape is frequently based on two factors: first, the method, such as qualitative inquiries requiring more room for findings, and quantitative variations requiring more room for the development of hypotheses from the literature; and second, the traditions that have developed within the course of a magazine’s records.
So, in the case of the Scientific Journal Online, it’s critical that authors first research articles that are similar to the method they’re going to use, then loosely adhere to this shape.
|Are you an
Entrepreneur or Startup?
Do you have a Success Story to Share?
SugerMint would like to share your success story.
We cover entrepreneur Stories, Startup News, Women entrepreneur stories, and Startup stories
Many of our reviewers have written well-received papers and can be counted on to find a positive magazine taste among the submissions.