Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Association
　

HOME PAGE   　APMAA Webinar    Conference Venues      2024 Conference   2023 Conference  　
2022 Conference  　2021 Conference    2020 Webinar   2019 Conference   2018 Conference     

   2017 Conference 　  2016 Conference 　 2015 Conference      2014 Conference    

 2013 Conference      2012 Conference       2011 Conference    2010 Forum    2009 Forum

  To Conference Organizers        Doctoral Colloquium　    Guidelines for Discussants and Presenters    

 Award and Prize          About Us         Key People        Message from Executives  

 　 Membership       Publications        研究論文の書き方      APMAA Japan

HOW TO WRITE A RESEARCH PAPER
(英語)研究論文の書き方

(http://www.experiment-resources.com/write-a-research-paper.html).
　

Most scientific fields (and paper formats) have their own specific rules and standards of writing. The most used standards for referencing in research papers are APA-standard(1) and MLA-standard(2).

(1) APA (American Psychological Association.) Style^®: The rules of APA Style, detailed in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. ( http://www.apastyle.org/index.aspx ) , offer sound guidance for writing with simplicity, power, and concision. APA Style has been adapted by many disciplines and is used by writers around the world.

(2) MLA (Modern Language Association) style (http://www.mla.org/style): MLA style has been widely adopted by schools, academic departments, and instructors for over half a century. The MLA's guidelines are followed throughout North America and in Brazil, China, India, Japan, Taiwan, and other countries around the world. The MLA publishes two authoritative explanations of MLA style: the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers and the MLA Style Manual and Guide to Scholarly Publishing.

STRUCTURE OF A RESEARCH PAPER

The outline of the academic paper is very similar for most branches of science. When writing a scientific paper, you will need to adjust to the academic format. The structure of a research paper might seem quite stiff, but it serves a purpose: It will help find information you are looking for easily and also help structure your thoughts and communication. An empirical paper frequently follows this structure:

• Title

• Abstract

• Introduction

• Literature Review

• Methodology

• Results

• Discussion

• Conclusion

• References

The following parts may be acceptable to include in some scientific standards, but may be inappropriate for other standards.

• Table of Contents (Usually placed right before or right after the abstract)

• Acknowledgments (Sometimes placed before the abstract and sometimes at the end of a paper)

• Appendices (Placement: After all the other parts)

• 
  　

OTHER TECHNICAL ISSUES OF ACADEMIC WRITING

Some paper formats allow you to include footnotes in the text, while some do not allow footnotes. Authors frequently want to include tables and figures in the text. Sometimes the format or standard prohibits the authors from entering tables and figures directly into the text (where you want your table). Sometimes they have to be included after the main text.

PUBLISH ARTICLES

Publication of your article can be a very time-consuming process. After writing the academic paper, the researchers submit it to a journal. Typically you start with the most regarded journal and then work yourself down the list, until a journal accepts the article. Scientific journals use peer review process, which is a panel of other researchers (most likely in the same field) who review the work, to ensure that the quality of the paper. Publication bias is a well known phenomenon, as the peer review process often rejects "null results"(3). A journal rejection does not necessarily mean that you do not have a chance to resubmit the journal though.
　

(3) null results: Journals mostly have a strong preference for articles that do find something, which means something other than an outcome consistent with the null hypothesis. That is, they prefer 'positive' results. The preference makes sense for at least two reasons. One is that 'unexpected' results are regarded as better than expected ones, and confirming the null hypothesis is, from this perspective, a very boring an predictable thing to do. Another reason is scarcity of space. Even if null results are in some sense part of science, they're less likely to get cited or built on than positive results. (http://effortlessincitement.blogspot.com/2009/01/proposal-journal-of-null-results.html)
　

[Best introductory books]
Malcolm Smith, Research Methods in Accounting (2nd Ed.), SAGE Publications, Inc., 2011.
　

John W. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, SAGE Publications, Inc., 2009.