Academic writing for HCI venues

東京大学情報学環・助教

Chi-Lan Yang, 2024 Summer

1

Overview

You can directly checking the specific section by clicking the linked section title

• Title and abstract
• Introduction
• Related Work
• Method
• Results/Findings
• Discussion
• Conclusion

2

Title and Abstract

Academic writing session 1

2024/05/08

Chi-Lan Yang

3

What are the functions of an abstract?

​

4

Abstract of the paper

1. Summary of the study
2. Screening
1. general readers: spark interests, find the relevance, decide whether to read
2. reviewers: get a quick overview to see if it fits the scope of the venue; whether it merits a detailed review

5

5-part structure of Abstract

1. Introduction
2. Problem/objective
3. Our proposal or method
4. Main findings
5. Implications

6

https://communities.springernature.com/posts/how-to-write-an-abstract

5-part structure of Abstract

Introduction (1 or 2 sentences):

• Basic introduction to the topic → set the boundary of the topic
• Background of the specific research question

Voice assistants’ inability to serve people-of-color and non-native English speakers has largely been documented as a quality-of-service harm. However, little work has investigated what downstream harms propagate from this poor service. How does poor usability materially manifest and affect users’ lives? And what interaction designs might help users recover from these effects? We identify 6 downstream harms that propagate from quality-of-service harms in voice assistants. Through interviews and design activities with 16 multicultural participants, we unveil these 6 harms, outline how multicultural users uniquely personify their voice assistant, and suggest how these harms and personifications may affect their interactions. Lastly, we employ techniques from psychology on communication repair to contribute suggestions for harm-reducing repair that may be implemented in voice technologies. Our communication repair strategies include: identity affirmations (intermittent frequency), cultural sensitivity, and blame redirection. This work shows potential for a harm-repair framework to positively influence voice interactions.

7

CHI24_Designing for Harm Reduction: Communication Repair for Multicultural Users' Voice Interactions

5-part structure of Abstract

Problem/objective: (1 or 2 sentences)

• Point out what is missing/unknown/problematic, i.e. why the current study happened.
• Typically, this sentence starts with “However”.

Voice assistants’ inability to serve people-of-color and non-native English speakers has largely been documented as a quality-of-service harm. However, little work has investigated what downstream harms propagate from this poor service. How does poor usability materially manifest and affect users’ lives? And what interaction designs might help users recover from these effects? We identify 6 downstream harms that propagate from quality-of-service harms in voice assistants. Through interviews and design activities with 16 multicultural participants, we unveil these 6 harms, outline how multicultural users uniquely personify their voice assistant, and suggest how these harms and personifications may affect their interactions. Lastly, we employ techniques from psychology on communication repair to contribute suggestions for harm-reducing repair that may be implemented in voice technologies. Our communication repair strategies include: identity affirmations (intermittent frequency), cultural sensitivity, and blame redirection. This work shows potential for a harm-repair framework to positively influence voice interactions.

8

5-part structure of Abstract

Our proposal or method: (1 or 2 sentences)

• Explain our proposed system or what method we used

Voice assistants’ inability to serve people-of-color and non-native English speakers has largely been documented as a quality-of-service harm. However, little work has investigated what downstream harms propagate from this poor service. How does poor usability materially manifest and affect users’ lives? And what interaction designs might help users recover from these effects? We identify 6 downstream harms that propagate from quality-of-service harms in voice assistants. Through interviews and design activities with 16 multicultural participants, we unveil these 6 harms, outline how multicultural users uniquely personify their voice assistant, and suggest how these harms and personifications may affect their interactions. Lastly, we employ techniques from psychology on communication repair to contribute suggestions for harm-reducing repair that may be implemented in voice technologies. Our communication repair strategies include: identity affirmations (intermittent frequency), cultural sensitivity, and blame redirection. This work shows potential for a harm-repair framework to positively influence voice interactions.

