Khaled Hussainey Professor of Accounting Portsmouth Business School

ﻣﻬﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻮﺙ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻭ ﻧﺸﺮﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﺪﻭﺭﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴﺔ Khaled Hussainey Professor of Accounting Portsmouth Business School The University of Portsmouth 1

The structure of the presentation - Why do we need international publication? Types of articles Publication Criteria Writing a Research Paper Journal Rankings Major Journals in the Field Journal Selection Publication Process Tips for the Journal Submission Editorial Decisions Managing Editors' and Reviewers' Comments

I am a Ph. D student!!! Why Should I Publish my Work? Should I include my supervisor as a co-author? If so, who should be the first author? Can I publish my work with others inside or outside the University? Do I need a permission from my supervisor?

Why do we need international publication?

Types of articles Conference papers Working papers Work in progress Forthcoming papers Early view papers In press papers

Journal articles Regular Issues Special Issues Journal Fees (Submission fees versus Acceptance Fees) Open Access articles

Publication Criteria The research idea should be relevant to the reader of the journal and also should be interesting. The research motivation(s) should be clearly stated. Novel incremental contribution(s). The reported findings have not been published elsewhere. Contribution(s) to knowledge, theory, methodology or practice. Rigorous methodology. Empirical analysis should be performed to a high technical standard and is described om sufficient details. Clear theoretical/practical implications (so what questions? ) Reasonable writing

Publication Criteria The assessment of papers is based on: Potential contribution to the literature; Appropriateness of the topic; Quality of the writing; Hypothesis development, data, and methodology. Journal of Financial Research

10

Where to find a new research idea? - Research in top-tier journals - Research from top-tier business schools - Top-tier researchers - Top-tier conferences - Newspapers: Financial times, Wall street journals - TVs: CNBS, Bloomberg - Twitter of professionals (e. g. , Superstar financial analysts, famous investors, etc. ) - Youtube - Blogs, professional forums, etc. - Professional websites: CIMA; ACCA; ICAEW , Io. D, Deloitte, Pricewaterhouse. Coopers, Ernst & Young, KPMG, Calpers, TIAACREF, Amundi, IMF, World Bank, Bank for International Settlements, World Economic Forum, NBER, IFC, ECGI (European Corporate Governance Institute), - Global Corporate Governance Forum (GCGF), etc.

12 Where to find a new research idea? • Read 1. RECENT RESEACH PAPERS IN TOP RANKED JOURNALS 2. REVIEW ARTICLES 3. RECENT WORKING PAPERS (i. e. SSRN) 4. RECENT TOP QUALITY CONFERENCE PAPERS 5. SPECIAL ISSUES (CURRENT AND FORTHCOMING) 6. RECENT PHD THESES IN TOP RANKED UNIVERSITIES • • Find out limitations and suggestions for future research. Write down your ideas. Explain your ideas to experienced researchers. Check data availability and other requirements for the analysis.

The structure of a research paper Title Abstract Introduction [overview; research objectives; research questions; research motivations; research importance; potential contributions; key findings; the structure of thesis]. Conceptual Framework [discuss the main concepts/themes of the paper] Theoretical framework [which theory and why? ]. Literature review [critically survey prior studies; identify gaps; explain how your paper fills at least one of these gaps]. Research method [context; sample selection criteria; sample period selection; research hypotheses; the justification of the research method; data collection; variables definitions and measurement; source of data…etc. ]. Empirical analysis [descriptive analysis; research findings; accepting/rejecting hypotheses; answering research questions]. Discussion [the link between the findings and both theory and literature] Conclusion [summary of the key findings; implications; research limitation and suggestions for future research].

