NextGenPsyc: Advancing Research, Diversity, Innovation, and Accountability

Encouraging students to embed research into practice and disseminate the findings/outputs of their work has always been my personal pursuit long before the project was given a name. The pursuit itself started way back in 2007 when 13 curious yet motivated students rose to the challenge and responded to my call to bring their work into the scholarly and public domains. The results? Three papers were presented at two international conferences.

I continued this pursuit post-PhD, and in 2013, three groups of students presented their research papers at UMRAN 2013: Vision and Methods towards Sustainable Built Environment and Liveable Communities - Undergraduate and Postgraduate Seminar organised by the Department of Landscape Architecture, Kulliyyah of Architecture and Environmental Design (KAED), IIUM. One of the groups went on to win the Best Paper award at the event. This is a notable achievement considering that the paper was not only judged relative to other undergraduate student’s projects, but it also competed against other postgraduate research papers, including those of PhD and Master’s students from KAED and other local institutions. 

In 2014, I decided that it’s time to notch it up a gear - and having enthusiastic students who are willing to learn and put in their best effort gave me that extra motivation to try something new. So, that year, I shipped two students to Taipei, Taiwan to participate in the International Conference on Education, Psychology, and Social Sciences (ICEPS) 2014. And, the same group also presented another paper at the 11th International Postgraduate Research Colloquium 2014. 

Photo credit: https://www.flickr.com/photos/126846601@N04/14904302302/in/photostream

The full texts of these papers are available here.

The shift in focus from research to innovation in 2015 provides opportunities for me to be even more adventurous and go beyond the conventional research dissemination. Consequently, the NextGenPsyc project was formally launched in 2016 as part of PSYC 4520 Environmental Psychology course that I taught. As these students will become the next generation of psychology scientists and practitioners, I want them to push themselves beyond boundaries and perspectives. Innovative students are our best hope for solving some of the world’s most pressing psychological and environmental problems. In this project, students are given the opportunity to turn ideas on psychology and environmental innovation into actions and gained hands-on innovation experience. They learned all the stages of the process, starting with the problem statement, kick-off, ideation, and preparation of concept notes up to buildathon and elevator pitch presentation where they pitched their ideas to a panel of judges that included me and a few colleagues.

It was a great experience for all of us and even boosted our confidence to try at the national level. Three groups then entered the Alliance Bank Eco-Biz Dream Project 2016 organised by Allianz Bank, and one of the groups was shortlisted as Top 24 in the competition. Although we did not make the Top 10 list, these students gained the skills and confidence to start their own innovation expedition and expand their network of contacts.

I continued the NextGenPsyc project in the subsequent semester with PSYC 4500 Engineering Psychology students. The theme now was safety interventions/innovations. Following the same format as in the previous semester, 13 groups came up with various ideas ranging from self and child safety to motorcycle and escalator safety. Some projects fell a bit short of my expectations. Still, considering the efforts made, all students have displayed a good skill in handling comments and questions from the curious audience. More importantly, they have experienced first-hand a more in-depth understanding of the entire research-innovation process – something that is not conventional in psychological coursework and curricula.

2017 marked the start of compulsory PSYC 4994 Final Year Project for our undergraduate programme, with eight students were assigned to my supervision. Two braved themselves to participate and present in international conferences. The first presented at the 5th ScientificConference on Occupational Safety and Health (SciCOSH2018) organised by NIOSH, Malaysia, and the paper was subsequently published in Journal of Occupational Safety and Health (JOSH) in 2019. The second presented at the 2nd Conference ofASEAN Road Safety 2018 (CARS 2018) organised by the Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research (MIROS). This paper, which explores the changing nature of ride-hailing services and compares safety perceptions, attitudes, and behaviours among drivers in traditional taxi services and e-hailing applications, went on to win the conference’s Best Paper Award. 

More than 80 papers were presented by both local and international presenters (researcher, practitioners, governmental, and NGOs) at the conference, and the student received the award from Director-General of MIROS, Dr. Siti Zaharah Ishak, at the Gala Dinner, which was officiated by the Minister Transport Malaysia.