9

5-part structure of Abstract

Main findings: (~ 3 – 5 sentences)

• Describe key findings
• Use the same term to describe the same concept

Voice assistants’ inability to serve people-of-color and non-native English speakers has largely been documented as a quality-of-service harm. However, little work has investigated what downstream harms propagate from this poor service. How does poor usability materially manifest and affect users’ lives? And what interaction designs might help users recover from these effects? We identify 6 downstream harms that propagate from quality-of-service harms in voice assistants. Through interviews and design activities with 16 multicultural participants, we unveil these 6 harms, outline how multicultural users uniquely personify their voice assistant, and suggest how these harms and personifications may affect their interactions. Lastly, we employ techniques from psychology on communication repair to contribute suggestions for harm-reducing repair that may be implemented in voice technologies. Our communication repair strategies include: identity affirmations (intermittent frequency), cultural sensitivity, and blame redirection. This work shows potential for a harm-repair framework to positively influence voice interactions.

10

5-part structure of Abstract

Implications: (1 or 2 sentences)

• Describe how our findings advance the field or key contribution

Voice assistants’ inability to serve people-of-color and non-native English speakers has largely been documented as a quality-of-service harm. However, little work has investigated what downstream harms propagate from this poor service. How does poor usability materially manifest and affect users’ lives? And what interaction designs might help users recover from these effects? We identify 6 downstream harms that propagate from quality-of-service harms in voice assistants. Through interviews and design activities with 16 multicultural participants, we unveil these 6 harms, outline how multicultural users uniquely personify their voice assistant, and suggest how these harms and personifications may affect their interactions. Lastly, we employ techniques from psychology on communication repair to contribute suggestions for harm-reducing repair that may be implemented in voice technologies. Our communication repair strategies include: identity affirmations (intermittent frequency), cultural sensitivity, and blame redirection. This work shows potential for a harm-repair framework to positively influence voice interactions.

11

What are the functions of a paper title?

12

Title of the paper

• Communicate main idea / types of contribution
• Set expectations
• Indicate the approach
• Attract attention

13

Title of the paper

1. Communicate main idea / types of contribution

• System. i.e., Piet: Facilitating Color Authoring for Motion Graphics Video
• Understanding people. i.e, Generative Echo Chamber? Effect of LLM-Powered Search Systems on Diverse Information Seeking
• Method. i.e., Development and Validation of the Collision Anxiety Questionnaire for VR Applications
• Theory. i.e., A Design Framework for Reflective Play
• Literature survey. i.e., A Systematic Review of Ability-diverse Collaboration through Ability-based Lens in HCI

14

https://programs.sigchi.org/chi/2024/awards/best-papers

Title of the paper

2. Set expectations

• Scope; what will (not) be covered
• specify the context, problem setting
• independent variable (what we manipulate/control), dependent variable (what we measured)

​

• Piet: Facilitating Color Authoring for Motion Graphics Video
• Effect of LLM-Powered Search Systems on Diverse Information Seeking
• Development and Validation of the Collision Anxiety Questionnaire for VR Applications

15

https://programs.sigchi.org/chi/2024/awards/best-papers

Title of the paper

3. Indicate the approach

• It is usually highlighted when its approach is part of the contribution

i.e.,

• A Longitudinal In-the-Wild Investigation of Design Frictions to Prevent Smartphone Overuse
• A Comparative Long-Term Study of Fallback Authentication Schemes
• Are Robots Ready to Deliver Autism Inclusion?: A Critical Review

​

16

https://programs.sigchi.org/chi/2024/awards/best-papers

Why title and abstract matter in submission stage?

• Paper bidding for AC
• want to, willing to, reluctant (AC needs to select 15~20 submissions they are willing to review among 200~700 submissions)
• Matching right reviewers (conference, journal)
• Types of contribution
• Method
• Topic
• Keep our audience in mind while writing every section of a paper

17

*Specific group of researchers who you want to communicate with or you think they would care about this topic

Introduction

Academic writing session 4

2024/06/26

Chi-Lan Yang

18

What are the functions of Introduction section?