The title of the paper The research title is usually read first and read the most. It should capture the reader’s attention to the main contribution(s) of thesis. A good research title should contain the fewest possible words needed to adequately describe the contribution(s) of thesis. 14

Abstract Write briefly and clearly. It mainly covers the following points: � Purpose: What are the aim/objectives of writing thesis? � Design/methodology/approach: How are the objectives achieved? Include the main method(s) used for the research. What is the approach to the topic and what is theoretical or subject scope of thesis? � Findings: What was found in the course of the work? This will refer to analysis, discussion, or results. � What is the original contribution of thesis What is new in thesis? State the value of thesis and to whom.

Keywords A keyword can be just a single word, but it can also be a phrase or combination of 2+ words. Why do journals ask for keywords? Journals ask for anywhere between 3 -8 keywords Do not use words or terms in the title as keywords. The function of keywords is to supplement the information given in the title. Words in the title are automatically included in indexes, and keywords serve as additional pointers.

A good introduction normally includes: 1. Research background 2. Research aim/objectives 3. Research problem 4. Research importance 5. Research motivations 6. Research contributions 7. Key findings 8. Paper structure 17

Theory: Is your study’s conceptual framework logically consistent and credible? - Develop your conceptual framework by applying theoretical arguments and/or previous empirical findings to a specific setting - Explain how your study distinguishes among alternative explanations for your predictions, or discuss why it is not important to do so in your setting (Evans III et al, 2015)

19 Saunders et al. (2012)

20 Saunders et al. (2012)

Research Questions What is your precise research question? You need to consider (Evans III et al, 2015): - The meaning of key terms in the research question. The scope of the research question. Whether the research question involved a casual relation or an association.

Research hypotheses The hypotheses should base on relevant theories (sometimes base on relevant empirical results of previous studies or rather reliable arguments). 22

Research design and analysis (Evans III et al, 2015) a. Research design and analysis for Archival Studies i. Select the appropriate sample, proxies, and empirical models ii. Consider alternative explanations iii. Conduct tests to support your theory and rule out alternative explanations b. Research design and analysis for Experimental Studies i. Consider in advance which design and operationalization of variables provide the best test of your theory and help rule out alternative explanations ii. Consider potential mediating or moderating variables that would be consistent with your theory and inconsistent with alternative explanations iii. Consider incorporating a predicted interaction to control for potential omitted variables iv. Conduct tests to support your theory and rule out alternative explanations c. Research design and analysis for Field Studies i. Establish field data reliability ii. Ensure the validity of the field study inferences d. Research design and analysis for Survey Studies i. Match the design of the survey with the purpose of the study ii. Establish survey data generalizability iii. Ensure the internal validity of the survey study inferences

Interpretation of empirical results (Evans III et al 2015) i. Describe the statistical significance, and the economic magnitude or effect size of the results, if applicable ii. Discuss and justify the pattern and magnitude of the results based on your story and findings in prior studies iii. If data support only part of the predicted pattern, or if different analyses lead to different statistical inferences, consider possible reasons for this to evaluate the reliability of your findings

Conclusions (Evans III et al, 2015) i. Relate your conclusions back to your motivation and research question ii. Avoid over-generalizing or over-concluding iii. Discuss the contribution and implications of your finding

26 REFERENCES The bibliography is put into alphabetical order according to the surnames of the authors you are citing Be consistent in writing references Example: Hassanein, A and Hussainey, K. (2015). “Is forward-looking financial disclosure really informative? Evidence from UK narrative statements”, International Review of Financial Analysis, 41, 52 -61. Cite only relevant articles Cite every article at least once Verify correct articles are cited in your paper Cite related articles in the target journal Cite relevant articles by the editor and associate editor

27 Tables; Charts; Appendices Charts, tables, diagrams, appendices and all equations should be original work. In the event it is necessary to use an item from another source, it must be cited appropriately. Charts, tables, diagrams, appendices should be placed – in most cases – at the end of the paper after the reference list. In the case of table, authors should write INSERT TABLE ……ABOUT HERE in the body of their manuscript. Be sure that the content of the charts, tables, diagrams, appendices and all equations are properly discussed in the body of the paper.

