《市场营销科学文章评论:Anpad科学委员会的提案》(2015-2016)

V. Brei, S. Farias, C. Matos, J. Mazzon
{"title":"《市场营销科学文章评论:Anpad科学委员会的提案》(2015-2016)","authors":"V. Brei, S. Farias, C. Matos, J. Mazzon","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2604521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Portuguese Abstract: Nesse artigo, o Comite Cientifico de Marketing da ANPAD (2015-2016) propoe um conjunto de reflexoes e sugestoes para avaliacao e elaboracao de pareceres para artigos cientificos submetidos aos congressos e aos periodicos cientificos de marketing. Analisamos o processo de submissao e revisao de artigos nos principais congressos – o Encontro Nacional da ANPAD (EnANPAD) e o Encontro de Marketing da ANPAD (EMA) – e periodicos de marketing. Mostramos quais sao os diferentes papeis e como atuam num processo de revisao os cientistas da academia brasileira de marketing – autores, editores, revisores, Comite Cientifico e Lideres de Tema da ANPAD. Tracamos algumas sugestoes a respeito do comportamento/postura de um revisor e analisamos quais sao os elementos essenciais de um bom artigo. Por fim, propomos uma grade de avaliacao (criterios) com o objetivo de ajudar os revisores a elaborarem seus pareceres a pesquisas teorico-empiricas, ensaios teoricos e casos de ensino.English Abstract: The ANPAD's Marketing Scintific Comitee (2015-2016) proposes a set of reflections and suggestions for evaluation and review of scientific papers submitted to the marketing congress and scientific journals. We analyze the submission and peer-review process in the most important Brazilian marketing congresses (ENANPAD and EMA). We show the different roles and how each scientist of the Brazilian marketing academy -- authors, editors, reviewers, Scientific Committee, and Theme Leaders -- participate in the review process. We develop some suggestions about the behavior/actions of the reviewers, and analyze which are the essential elements of a good academic paper. Finally, we propose a evaluation framework to help reviewers to elaborate their paper evaluations of about theoretical-empirical, and theoretical papers, as well as case studies.","PeriodicalId":23435,"journal":{"name":"UNSW Business School Research Paper Series","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Avaliação De Artigos Científicos EM Marketing: Uma Proposição Do Comitê Científico De Marketing Da Anpad (2015-2016) (Review of Scientific Articles in Marketing: A Proposition of the Anpad's Sciencifc Committee (2015-2016))\",\"authors\":\"V. Brei, S. Farias, C. Matos, J. Mazzon\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2604521\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Portuguese Abstract: Nesse artigo, o Comite Cientifico de Marketing da ANPAD (2015-2016) propoe um conjunto de reflexoes e sugestoes para avaliacao e elaboracao de pareceres para artigos cientificos submetidos aos congressos e aos periodicos cientificos de marketing. Analisamos o processo de submissao e revisao de artigos nos principais congressos – o Encontro Nacional da ANPAD (EnANPAD) e o Encontro de Marketing da ANPAD (EMA) – e periodicos de marketing. Mostramos quais sao os diferentes papeis e como atuam num processo de revisao os cientistas da academia brasileira de marketing – autores, editores, revisores, Comite Cientifico e Lideres de Tema da ANPAD. Tracamos algumas sugestoes a respeito do comportamento/postura de um revisor e analisamos quais sao os elementos essenciais de um bom artigo. Por fim, propomos uma grade de avaliacao (criterios) com o objetivo de ajudar os revisores a elaborarem seus pareceres a pesquisas teorico-empiricas, ensaios teoricos e casos de ensino.English Abstract: The ANPAD's Marketing Scintific Comitee (2015-2016) proposes a set of reflections and suggestions for evaluation and review of scientific papers submitted to the marketing congress and scientific journals. We analyze the submission and