19

Functions of the Introduction section of the paper

• Present the scope of our research: what is, what is not
• Provide background and research gap of this topic
• Show problem statement and research questions
• Give an overview and expected contribution of the whole study
• Show the importance and significance of this research

20

Structure of Introduction

1. A broad statement about the topic

→ context/introduce key concepts

→ challenge / problem statement

21

https://www.sjsu.edu/writingcenter/docs/handouts/Introduction%20of%20Research%20Papers.pdf

Fu, Y., Foell, S., Xu, X., & Hiniker, A. (2024, May). From Text to Self: Users’ Perception of AIMC Tools on Interpersonal Communication and Self. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-17).

​

​

Example

Broad statement

Introduce key concepts

Challenge

Structure of Introduction

2. Existing solutions or understanding about this specific topic

22

Fu, Y., Foell, S., Xu, X., & Hiniker, A. (2024, May). From Text to Self: Users’ Perception of AIMC Tools on Interpersonal Communication and Self. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-17).

​

Example

Structure of Introduction

3. Research gap → importance of our proposal → our proposal

• a new angle
• a new intervention
• a new design
• a new approach

​

23

Example

Fu, Y., Foell, S., Xu, X., & Hiniker, A. (2024, May). From Text to Self: Users’ Perception of AIMC Tools on Interpersonal Communication and Self. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-17).

​

Structure of Introduction

4. Research questions

• RQs are usually asked with an open-ended way:
• O: How, what
• Avoid yes/no questions
• X: Does, can, whether
• (Some people prefer to put RQs within or after Related work section. Using related work to motivate RQs)

24

Example

Fu, Y., Foell, S., Xu, X., & Hiniker, A. (2024, May). From Text to Self: Users’ Perception of AIMC Tools on Interpersonal Communication and Self. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-17).

​

Structure of Introduction

5. Overview of the research and contributions

• A short summary
• High-level contribution and implications

​

25

Example

Fu, Y., Foell, S., Xu, X., & Hiniker, A. (2024, May). From Text to Self: Users’ Perception of AIMC Tools on Interpersonal Communication and Self. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-17).

Writing tips

1. Abstract → Introduction → Related work
• Expands Introduction based on Abstract; expands Related work based on Introduction
2. Coherence - global flow
3. Cohesion - local flow

26

https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/flow/

​

Coherence - global flow

• The following sections should be aligned:
• RQs, measurements (Method), Results and Discussion
• Organize ideas/concepts with reasonable orders:
• Chronological (e.g., a history or a step-by-step process)
• Grouping similar ideas (e.g., advantages / disadvantages; causes / effects)
• Moving from large to small (e.g., global to local) or vice versa (local to global)
• Distinguish our assertion/claim, evidence by others/us, reasoning

27

https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/flow/

​

Checklist for Introduction section - globally

1. The challenge or problem statement was specified
2. The most relevant work was described
3. The research gap / knowledge gap was clearly identified
4. The significance of the research was clear
5. The authors’ proposal was clear
6. Research questions were clear
7. Key concepts were introduced and clearly defined → don’t introduce new important concept in the middle of the paper
8. Overview of the study was clear
9. The expected contribution was clear
10. The concepts mentioned were aligned with RQs, measurements, Result and Discussion

28

Tips

• Abstract → Introduction → Related work
• Expands Introduction based on Abstract; expands Related work based on Introduction
• Coherence - global flow
• Cohesion - local flow

29

https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/flow/

​

Cohesion - local flow

1. ABT narrative framework: "And, But, Therefore"
• 2 sentences connected with an AND
• 1 sentence starting with a BUT (or however)
• 1 sentence starting with a THEREFORE
2. Use the same word or concept to bridge two paragraphs
3. A clear connection between sentences

30

https://entomologychallenges.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/abt-shorthand-reference-card.pdf

https://medium.com/the-curious-researchers/enabling-scientific-storytelling-the-abt-structure-c49782b17bf9

​

​

“LLM is getting popular, AND many researchers use LLM to support writing process, AND previous study showed LLM facilitate ideation, AND some other study showed LLM enhances writing efficiency.”