28 Footnotes should be numbered consecutively throughout the manuscript with superscript Arabic Numerals (1, 2, 3, ……). They may be presented at the bottom of the related pages or collected in a separate file at the end of the text.

Journal Rankings

ABS Rankings ABS Ratings (2015) 4* 4 3 2 1 Academic Journal Quality Guide: http: //www. bizschooljournals. com/

The following links offer Journal rankings for other fields of study

Major Journals in the Field

Major Financial Accounting Journals 34

Journal Selection Reputations are made in the best journals Become familiar with the range of journals Check relevance and the scope of journal Be aware of journal preferences and style q q Specific orientation around research approaches (e. g. JAE - economics based). Special interest in research (e. g. EAR - European research, Critical Perspectives in Accounting – critical theory, Accounting Historian Journal – accounting history). Preference for a style of research TAR, JAR – US styled theory driven, hard data Broad interests covering all areas (e. g. AOS, CAR, AAAJ, EAR)

How do you find the right journal? Aims and scope of the Journal (Journal website) The Journal of Corporate Finance aims to publish high quality, original manuscripts that analyze issues related to corporate finance. Contributions can be of a theoretical, empirical, or clinical nature. Topical areas of interest include, but are not limited to: financial structure, payout policies, corporate restructuring, financial contracts, corporate governance arrangements, the economics of organizations, the influence of legal structures, and international financial management. Papers that apply asset pricing and microstructure analysis to corporate finance issues are also welcome. 36

Publication Process

Tips for the Journal Submission Preliminary issues to be considered before sending a manuscript to the journal q Present and attend conferences Feedback on your paper Identify other work in the area Network with peer group Identify yourself to ‘key’ players in your field Present and attend seminars/workshops Seek feedback from colleagues and experts Try and link your paper to the interests of experts q Acknowledgement - funding organisations, conferences…etc Reviewers see many papers, so a well written, clearly presented paper will impress. q Make sure you are totally honest with editors totally honest q DO NOT submit same paper to different

What journal and its style? q. Identify target journal q. Review at least the last five years and select papers that are similar in topic and style to yours q. Do your own ‘best practice’ analysis of the structure and style of papers in your area q. Learn from others’ experiences with the journal. q. Write to the style of target journal q. Check instructions to authors q. Check Editors’ and Associate Editors’ publication and cite their relevant papers q. Reference papers from journal you are submitting to

SUBMISSION Cover Letter to the editor (1) Dear Professor [The Editor] I am pleased to send you a paper that we wish you to consider for possible publication in……… This is an entirely new paper that represents an original contribution to ………. . literature. It introduces ……………. . Our results have not been demonstrated in any other paper. We strongly believe that ………. would be the best place to publish our paper. This paper is our original unpublished work and it has not been submitted to any other journal for review. Looking forward to your response in due course. Kind regards,

Sample Cover Letter (Requirement for 4 experts) Dear Editor of the [please type in journal title]: Enclosed is an article, entitled “…………. . " Please accept it as a candidate for publication in the [journal title]. Below are our responses to your submission requirements. 1. Title and the central theme of the article. Article title: “…………………. " This study examines ……………. . . 2. Which subject/theme of the journal the material fits. …………. . 3. Why the material is important in its field and why the material should be published in the journal ……………………. We strongly believe the contribution of this study warrants its publication in the [journal title/acronym]. 4. Names, addresses, and email addresses of four international experts in the subject of your paper Professor……. Address…. . Email……Expertise: Relationship: I met Dr. …. . only once at a conference in ……. . I do not know him personally. Finally, this article is our original unpublished work and it has not been submitted to any other journal for review. Sincerely,

Electronic submission 42

Electronic submission 43 Manuscripts should be submitted to the Editor, A. Rashad Abdel-khalik, The International Journal of Accounting. Electronic submission is required. Submitted manuscripts should be sent to tijajournal@illinois. edu.

Hard copies submission

What to do after submitting a Paper? When you enquire about the status of a paper? A year? Nine months? Some journals let you know timelines on their websites. Check there first.