Through all these endevours, both students and I learned the many aspects of the rigorous review procedure, how to craft an elevator pitch, and developed our scholarly skills further. I am proud of their efforts and achievements. Hopefully, I have the strength and ability to continue this project in the future.

N.B.: These are all undergraduate projects. How about the postgraduates? That will be another post. 

Read More

In pursuit of publishing

I’m sure supervisors, academics, and lecturers have been asked many times on how to publish a paper. There are of course many ways to answer this question. A simple Google search will reveal the many tips, steps, guidelines, and the likes that people have used as their best-practice model for publishing an academic paper. I am still learning too but in response to a similar question received recently, I shared a simple guide that I’ve followed and found helpful:

1. While working on a paper and writing the literature review, I make a note of the journals where papers that are similar to the one I am drafting are published.
2. Then, I shortlist a few journals that are relevant to the paper that I am writing. For each journal, I look at their aims and objectives, and choose the one that matches my paper.
3. Next, I download a few recent papers or most cited papers from that journal and read them carefully to understand their writing style.
4. At the same time, I will read through the journal’s 'Instruction to Author' (usually on their website). This is important because I want to make sure that the paper adheres to the journal’s formatting and writing style and its author’s guidelines.
5. Next, I will draft, reorganise, and rewrite the paper according to the journal’s writing style, author’s guidelines, and aims/objectives. In whatever journals, we have to write and emphasise that the paper is about something new (theoretical novelty, practical novelty, or/and methodological novelty).
6. Once the paper is sufficiently written and proofread, I will write a personalised cover letter to the Editors. Online or traditional submission almost always require a cover letter, so this, too, has to be written properly.  

This guide works for me - it may work for you too.  

Read More

The curious case of unsolicited invitations for scholarly work

As much fun as it sounds, my weekly routine task includes deleting and marking predatory or bogus journal/ conference invitations as spams. These invitations started pouring in once I began publishing and presenting papers, and I believe exactly the same problem is experienced by many academics, ECRs, ECAs, and students. For me, the best defence is to be vigilant of these invitations. Some tell-tale signs of predatory/bad journals include:

• Spelling, grammatical, statistical, or methodological mistakes are littered on their website or in the papers they published. Poor use of language and serious flaw in contents indicate a low professional standard.
• Asking a submission fee (sometime an obscene amount) before the article is reviewed or accepted.
• Look at the timeline of the papers published in the journals. Typically, the duration of the peer review process takes on average 17 weeks, and may differ according to the journal. If a paper in a journal is received on September 2019 and published in October/ November 2019, this raises a red flag that the paper might not be subjected to a rigorous peer review, or the journal operates with a false-front or non-existent peer review process.
• Publishing papers already published in other venues.
• Publishing papers that contain plagiarism (of any form).
• The journal’s contact information looks dodgy, e.g., unrecognisable address or contact details; address state that their offices are in one country whereas the contact details are in another.
• The Editorial Board lacks legitimacy (e.g., appointed without knowledge, wrong skillset). If the names of the Editorial Board look fishy, then mostly likely the journal is a predatory.
• In the case of conference, be cautious if you found that there are too many being organised in a year by the same organiser. Please stick to those organised and supported by the corresponding scientific associations, universities, reputable NGOs, and professional associations in the national/international level only.

My advice - use more reputable sources that vet their resources for adherence to publishing standards to find suitable journals/ conferences for your publications. Examples below:

• ISI: http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/mjl/
• Elsevier: http://journalfinder.elsevier.com/
• Scopus: https://journalmetrics.scopus.com/
• ScimagoJR: http://www.scimagojr.com/
• Plos: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/
• Open access journals:  oatd.org and https://doaj.org/ 
• Choosing a trusted journal to publish: Think. Check. Submit. https://thinkchecksubmit.org/
• Choosing a legitimate conference: Think. Check. Attend https://thinkcheckattend.org
• Checking if the journals in which we wish to publish our research comply with funder's requirements: SHERPA/FACT http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/index.php

Please also read my previous post on predatory journals and questionable conferences here.

Read More