→ (X) Unclear key message

Cohesion - local flow

• ABT narrative framework: "And, But, Therefore"
• 2 sentences connected with an AND
• 1 sentence starting with a BUT (or however)
• 1 sentence starting with a THEREFORE
• Use the same word or concept to bridge two paragraphs
• A clear connection between sentences

31

https://entomologychallenges.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/abt-shorthand-reference-card.pdf

https://medium.com/the-curious-researchers/enabling-scientific-storytelling-the-abt-structure-c49782b17bf9

​

​

“LLM is getting popular, AND many researchers use LLM to support writing process. However, previous study only focused on how LLM facilitates ideation. Therefore, this study aims to investigate how LLM influences idea fixation.”

Cohesion - local flow

• ABT narrative framework: "And, But, Therefore"
• 2 sentences connected with an AND
• 1 sentence starting with a BUT (or however, despite)
• 1 sentence starting with a THEREFORE
• Use the same word or concept to bridge two paragraphs
• A clear connection between sentences

32

Example

https://entomologychallenges.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/abt-shorthand-reference-card.pdf

https://medium.com/the-curious-researchers/enabling-scientific-storytelling-the-abt-structure-c49782b17bf9

​

​

ABT narrative framework can be used in the following sections

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Related work
• Discussion
• Conclusion
• Slides for research presentation

33

Checklist for Introduction section - locally

• Follow ABT structure
• Clear bridge and connections between two paragraphs
• Clear connection between sentences (transition words)
• The same term was used to describe the same concept

34

Why Introduction matters in submission stage?

• Determines whether reviewers/readers have motivation to keep reading the rest of the draft
• A section that helps readers tell a researchers’ writing skill and depth of thinking
• How authors connects all relevant ideas, how they position their research, how they show the importance of this topic

35

Related Work

Academic writing session 4

2024/07/10

Chi-Lan Yang

36

What are the functions of Related Work section?

37

Functions of the Related Work section of the paper

• Show the scope of the research
• Provide background information of the key concepts (factors, independent/dependent variables) in our study
• Show the research gap between our work and the most related topics
• Show that authors are familiar with the major agreements, debates, and critical findings of of the field
• (Motivate RQs and hypotheses, depending on authors’ writing style)

38

https://www.cmu.edu/student-success/other-resources/handouts/comm-supp-pdfs/literature-reviews.pdf

Structure of Related Work

Categorize sections based on (1) key themes of our research and (2) our expected contribution:

• Background and definition of the key concepts
• Focus on explaining:
• Why they are important
• Their connection to our study

​

39

Structure of Related Work

Categorize sections based on (1) key themes of our research and (2) our expected contribution:

• System: focus on the strength and weakness of the technical solutions → what is still missing? what can be improved? → connect to our proposed solution (tell readers why our approach is important)

​

40

Structure of Related Work

Categorize sections based on (1) key themes of our research and (2) our expected contribution:

• Understanding people: focus on what we have known/agreed/disagreed about the topic → what is still unknown? what is still inconclusive? → connect to our proposed study/perspective (tell readers why our approach is important)

41

Structure of Related Work

Categorize sections based on (1) key themes of our research and (2) our expected contribution:

• Method/Theory: focus on the strength and weakness of the existing method/theory → what is still missing? what is still unknown? what is still inconclusive? → connect to our proposed new method/theory (tell readers why our approach is important)

42

Useful phrases:

Academic Phrasebank | Referring to sources

​

43

Checklist for Related Work section

• The scope of the research is consistent with Introduction section
• Key concepts are clearly described and defined
• Knowledge/research gap is identified
• Novelty and importance of our research is justified
• Try to follow ABT framework in this section

44

How Related Work matters in submission stage?

