Facts, scope, style: a guide to writing papers for IEEE transactions on consumer electronics

In a previous article, I wrote a brief piece on how to enhance papers that have been published at one of the IEEE Consumer Electronics (CE) Society conferences to create papers that can be considered for publishing in IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics (T-CE) [1]. Basically, it included some hints and tips to enhance a conference paper into what is required for a full archival journal paper and not fall foul of self-plagiarism. This article focuses on writing original papers specifically for T-CE. After three years as the journal’s editor-in-chief (EiC), a previous eight years on the editorial board, and having reviewed some 4,000 T-CE papers, I decided to write this article to archive and detail for prospective authors what I have learned over this time. Of course, there are numerous articles on writing good papers—some are really useful [2], but they do not address the specific issues of writing for a journal whose topic (scope) is not widely understood or, indeed, is often misunderstood

Special Libraries, November 1980

Volume 71, Issue 11https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/sla_sl_1980/1009/thumbnail.jp

Developing 5GL Concepts from User Interactions

In the fulfilling of the contracts generated in Test Driven Development, a developer could be said to act as a constraint solver, similar to those used by a 5th Generation Language(5GL). This thesis presents the hypothesis that 5GL linguistic mechanics, such as facts, rules and goals, will be emergent in the communications of developer pairs performing Test Driven Development, validating that 5GL syntax is congruent with the ways that practitioners communicate. Along the way, nomenclatures and linguistic patterns may be observed that could inform the design of future 5GL languages

An Empirical Analysis of Factors Affecting Autonomous Truck Adoption

Autonomous vehicles have the potential to revolutionize the transportation industry. The segment of truck transportation is no exception. Autonomous vehicles have the potential to improve trucking safety, to increase shipping velocity, and to decrease costs. Additionally, autonomous trucks could be an important tool to help alleviate the ongoing driver shortage that the trucking industry is contending with. Autonomous truck adoption is not guaranteed. Transportation equipment decisions are market-based, and autonomous trucks must present a compelling business case to transportation professionals. As such, it is imperative to understand the decision-making factors that drive transportation solution adoption, and how autonomous trucks could take advantage of those factors to be a competitive force in the transportation marketplace. It is also important to understand the potential effects that autonomous trucks could have on industry as well, so that companies can develop contingency plans to deal with these effects. This study uses Grounded Theory to analyze semi-structured interviews with twelve professionals from the transportation industry. A conceptual model detailing major factors that affect transportation decisions and propositions about autonomous trucks\u27 effects on industry are presented, along with a discussion. The dissertation concludes with an identification of avenues of future research to further the information uncovered in this study, and to address its limitations

SciTech News Volume 71, No. 2 (2017)

Columns and Reports From the Editor 3 Division News Science-Technology Division 5 Chemistry Division 8 Engineering Division 9 Aerospace Section of the Engineering Division 12 Architecture, Building Engineering, Construction and Design Section of the Engineering Division 14 Reviews Sci-Tech Book News Reviews 16 Advertisements IEEE

An investigation into the depiction of smart grid technology

Increasing climate change concerns and depletion of fossil fuels demand greater efficiency in electricity production and consumption. Smart Grid is a vision of an enhanced electricity grid that integrates the electric grid with communication and sensing technologies to improve energy delivery. A number of initiatives have been embarked upon to reach this vision. Databases of Smart Grid projects are being kept to hallmark the state of development and advise future project design. However, to date, there is no method of comparing projects‟ results. This means that it is difficult to identify the most successful projects. In addition, details of projects tend to be descriptive and there is no standard method of representing Smart Grid systems. The first Smart Grid technologies are about to be deployed in homes, and yet, there are little research examining how domestic consumers would react to a full set of Smart Grid technology. This is important because the opinions and participation of domestic consumers could lead to the success or failure of the Smart Grid system. This research aims to device a representation system that enables the comparison of smart grid technology available for the residential consumers in the UK. The objectives are to: (i) review and identify existing representations of home Smart Grid technology; (ii) review and identify the general system representation methods; (iii) develop a representation method that maps and enables the comparison of Smart Grid technology in homes; (iv) validate the design of the representation method with relevant stakeholders. Through a four step methodology these objectives were achieved. Thirty Smart Grid diagrams taken from journals and conference papers were analysed and categorised into five groups based of the type of communication features they contained. The results from this analysis guided the development of a Smart Grid representation method. Two Smart Grid systems that are available on the market were depicted using the representation method and were used to validate the design through interviewing 10 residential electricity consumers. As an outcome, this research had delivered a validated representation method that could be used to depict electricity management systems. It could be adopted by energy companies to convey the functions and benefits of Smart Grid technologies to potential customers

