MEMIKIRKAN KEMBALI PERSPEKTIF SOSIOLOGIS: Upaya Peningkatan Mutu Kualitas Artikel di Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif

Y. Suryana, A. Arifin
{"title":"MEMIKIRKAN KEMBALI PERSPEKTIF SOSIOLOGIS: Upaya Peningkatan Mutu Kualitas Artikel di Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif","authors":"Y. Suryana, A. Arifin","doi":"10.14421/jsr.v13i1.1545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to enhance the quality of paper submitted to Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif (JSR) by exploring some weaknesses of submitted articles to JSR within two last editions of using online journal system. Based on reasons used by the management of JSR in rejecting submitted articles at the first stage, which shows that around 23 percent of them are due to the lack of sociological perspective or framework, it is important to reconsidering the meaning of employing sociological perspective the the article. The ability to understand the basic characteristics of sociological analysis becomes the most fundamental requirements in producing a good sociological article. How we should formulate a good sociological question will determine the quality of a sociological paper. At this point, reconsidering and understanding how we should use a basic concept of sociological imagination in formulating a research question will help to focus an article on being strongly considered as sociological, in addition to the use of sociological theories. Besides, many articles are not built upon an adequate literature review. Some of them use literature reviews as making a summary of other people have done without further discussing their differences and contributions both theoretically and practically.","PeriodicalId":55676,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14421/jsr.v13i1.1545","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This article aims to enhance the quality of paper submitted to Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif (JSR) by exploring some weaknesses of submitted articles to JSR within two last editions of using online journal system. Based on reasons used by the management of JSR in rejecting submitted articles at the first stage, which shows that around 23 percent of them are due to the lack of sociological perspective or framework, it is important to reconsidering the meaning of employing sociological perspective the the article. The ability to understand the basic characteristics of sociological analysis becomes the most fundamental requirements in producing a good sociological article. How we should formulate a good sociological question will determine the quality of a sociological paper. At this point, reconsidering and understanding how we should use a basic concept of sociological imagination in formulating a research question will help to focus an article on being strongly considered as sociological, in addition to the use of sociological theories. Besides, many articles are not built upon an adequate literature review. Some of them use literature reviews as making a summary of other people have done without further discussing their differences and contributions both theoretically and practically.
重新思考社会学视角:反射社会学杂志上的文章试图提高质量
本文通过对JSR在使用在线期刊系统的最后两个版本中所存在的不足进行分析,旨在提高JSR的论文质量。根据JSR管理层在第一阶段拒绝提交文章的原因,其中约23%是由于缺乏社会学视角或框架,重新考虑使用社会学视角的意义是很重要的。理解社会学分析的基本特征的能力成为制作一篇好的社会学文章的最基本要求。如何提出一个好的社会学问题将决定社会学论文的质量。在这一点上,重新考虑和理解我们应该如何在制定研究问题时使用社会学想象的基本概念,将有助于将一篇文章的重点放在被强烈认为是社会学的,除了社会学理论的使用。此外,许多文章并没有建立在充分的文献回顾的基础上。他们中的一些人用文献综述来总结其他人所做的事情,而没有进一步讨论他们在理论和实践上的差异和贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信