• Usually it won’t be the major reason to accept/reject a submission. But if research gap couldn’t be seen in this section, this can lead to “reject” or “major revision”, depending on other weakness of the submission

45

Method

Academic writing session 2

2024/05/22

Chi-Lan Yang

46

What are the functions of method section?

47

Functions of the Method section of the paper

• To replicate the study
• Evaluate reliability and validity
• reliability: i.e., whether we can get similar results under similar setting and after repetitive testing
• validity: i.e., if we’re using a ruler to measure weight

48

Structure of Method

• System design
• Experiment design
• Participants
• Procedure
• Measurements (dependent variables)

• What has been done/measured
• How something was executed/measured
• Which method/materials were used
• Why certain design choices were made

49

Analyze the structure of the example paper we found (10-min)

50

Checklist for Method section

• System design
• design rationale
• system behavior
• Experiment design
• between-subject/within-subject design
• factors, conditions and their rationale
• task
• Participants
• sample size, gender/age distribution, recruiting method, their characteristics, IRB approval
• Procedure
• exact steps participants experienced
• Measurements (dependent variables)
• 7-point Likert scale, behavioral log, semi-structured interview; how they were preprocessed

51

Structure of Method

I.e., Experiment design:

52

Y. Wayne Wu, Brian P. Bailey. 2020. Better Feedback from Nicer People: Narrative Empathy and Ingroup Framing Improve Feedback Exchange. In Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 4, CSCW, Article 236 (December 2020). 20 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3432935

Factors

Conditions

Task

How much details should I write?

System paper

• Describe system behavior
• Input-process-output
• Self-check: If a master student with an engineering background wants to do the similar things, what kind of details are sufficient for them to replicate the system (and the study)

Understanding people

• The details of experiment design, procedure, characteristics of participants
• Self-check: If a master student with a social science background wants to do the similar study, what kind of details are sufficient for them to replicate the study

​

53

Writing tips

• Use simple past tense
• Use same names of the conditions or system features throughout the whole paper
• Start writing this section before other sections because it’s almost descriptive (not much narrative involved)

54

Why method matters in submission stage?

• A critical/fatal reason for rejecting a submission
• Reviewers couldn’t understand what has been done and why
• Reviewers aren’t convinced by the method
• If the reviewers are not convinced by the method, then they wouldn’t believe the rest of the paper.

​

• Keep our audience in mind while writing every section of a paper

55

Results/Findings

Academic writing session 3

2024/06/12

Chi-Lan Yang

56

What are the functions of result section?

57

Functions of the Result section of the paper

• Show findings that answers our research questions
• Ensure its consistency with RQs (in Introduction)
• For readers to assess reliability and validity of the study
• Whether authors used a valid way to analyze their data (i.e., what statistical method, what coding approach)
• Ensure its consistency with the measurements/dependent variables we described in Method section

58

Presentation order of all subsections in Result section

• Depending on the order of our RQ and hypotheses
• When doing mixed-method study, quantitative first or qualitative first?
• Depending on the focus of the paper: which is “main” and which is “supplementary”
• If we use statistical results as main source of finding and use interview to help us explain the stat result → quantitative first, qualitative latter

59

Structure of one subsection in Result section: quantitative data

• Begin with an introduction to connect the results with the research question/goal. (1~2 sentences)

60

https://www.sjsu.edu/writingcenter/docs/handouts/Results%20Section%20for%20Research%20Papers.pdf

https://dl.acm.org/doi/full/10.1145/3544548.3581061#d1e1219

​

Example

Structure of one subsection in Result section: quantitative data

2.