peer-review process in the most important Brazilian marketing congresses (ENANPAD and EMA). We show the different roles and how each scientist of the Brazilian marketing academy -- authors, editors, reviewers, Scientific Committee, and Theme Leaders -- participate in the review process. We develop some suggestions about the behavior/actions of the reviewers, and analyze which are the essential elements of a good academic paper. Finally, we propose a evaluation framework to help reviewers to elaborate their paper evaluations of about theoretical-empirical, and theoretical papers, as well as case studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23435,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"UNSW Business School Research Paper Series\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-05-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"UNSW Business School Research Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2604521\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"UNSW Business School Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2604521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:在本文中,ANPAD科学营销委员会(2015-2016)提出了一套反思和建议,以评估和准备提交给大会和科学营销期刊的科学文章的意见。我们分析了在主要会议- ANPAD全国会议(EnANPAD)和ANPAD营销会议(EMA) -和营销期刊上提交和审查文章的过程。我们展示了巴西营销学院的科学家——ANPAD的作者、编辑、审稿人、科学委员会和主题领袖——在审查过程中扮演的不同角色和他们是如何工作的。我们对审稿人的行为/态度提出了一些建议,并分析了一篇好文章的基本要素。最后,我们提出了一个评估网格(标准),以帮助审稿人阐述他们对理论-实证研究、理论论文和教学案例的意见。英语文摘:ANPAD'的营销Scintific委员会(2015 - -2016)proposes组对称,suggestions是评估和审查的科学论文。带给营销国会和科学期刊。我们分析了巴西最重要的营销大会(ENANPAD和EMA)的提交和同行评审过程。我们展示了巴西营销学院的每个科学家——作者、编辑、审稿人、科学委员会和主题领导人——参与审查过程的不同角色和方式。我们对审稿人的行为/行动提出了一些建议,并分析了一篇好的学术论文的基本要素。最后,我们提出了一个评估框架,以帮助审稿人准备他们的论文评估的理论-实证,理论论文和案例研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Avaliação De Artigos Científicos EM Marketing: Uma Proposição Do Comitê Científico De Marketing Da Anpad (2015-2016) (Review of Scientific Articles in Marketing: A Proposition of the Anpad's Sciencifc Committee (2015-2016))
Portuguese Abstract: Nesse artigo, o Comite Cientifico de Marketing da ANPAD (2015-2016) propoe um conjunto de reflexoes e sugestoes para avaliacao e elaboracao de pareceres para artigos cientificos submetidos aos congressos e aos periodicos cientificos de marketing. Analisamos o processo de submissao e revisao de artigos nos principais congressos – o Encontro Nacional da ANPAD (EnANPAD) e o Encontro de Marketing da ANPAD (EMA) – e periodicos de marketing. Mostramos quais sao os diferentes papeis e como atuam num processo de revisao os cientistas da academia brasileira de marketing – autores, editores, revisores, Comite Cientifico e Lideres de Tema da ANPAD. Tracamos algumas sugestoes a respeito do comportamento/postura de um revisor e analisamos quais sao os elementos essenciais de um bom artigo. Por fim, propomos uma grade de avaliacao (criterios) com o objetivo de ajudar os revisores a elaborarem seus pareceres a pesquisas teorico-empiricas, ensaios teoricos e casos de ensino.English Abstract: The ANPAD's Marketing Scintific Comitee (2015-2016) proposes a set of reflections and suggestions for evaluation and review of scientific papers submitted to the marketing congress and scientific journals. We analyze the submission and peer-review process in the most important Brazilian marketing congresses (ENANPAD and EMA). We show the different roles and how each scientist of the Brazilian marketing academy -- authors, editors, reviewers, Scientific Committee, and Theme Leaders -- participate in the review process. We develop some suggestions about the behavior/actions of the reviewers, and analyze which are the essential elements of a good academic paper. Finally, we propose a evaluation framework to help reviewers to elaborate their paper evaluations of about theoretical-empirical, and theoretical papers, as well as case studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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