Editorial Decisions and Managing. Editors’ and Reviewers’ Comments Editorial Decisions: 1. Desk Rejection 2. Acceptance with no changes required 3. Conditional Acceptance 4. Revise and Resubmit (R & R) (then 2; 3 or 5) 5. Rejection based on referees’ comments

47 1. DESK REJECTION Sample (1) Each manuscript submitted to our journal is carefully pre-screened by one of our Screening Editors to make sure that the manuscript fits with the mission of our journal. As you can see from the Screening Editor’s comments below, your manuscript was judged to not be a clear fit with our mission and therefore recommended that it not be sent out for a formal review. As such, I regret to inform you that we will no longer be able to consider this particular manuscript for potential publication in our journal.

48 1. DESK REJECTION Sample (2) Thank you for recent submission entitled “……” for consideration for publication in ………Unfortunately, the editors have decided not to continue with the review process for your submission. While the topic is of interest and within the scope of ………, the editors have suggested that the paper needs substantial development and an increased level of rigour. It may be worthwhile to consider exposing this paper to research seminars and conferences to obtain valuable feedback, which will assist in developing the paper for future submission.

1. DESK REJECTION q Don’t give an Editor a good reason to give you a desk rejection!!! Bradbury (2012), "Why you don't get published: an editors view", Accounting and Finance 52, 343 -358 q Why desk reject? o There is no fit with the journal o No contribution to the literature o Poorly written o Poorly executed

Why desk reject? - An empirical paper that replicates earlier work for a new sample (or new international data) is generally not publishable unless the sample allows important new insights. - A theoretical paper where the contribution is the technique is not publishable. - A paper that is poorly executed, not well polished, does not recognize the literature or in general is submitted too early is not publishable. - It is not a referee's job to work with the authors to improve the paper. - Journal of Corporate Finance

Why desk reject? The number of submissions to the Journal of Banking and Finance (JBF) has been increasing markedly for several years Implementation of a Desk Rejection Policy. - 'out of scope‘: Submitted papers have little direct relationship to the core JBF issues, even if such papers are good; - Do address a JBF issue, but do not meet our quality standards. - An analysis that is inappropriate to the research question being asked; - An analysis that is not sufficiently rigorous ; - Empirical problems (endogeneity, self-selection, sample bias, omitted variables, alternative proxies, etc. ) - Problems in the interpretation of the results (alternative interpretations (disentangling), spurious results, etc. ) - The language, style, punctuation, or grammar does not conform to accepted standards of scholarship; - The paper is excessively long: Write in a complete but concise style; - The paper makes only a marginal contribution to the field of research.

Why desk reject? - Not being ready for submission; Not well polished. Poor exposition of the paper: grammar, punctuation, and syntax are sufficiently poor; Paper not well motivated and the story is not clear. It is not an editor's or reviewer's job to find the author's motivation and story, and in the review process edit the paper. Paper uses data from a non-U. S. country applied to a research question previously addressed with U. S. data: The research has to be contributive. Journal of Financial Research

Managing Desk Rejection o DO NOT aggressively reply to the Editors! - Reject the rejection (if the paper fits with the journal) - If you decided to submit elsewhere; make sure that you address the editor’ comments from the rejected manuscript because different journals use the same policy

2. ACCEPTANCE WITHOUT ANY CORRECTION Example 1: It is a pleasure to accept your manuscript entitled “………………" in its current form for publication in Example 2: We have received a feedback on your paper from a reviewer which is generally positive with a few formatting remarks we will do ourselves. Therefore I decide to accept your paper to have it published in ………

55 2. ACCEPTANCE WITHOUT ANY CORRECTION How to respond? Thank the editor by email for the good news! If the acceptance is received after different rounds of revisions, DO NOT forget to thank the editor and the referees for their valuable comments in the acknowledgement. Proofread the paper again and inform the editor if you find any spelling or grammatical mistakes. Inform the editor if you discover any mistakes in the paper. Remember to update your information especially your email address (if changed).

3. CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE (SUBJECT TO MINOR CHANGE) Example I have now received a report on your paper in which the referee makes a number of recommendations for improvement. Both referees are positive. I am pleased to accept your paper for publication at ……. . Subject to the following minor comments: Referee [1] Improve the motivation of your study Referee [2] Discuss the limitation of your study Suggest ideas for future research Proofread the paper before the final submission

57 3. CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE (SUBJECT TO MINOR CHANGE) How to respond? Thank the editor by email for the good news! If the acceptance is received after different rounds of revisions, DO NOT forget to thank the editor and the referees for their valuable comments in the acknowledgement. Prepare a table to consider all comments are shown in their report (same order). Agreement with every comment is not mandatory Can just defend your position (but not “too often”)

58 3. CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE (SUBJECT TO MINOR CHANGE ) Submission of revised manuscript “A sample reply to referees” We are grateful to both referees for their useful comments. We have fully revised the paper thoroughly in response to the issues raised in the two referees’ reports. Referees 1 N Referees' Comments Authors ' reply Page No. 1 2 3 4 Referees 2 1 2 3 4

59 3. CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE (SUBJECT TO MINOR CHANGE ) Submission of A revised manuscript* A polite cover letter to Editor. Thank referees for their valuable comments & suggestions. Clearly mark changes in the revised MS Submit both the revised version of the paper and the reply. Be patient: Weeks to several months after MS re-submission Some journals “RE-review” a revised MS * Chenhall, 2010

60 4. The Revise & Resubmit (R&R) Example Your manuscript entitled “………………. . ", which you submitted to …………………, has been reviewed. The referee comments are included at the bottom of this letter. The referee(s) would like to see some major revisions made to your manuscript before publication. Therefore, I invite you to respond to the referee(s)' comments and revise your manuscript. When you revise your manuscript please highlight the changes you make in the manuscript by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or coloured text. NOTE: Normal revision time: up to 12 months (earlier is better, but not too early!)

4. The Revise & Resubmit (R&R) Your odds are now better than 50%. Referees are always right, or else… Ideal is to get the reviewer to work with you on the paper • Make sure you respond to every point raised by reviewers, even if you disagree with them, or you think the comments are odd. Prepare a detailed Guide to Revisions. If you disagree with comments put your arguments clearly, do not suggest that the reviewer is wrong. • • If a reviewer gets difficult on a point that you are confident about you can always appeal to the editor.

4. The Revise & Resubmit (R&R) o An invitation to revise and resubmit (R&R) does not mean an automatic acceptance. o Make your letter to the editor and responses to the reviewers as clear and precise as possible. • Make the review process easy for the reviewers • Try to engage the reviewer – – Acknowledge the helpfulness of the reviewer Provide the reviewer with options If you disagree with a point argue your case carefully without personally attacking the reviewer Aim to get the reviewer to work with you on the paper (not against you)

63 4. THE REVISE & RESUBMIT (R&R) “A sample reply to referees” We are grateful to both referees for their useful comments. We have fully revised the paper thoroughly in response to the issues raised in the two referees’ reports. Referees 1 N Referees' Comments Authors ' reply Page No. 1 2 3 4 Referees 2 1 2 3 4

64 4. THE REVISE & RESUBMIT (R&R) Golden rules of responding to referees’ comments* Rule 1: Answer completely Rule 2: Answer politely Rule 3: Answer with evidence * Williams, (2014). How to reply to peer review comments when submitting papers for publication. http: //eprints. nottingham. ac. uk/859/2/How_to_reply_to_referees. pdf

65 4. THE REVISE & RESUBMIT (R&R) In writing a reply to referees, try to avoid opening phrases such as: q“we totally disagree…” (Williams, 2014) q“the referee obviously does not know this field” (Williams, 2014) q“There is a clear misunderstanding here by the referee” q“This is an unfair point by the referee” And similar phrases