• Use the title of subsection to show the key finding
• Describe what statistical method we used
• Describe what condition is (not) significantly different from what conditions; stat, M, SD, p-value, effect size
• Follow APA format

61

https://dl.acm.org/doi/full/10.1145/3544548.3581061#d1e1219

​

Example

Structure of one subsection in Result section: quantitative data

3.

• Clearly describe the trend and whether the hypothesis was supported
• Refer results to figures or tables in the text

​

62

https://dl.acm.org/doi/full/10.1145/3544548.3581061#d1e1219

​

Example

Structure of one subsection in Result section: qualitative data

1. ​
1. Use the title of subsection to show the key finding
2. Begin with an introduction to connect the results with the research question/goal. (1~2 sentences)

63

Yichao Cui, Yu-Jen Lee, Jack Jamieson, Naomi Yamashita, and Yi-Chieh Lee. 2024. Exploring Effects of Chatbot's Interpretation and Self-disclosure on Mental Illness Stigma. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 8, CSCW1, Article 52 (April 2024), 33 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3637329

Example

Structure of one subsection in Result section: qualitative data

2. Describe the definition of the theme we present; elaborate the theme with details and quotes. I.e. As P01 described, “...” (P01-student)

64

Yichao Cui, Yu-Jen Lee, Jack Jamieson, Naomi Yamashita, and Yi-Chieh Lee. 2024. Exploring Effects of Chatbot's Interpretation and Self-disclosure on Mental Illness Stigma. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 8, CSCW1, Article 52 (April 2024), 33 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3637329

Example

Structure of one subsection in Result section: qualitative data

3. Include a closing sentence that refers back to RQ with a high-level concept of this subsection

​

65

Yichao Cui, Yu-Jen Lee, Jack Jamieson, Naomi Yamashita, and Yi-Chieh Lee. 2024. Exploring Effects of Chatbot's Interpretation and Self-disclosure on Mental Illness Stigma. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 8, CSCW1, Article 52 (April 2024), 33 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3637329

Example

66

https://www.sjsu.edu/writingcenter/docs/handouts/Results%20Section%20for%20Research%20Papers.pdf

Checklist for Result section

1. [Grammar] Used past tense throughout the Result section
2. [Structure] The outline of all subsections was consistent with the RQs & Method
3. [Opening] Introduced research questions/goals at the beginning of Result section
4. [Quantitative] Included descriptive and inferential statistics with APA format
5. [Quantitative] Stated whether each hypothesis was supported or not
6. [Qualitative] Themes were clearly defined and explained
7. [Qualitative] Representative quotes were presented clearly with participant’s attributes
8. [Figures/Tables] X-, Y-axis, legend, color coding, font were clear and consistent with the main text
9. [Figures/Tables] They were correctly referred to in the text
10. [Conclusion] Summarized key findings at the end of Result section

67

Why Result matters in submission stage?

• A critical/fatal reason for rejecting a submission
• Reviewers couldn’t make sense of why certain analysis was done, how they relate to RQs, and how they were analyzed
• Reviewers aren’t convinced by how we present the data.
• I.e., only descriptive result without doing inferential stat analysis;
• inconsistent with RQ/research goal; too unfocused and overwhelmed
• If the reviewers are not convinced by the result, then they wouldn’t give authors a chance for rebuttal or major revision
• Spend some effort polishing the figures & tables → first impression of the submission

68

Discussion & Conclusion

Academic writing session 5

2024/07/31

Chi-Lan Yang

69

Discussion

70

What are the functions of Discussion section?

71

Functions of the Discussion section of the paper

• Show the meaning, importance, and relevance of our results.
• Show the expected contribution of the study

72

https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/discussion/

Structure of Discussion

1. Summarize key findings that answer our RQs within one paragraph

​

​

73

1. https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/discussion/
2. Thi Thao Duyen T. Nguyen, Thomas Garncarz, Felicia Ng, Laura A. Dabbish, and Steven P. Dow. 2017. Fruitful Feedback: Positive Affective Language and Source Anonymity Improve Critique Reception and Work Outcomes. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1024–1034. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998319

Structure of Discussion

2. Interpret our main findings (remember to connect back to RQ):

Organize Discussion around key themes, RQs, or following the same structure as the results section.

