Research Proposal for English 5389

Title: Collaboration in the Editorial Review Process: A Pilot Study

I will perform a pilot study to collect information from editors on their processes for collaborative editing and editorial review. The purpose of the research at this stage is data collection in determining what processes editors use to collaborate between editors and with authors, and what technologies assist them with this collaboration. One of the goals of the study is to attempt a small-scale study in order to test the research questions so that they can then be adjusted appropriately for future research.

Timeline

This research will be conducted in stages as follows:

Stage 1: Submit a request to Texas Tech University’s Institutional Review Board for approval to use human participants in the research. If approved, research would begin on 1 March 2009.

Stage 2: Literature review and further development of the data collection process. This is expected to be completed by 15 March 2009.

Stage 3: Actual collection of the data; expected to be completed by 1 April 2009.

Stage 4: Analysis of the data; expected to be completed by mid-April.

Stage 5: The results of the research will be documented in a written report. The report will likely consist of the following sections: abstract, introduction, background/literature review, methodology, data analyses, and reflections/conclusions/proposed further research. The report is expected to be completed by 22 April 2009.

Research Problem and Motivation

The field of technical communication encompasses a large body of knowledge, including the work of scholars and professionals in such areas as communication, technical writing, usability, editing, illustration, design, and translation, just to name a few. Magazines and journals publishing articles in the field of technical communication have the advantage of diverse subject matter from which to choose, yet editors cannot possibly be experts in all of these related areas. How do editors of peer-reviewed journals assess the manuscripts they receive? What methods do editors use to work collaboratively (both with other editors and with authors)?

Method(s)

For this research project, I will survey journal editors who work in a collaborative environment about how they see their job in terms of field vs. journal, how they use collaboration in the editorial process, and what technologies aid them in their work. I will conduct a pilot study, surveying the editors of one peer-reviewed journal, Kairos, about their use of collaborative editing techniques and technologies in the editorial review process. I have chosen Kairos in particular because it already uses collaborative editing techniques. Kairos is an online-only peer-reviewed journal, and therefore the editors are already familiar with technologies and collaborative techniques that uniquely qualify them to provide data for this study. For example, according to its website, in “tier 2” of the editorial submission process, “the entire editorial board discusses the submission for two weeks, coming to a collaborative assessment of its quality and potential to be published in Kairos.” In addition, in "tier 3," "the editors work with authors, as needed, to guide/facilitate revisions based on the editorial board's comments and evaluation."

Participants: Volunteer participants will be recruited from approximately 30 editorial staff and 50 editorial board members at Kairos.

I will gather data through the following methods: email surveys to participants and existing literature review. Questionnaires will be administered to gain an understanding of the work and processes of the editors.

Sample questions include:

1. How long have you worked with this journal? What is the nature of your experience working in publishing? Have you worked for any other magazine or journal besides Kairos?
2. What are your chief duties with the journal?
3. Describe the interactions you regularly have with other Kairos editors and board members.
4. Describe the interactions you regularly have with Kairos authors. Do you work mostly with scholars or professionals/practitioners or a combination of the two?
5. What are editorial meetings like? When do you communicate using the telephone, email, etc. as opposed to face-to-face?
6. Did you receive any training when you started working with the journal (technology, teamwork, customer relations, procedures, etc.)?
7. During your tenure with the journal, what have you seen change? Are there things that do or don’t work well for you? Is there any part of the process that you like or don’t like in particular?
8. What technologies do you use to complete your work with Kairos? Do you use technological artifacts such as computer interfaces, software, mobile devices, etc.?
9. As an editor or editorial board member, how do you measure editorial success? Do you use reader surveys or other methods?
10. Editors often encounter difficulties (such as losing an author, having trouble communicating a vision, or missing a production date). As you think about your work with Kairos, what sorts of difficulties stick out in your mind?
11. If you work at another job besides Kairos (such as in academia or industry), how do you see your job(s) in terms of field vs. journal? How do you balance the needs of your field with the needs of a successful journal?

I will limit this pilot study to an email questionnaire, however, examinations of artifacts that the editorial board and staff editors use in their work and contextual inquiry are potential further research in this area. Artifacts I would expect to examine include such tools as manuals, checklists, documentation, etc. The research would also benefit from visiting editors in their work environment and from interviewing and/or surveying authors about the editorial process.

Aims, Benefits, and Importance of Knowledge Obtained:

Because this is a pilot study, this research should provide insight not just into this particular case, but more broadly into how editorial and collaborative teams work together, how they communicate, how they use technology, and what sorts of communicative problems they face, particularly ones related to technology and online environments.

This research also seeks to shed light and further detail on collaborative editing techniques in peer-reviewed online journals in particular in order to:

1. provide editors and potential authors with solid recommendations for improving editorial teamwork/collaboration, including ways to better use existing technology in editorial work

2. provide researchers with further insights into how collaborative teams work, how they communicate, and how they use technology

3. help potential authors understand the collaborative publication process and what to expect

4. provide individuals who make decisions about promotion or tenure with a clearer description of the rigorous review procedure some online journals use so that they might give more credence to publication in these journals during the review process.

This study has implications for publishing, editing, writing, management, communication, documentation design, training, professional development, and study methodology.

Deliverable

I expect to deliver a formal report documenting and summarizing my research, data, and analysis. The report will likely consist of the following sections: abstract, introduction, background/literature review, methodology, data analyses, and reflections/conclusions/proposed further research. I plan to use this report to develop and refine further research. I also propose that feedback and responses from the editors on my conclusions would be a method for sharing any knowledge gained and validating any assertions made.