66 Some useful phrases to start your replies to critical comments* We agree with the referee that ……, but The referee is right to point out …. , yet In accordance with the referees’ wishes, we have now changed this sentence to Whilst we agree with the referee that……. . It is true that …, but We acknowledge that our paper might have been…. , but We too were disappointed by the low response rate… We agree that this is an important area that requires further research…. . We support the referee’s assertion that …. , although With all due respect to the reviewer, we felt that this point is not correct… * Williams (2014)

67 5. Rejection based on referees’ comments Sample (1): I regret to inform you that the reviewers have now considered your paper but unfortunately feel it unsuitable for publication in …………. . The comments of the reviewers and the associate editor responsible for your paper are either included at the end of this decision email. I hope you will find them to be constructive and helpful. You are of course now free to submit the paper elsewhere should you choose to do so.

68 5. Rejection based on referees’ comments Sample (2): I am writing regarding manuscript entitled “………. . " which you submitted to the Journal of ……………. . Unfortunately both reviewers have been critical of the paper and have both recommended rejection. In view of this I am sorry that we will not be able to publish your paper in the ………………. .

5. Rejection based on referees’ comments What leads to rejection? q Paper fails the ‘so what’ question q No contributions q No theoretical framework or Inappropriate theory q Research method (Lack of clarity ; Poor sampling methods; Small sample size; Poor execution of survey; Poor Instrumentation; Wrong statistic; Inappropriate generalizations. q Paper is hard to follow due to poor structure; Expression lacks clarity and precision; Too many typographical errors

5. Rejection based on referees’ comments Managing rejection q Read the comments carefully and see if the paper can be improved. q Probably not a good idea to write a scathing letter to the editor! q If you send manuscript to another journal (which you should) MAKE SURE you address the reviewers’ comments from the rejected manuscript because different journals use the same reviewers (i. e. a rejected paper submitted to second journal may have the same reviewer as the first journal) q Reject the rejection If you can revise the paper to take into account the reviewers concerns you can ask the editor if he/she will accept the paper as a new submission. § Note the editor will likely use the same reviewers

References Bradbury (2012), "Why you don't get published: an editors view", Accounting and Finance 52, 343 -358. Chenhall , Robert. Accounting Research and Publications. Monash University. EVANS III, et al. (2015). Points to Consider When Self-Assessing Your Empirical Accounting Research, Contemporary Accounting Research, forthcoming. Ferguson, John and Weetman, Pauline. Get Published in Accounting and Finance, Strathclyde University. Guillén , Mauro. The Scholarly Publication Process in the Field of Sociology University of Pennsylvania. Heilbrun, Lance. Manuscript Preparation and the Publication Process, Wayne State University. Ke , Bin. How to Conduct High-quality Empirical Accounting Research. Pennsylvania State University. Linacre, Simon and Bailey, Ruth. An insider’s guide to getting published in research journals, Emerald. Williams, (2014). How to reply to peer review comments when submitting papers for publication. http: //eprints. nottingham. ac. uk/859/2/How_to_reply_to_referees. pdf

72 ﺍﻟﻠﻬﻢ ﻋﻠﻤﻨﺎ ﻣﺎ ، ﺇﻧﻚ ﺃﻨﺖ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻴﻢ ، ﺍﻟﻠﻬﻢ ﻻ ﻋﻠﻢ ﻟﻨﺎ ﺇﻻ ﻣﺎ ﻋﻠﻤﺘﻨﺎ ﻭﺯﺩﻧﺎ ﻋﻠﻤﺎ ، ﻭﺍﻧﻔﻌﻨﺎ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻋﻠﻤﺘﻨﺎ ، ﻳﻨﻔﻌﻨﺎ Khaled Hussainey Professor of Accounting and Financial Management Portsmouth Business School Portsmouth University Telephone: Mobile 07727190105 Office 02392844715 Email: khaled. hussainey@port. ac. uk