Some typical ways to interpret the data include:

• Discussing whether and why the results met our expectations or supported hypotheses
• Discussing whether and how our findings are consistent or inconsistent previous research and theory;
• Explaining unexpected results and discussing their significance
• Considering possible alternative explanations and making an argument for our position

​

​

​

74

https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/discussion/

Structure of Discussion

3. Discuss (one of the following) implications: what’s new and why it’s important

• Design (or practical) implications
• What future designers/practitioners can do with the new system/interaction/findings?
• Theory implication
• How our findings fit into the existing theory?
• What new insights we can contribute to the existing theory
• Policy implications
• What new rules or policies can be proposed based on our findings?
• Method implications
• What new method/approach should we use to understand this topic?
• (Optional) Ethical issues

​

​

75

https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/discussion/

Structure of Discussion

4. Acknowledge the limitations and point out future work

Some common ways:

• If our sample size was small or limited to a specific group of people, explain how generalizability is limited
• If there are potential confounding variables that we were unable to control, acknowledge the effect these may have had

Tip: Try to phrase them in a positive way and sound they are not very critical

​

​

76

https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/discussion/

There are various ways to structure Discussion section

• Some would separate Design implication or Limitation as another independent sections, depending on people’s writing style. No right or wrong for any ways to present Discussion.

77

Checklist for Discussion section

• Brief summary of key findings
• Provide possible explanations for the results
• No overclaimed statements
• No new data/result that was not mentioned in the Results section
• Explain how the result be (in)consistent with the literature
• Connect back to RQs
• Discuss implications (for design or theory)
• Acknowledge limitations and point out future work

78

How Discussion matters in submission stage?

• Usually it won’t be the major reason to accept/reject a submission. The common critique including: the discussion is too shallow or overclaimed
• Discussion & Introduction are places where we can see the authors’ writing and storytelling skill

79

Conclusion

80

What are the functions of Conclusion section?

81

Functions of the Conclusion section of the paper

• Wrap up our ideas and leave the reader with a strong positive final impression.

82

https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-conclusion/

Structure of Conclusion

• Restate the problem statement

​

​

83

1. https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-conclusion/
2. Thi Thao Duyen T. Nguyen, Thomas Garncarz, Felicia Ng, Laura A. Dabbish, and Steven P. Dow. 2017. Fruitful Feedback: Positive Affective Language and Source Anonymity Improve Critique Reception and Work Outcomes. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1024–1034. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998319

​

​

Structure of Conclusion

2. Summarize our proposal and key findings

​

​

​

84

• https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-conclusion/
• Thi Thao Duyen T. Nguyen, Thomas Garncarz, Felicia Ng, Laura A. Dabbish, and Steven P. Dow. 2017. Fruitful Feedback: Positive Affective Language and Source Anonymity Improve Critique Reception and Work Outcomes. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1024–1034. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998319

​

​

Structure of Conclusion

3. Use one sentence to highlight the implication

• Key takeaways
• Call for action

​

​

85

• https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-conclusion/
• Thi Thao Duyen T. Nguyen, Thomas Garncarz, Felicia Ng, Laura A. Dabbish, and Steven P. Dow. 2017. Fruitful Feedback: Positive Affective Language and Source Anonymity Improve Critique Reception and Work Outcomes. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1024–1034. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998319

​

​

Checklist for Conclusion section

• Describe problem statement clearly at the beginning of the paragraph
• Describe our proposal/argument and key findings
• Ensure the findings answered research questions
• Describe implications and key takeaways

86

How Conclusion matters in submission stage?

• Doesn’t matter much

87