Three-stage publishing to support evidence-based management practice

[EN] A Spanish version of the article is provided (see section before annex).This article proposes a 4-step model for scientific dissemination that aims to promote evidence-based professional practice in Operations Management or Human Resource Management as well as research with a more transparent and reproducible process. These 4 steps include:1 social network announcements,2 dissemination to scientific journals, 3 dissemination to social networks, and 4 scientific dissemination to professional journals. Central to the 4-step model is a three-stage publication process within the second step, which adds an additional stage to the two previously proposed (Marin-Garcia, 2015). These three publication stages begin with a protocol paper, are followed by a data paper, and finish with a traditional article. Each stage promotes research with merit which is citable and recognizable as such before the scientific evaluation bodies. As two of these stages are largely unknown within the fields of Business and Management, I define the details of a protocol paper and a data paper including their contents. In addition, I provide examples of both papers as well as the other steps of the science dissemination model. This model can be adopted by researchers as a means of achieving greater impact and transfer of research results. This work intends to help researchers to understand, to evaluate, and to make better decisions about how their research reaches society at large outside of academia.In this way, WPOM aligns with the recommendations of several leading journals in the field of business management on the need to promote transparent, accessible, and replicable science (Beugelsdijk et al., 2020). WPOM goes one step further in compliance with this direction by having relevant journals that not only accept, but also actively encourage the publication of protocol papers and data papers. WPOM strives to pioneer in this field of Business and Management.This article also explores the potential prevalence of protocol papers and data papers within the set of all articles published in journals indexed in Clarivate Web of Science and Scopus.With this editorial, WPOM is committed to promoting this model by accepting for review any of the three types of scientific contributions including protocol papers, data papers, and traditional papers.Marin-Garcia, JA. (2021). Three-stage publishing to support evidence-based management practice. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management. 12(2):56-95. https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.11755OJS5695122Adeniji, C., Adeyeye, O., Iyiola, O., Olokundun, M., Motilewa, D., Ibidunni, S., & Akinbode, M. (2018). Data on strategic change on employees' behavioural attitude and firm performance of selected manufacturing firms in Nigeria. Data in Brief, 18, 1551-1555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.04.032Aguinis, H., Banks, G. C., Rogelberg, S. G., & Cascio, W. F. (2020). Actionable recommendations for narrowing the science-practice gap in open science. Organizational Behavior and Human dEcision Processes, 158, 27-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.02.007Aguinis, H., & Gabriel, K. P. (2021). If You are Serious About Impact, Create a Personal Impact Development Plan. Business & Society, 00076503211014482. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503211014482Aguinis, H., Ramani, R. S., & Alabduljader, N. (2018). What You See Is What You Get? Enhancing Methodological Transparency in Management Research. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 83-110. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0011Akl, E. A., Kairouz, V. F., Sackett, K. M., Erdley, W. S., Mustafa, R. A., Fiander, M., Gabriel, C., & Schünemann, H. (2013). Educational games for health professionals. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006411.pub4Al-Rahmi, W., Aldraiweesh, A., Yahaya, N., Bin Kamin, Y., & Zeki, A. M. (2019). Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): Data on higher education. Data in Brief, 22, 118-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.11.139Amaral, O. B., & Neves, K. (2021). Reproducibility: expect less of the scientific paper. NAture, 597(16 September), 329-332. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02486-7 https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02486-7Angus, D. C., Alexander, B. M., Berry, S., Buxton, M., Lewis, R., Paoloni, M., Webb, S. A. R., Arnold, S., Barker, A., Berry, D. A., Bonten, M. J. M., Brophy, M., Butler, C., Cloughesy, T. F., Derde, L. P. G., Esserman, L. J., Ferguson, R., Fiore, L., Gaffey, S. C., Gaziano, J. M., Giusti, K., Goossens, H., Heritier, S., Hyman, B., Krams, M., Larholt, K., LaVange, L. M., Lavori, P., Lo, A. W., London, A. J., Manax, V., McArthur, C., O'Neill, G., Parmigiani, G., Perlmutter, J., Petzold, E. A., Ritchie, C., Rowan, K. M., Seymour, C. W., Shapiro, N. I., Simeone, D. M., Smith, B., Spellberg, B., Stern, A. D., Trippa, L., Trusheim, M., Viele, K., Wen, P. Y., Woodcock, J., & The Adaptive Platform Trials, C. (2019). Adaptive platform trials: definition, design, conduct and reporting considerations. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 18(10), 797-807. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41573-019-0034-3Berry, S. M. (2020). Potential Statistical Issues Between Designers and Regulators in Confirmatory Basket, Umbrella, and Platform Trials [https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.1908]. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 108(3), 444-446. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.1908Beugelsdijk, S., van Witteloostuijn, A., & Meyer, K. E. (2020). A new approach to data access and research transparency (DART). Journal of International Business Studies, 51(6), 887-905. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00323-zBonett, D. G. (2020). Design and Analysis of Replication Studies. Organizational Research Methods, 1094428120911088. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120911088Brandenburg, M., & Hahn, G. J. (2018). Sustainable aggregate production planning in the chemical process industry - A benchmark problem and dataset. Data in Brief, 18, 961-967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.03.064Burke, L. A., & Rau, B. (2010). The Research-Teaching Gap in Management. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(1), 132-143. http://amle.aom.org/content/9/1/132.abstract https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.9.1.zqr132Candela, L., Castelli, D., Manghi, P., & Tani, A. (2015). Data journals: A survey. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(9), 1747-1762. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23358Cannon, S., & Boswell, C. (2016). Evidence-based teaching in nursing. Jones & Bartlett Learning.Center for Open Science. (2015). Guidelines for Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) in Journal Policies and Practices. "The TOP Guidelines" Version 1.0.1. In. https://www.cos.io/initiatives/top-guidelines: Center for Open Science.Chambers, C. D., Feredoes, E., Muthukumaraswamy, S. D., & Etchells, P. J. (2014). Instead of "playing the game" it is time to change the rules: Registered Reports at AIMS Neuroscience and beyond. AIMS Neuroscience, 1(1), 4-17. https://doi.org/10.3934/Neuroscience.2014.1.4Chavan, V., & Penev, L. (2011). The data paper: a mechanism to incentivize data publishing in biodiversity science [Article]. BMC bioinformatics, 12 Suppl 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-S15-S2Closa, C. (2021). Planning, implementing and reporting: increasing transparency, replicability and credibility in qualitative political science research [Article; Early Access]. European Political Science, 11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-020-00299-2Davis, A. (2017). It worked there. Will it work here? Researching teaching methods. Ethics and Education, 12(3), 289-303. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2017.1361267Delgado-López-Cózar, E., Ràfols, I., & Abadal, E. (2021). Letter: A call for a radical change in research evaluation in Spain. El profesional de la información. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.may.09Duñabeitia, J. A., Griffin, K. L., Martín, J. L., Oliva, M., Sámano, M. L., & Ivaz, L. (2016). The Spanish General Knowledge Norms [Data Report]. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1888). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01888El-Tawil, S., & Agrawal, A. K. (2019). Data Papers: A New Submission Category [Editorial]. Journal of Structural Engineering (United States), 145(12). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002574European Organization For Nuclear Research, & OpenAIRE. (2013). Zenodo. In.Evans, L. (2019). Catedráticos de universidad. De lideres académicos a académicos que lideran.Fadahunsi, K. P., Akinlua, J. T., O'Connor, S., Wark, P. A., Gallagher, J., Carroll, C., Majeed, A., & O'Donoghue, J. (2019). Protocol for a systematic review and qualitative synthesis of information quality frameworks in eHealth [Article]. Bmj Open, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024722Fernández-Muñoz, J. J., & Topa, G. (2018). Older Workers and Affective Job Satisfaction: Gender Invariance in Spain [Data Report]. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(930). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00930France, E. F., Cunningham, M., Ring, N., Uny, I., Duncan, E. A. S., Jepson, R. G., Maxwell, M., Roberts, R. J., Turley, R. L., Booth, A., Britten, N., Flemming, K., Gallagher, I., Garside, R., Hannes, K., Lewin, S., Noblit, G. W., Pope, C., Thomas, J., Vanstone, M., Higginbottom, G. M. A., & Noyes, J. (2019). Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: The eMERGe reporting guidance [Article]. BMC medical research methodology, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0600-0Gillen, P. A., Sinclair, M., Kernohan, W. G., Begley, C. M., & Luyben, A. G. (2017). Interventions for prevention of bullying in the workplace. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009778.pub2Hardwicke, T. E., Thibault, R. T., Kosie, J. E., Wallach, J. D., Kidwell, M. C., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2021). Estimating the Prevalence of Transparency and Reproducibility-Related Research Practices in Psychology (2014-2017) [Article; Early Access]. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620979806Hogekamp, Z., Blomster, J. K., Bursalıoğlu, A., Călin, M. C., Çetinçelik, M., Haastrup, L., & van den Berg, Y. H. M. (2016). Examining the Importance of the Teachers' Emotional Support for Students' Social Inclusion Using the One-with-Many Design [Protocols]. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1014). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01014Kim, J. (2020). An analysis of data paper templates and guidelines: types of contextual information described by data journals. Science Editing, 7(1), 16-23. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.185Köhler, T., & Cortina, J. M. (2019). Play It Again, Sam! An Analysis of Constructive Replication in the Organizational Sciences. Journal of Management, 47(2), 488-518. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319843985Lawler Iii, E. E. (2007). Why HR practices are not evidence-based [Article]. Academy of management Journal, 50(5), 1033-1036. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2007.27155013Leganés-Lavall, E. N., & Pérez-Aldeguer, S. (2016). Social Competence in Higher Education Questionnaire (CCSES): Revision and Psychometric Analysis [Data Report]. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1484). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01484LERU. (2020). Towards a research integrity culture at universities: From recommendations to implementation. LEAGUE OF EUROPEAN RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES.Li, G. W., Jin, Y. L., Mbuagbaw, L., Dolovich, L., Adachi, J. D., Levine, M. A. H., Cook, D., Samaan, Z., & Thabane, L. (2018). Enhancing research publications and advancing scientific writing in health research collaborations: sharing lessons learnt from the trenches. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 11, 245-254. https://doi.org/10.2147/jmdh.S152681Losilla, J. M., Navarro, J. B., Palmer, A., Rodrigo, M. F., & Ato, M. (2005). Análisis de datos. Del contraste de hipótesis al modelado estadístico. Edicions a Petició.Machuca-Martinez, F. (2020). Importance of scientific data and its publication as data paper. Ingenieria Y Competitividad, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.25100/iyc.v22i1.8843Mahajan, R., Burza, S., Bouter, L. M., Sijtsma, K., Knottnerus, A., Kleijnen, J., van Dael, P., & Zeegers, M. P. (2020). Standardized protocol items recommendations for observational studies (SPIROS) for observational study protocol reporting guidelines: Protocol for a delphi study [Article]. JMIR Research Protocols, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.2196/17864Marin-Garcia, J. A. (2015). Publishing in two phases for focused research by means of "research collaborations". WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management, 6(2), 76-80. https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.v6i2.4459Marin-Garcia, J. A. (in press). Data Paper Spanish version of Soft Skills Scale (SSS17sp). WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management(in press). https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.15572Marin-Garcia, J. A., & Alfalla-Luque, R. (2018). Protocol: Is there agreement or disagreement between the absolute and relative impact indices obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus data? WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management, Vol 9(1), 53-80. https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.v9i1.8989Marin-Garcia, J. A., & Alfalla-Luque, R. (2021). Teaching experiences based on action research: a guide to publishing in scientific journals. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management, 12(1), 42-50. https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.7243Marin-Garcia, J. A., Betancour, E., & Giraldo-OMeara, M. (2018). Protocol: Literature review on the psychometric properties of the short versions of the scales of social desirability in the answers to competency self-assessment questionnaires [Literature review; protocol; social desirability; short version; scales; soft skills]. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management, 9(1), 14-29. https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.v9i1.9172Marin-Garcia, J. A., & Garcia-Sabater, J. P. (2021). Case reporting guidelines for the management area. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management, 12(2), in press. https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.15332Marin-Garcia, J. A., Ruiz, A., Julien, M., & Garcia-Sabater, J. P. (2021). A data generator for covid-19 patients' care requirements inside hospitals. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management, 12(1), 76-115. https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.15332Mascarenhas, M. F., Dübbers, F., Hoszowska, M., Köseoğlu, A., Karakasheva, R., Topal, A. B., Izydorczyk, D., & Lemoine, J. E. (2018). The Power of Choice: A Study Protocol on How Identity Leadership Fosters Commitment Toward the Organization [Protocols]. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(1677). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01677Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., Group, P.-P., Altman, D. G., Booth, A., Chan, A. W., Chang, S., Clifford, T., Dickersin, K., Egger, M., Gøtzsche, P. C., Grimshaw, J. M., Groves, T., Helfand, M., Higgins, J., Lasserson, T., Lau, J., Lohr, K., McGowan, J., Mulrow, C., Norton, M., Page, M., Sampson, M., Schünemann, H., Simera, I., Summerskill, W., Tetzlaff, J., Trikalinos, T. A., Tovey, D., Turner, L., & Whitlock, E. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement [Article]. Systematic Reviews, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1Motilewa, B. D. (2018). Survey data on supply chain improvement and operational competency of oil and gas firms in Nigeria. Data in Brief, 20, 1073-1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.08.150Newman, P., & Corke, P. (2009). Editorial: Data papers peer reviewed publication of high quality data sets [Editorial]. International Journal of Robotics Research, 28(5), 587. https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364909104283Nielsen, K., & Miraglia, M. (2016). What works for whom in which circumstances? On the need to move beyond the 'what works?' question in organizational intervention research. Human relations, 70(1), 40-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726716670226Noor, N. M., Pett, S. L., Esmail, H., Crook, A. M., Vale, C. L., Sydes, M. R., & Parmar, M. K. B. (2020). Adaptive platform trials using multi-arm, multi-stage protocols: getting fast answers in pandemic settings. F1000Res, 9, 1109. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.26253.2Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., Breckler, S. J., Buck, S., Chambers, C. D., Chin, G., Christensen, G., Contestabile, M., Dafoe, A., Eich, E., Freese, J., Glennerster, R., Goroff, D., Green, D. P., Hesse, B., Humphreys, M., Ishiyama, J., Karlan, D., Kraut, A., Lupia, A., Mabry, P., Madon, T., Malhotra, N., Mayo-Wilson, E., McNutt, M., Miguel, E., Paluck, E. L., Simonsohn, U., Soderberg, C., Spellman, B. A., Turitto, J., VandenBos, G., Vazire, S., Wagenmakers, E. J., Wilson, R., & Yarkoni, T. (2015). Promoting an open research culture. Science, 348(6242), 1422. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab2374OECD. (2007). Principles and Guidelines for Access to Research Data from Public Funding. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264034020-en-frOgunnaike, O. O., Ayeni, B., Olorunyomi, B., Olokundun, M., Ayoade, O., & Borishade, T. (2018). Data set on interactive service quality in higher education marketing. Data in Brief, 19, 1403-1409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.05.082Ondé, D., & Alvarado, J. M. (2018). Scale Validation Conducting Confirmatory Factor Analysis: A Monte Carlo Simulation Study With LISREL [Data Report]. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(751). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00751Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., Stewart, L. A., Thomas, J., Tricco, A. C., Welch, V. A., Whiting, P., & McKenzie, J. E. (2021). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n160. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n160Popoola, S. I., Atayero, A. A., Badejo, J. A., John, T. M., Odukoya, J. A., & Omole, D. O. (2018). Learning analytics for smart campus: Data on academic performances of engineering undergraduates in Nigerian private university. Data in Brief, 17, 76-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2017.12.059Popoola, S. I., Atayero, A. A., Badejo, J. A., Odukoya, J. A., Omole, D. O., & Ajayi, P. (2018). Datasets on demographic trends in enrollment into undergraduate engineering programs at Covenant University, Nigeria. Data in Brief, 18, 47-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.02.073Puerta-Piñero, C., Pérez-Luque, A. J., & Rodríguez-Echeverría, S. (2020). Ecosistemas is committed to the publication of data papers [Editorial]. Ecosistemas, 29(3). https://doi.org/10.7818/ECOS.2118Rico-Castro, P. (2019). ¿Amigos o enemigos? Cómo la open science pone a las políticas de open access frente al espejo. RUIDERAe: revista de unidades de información(15). https://doi.org/https://revista.uclm.es/index.php/ruiderae/article/view/2166Roa-Martinez, S. M., Vidotti, S. A. B., & Santana, R. C. (2017). Proposed structure of a data paper structure as scientific publication. Revista Espanola De Documentacion Cientifica, 40(1). https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2017.1.1375Rousseau, D. M. (2006). Is there such a thing as "evidence-based management"? [Review]. Academy of management Review, 31(2), 256-269. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.20208679Rousseau, D. M., & McCarthy, S. (2007). Educating managers from an evidence-based perspective [Review]. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 6(1), 84-101. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2007.24401705Rushby, N. (2015). Editorial: Data papers [Article]. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(5), 899-903. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12337Sackett, D. L., Straus , S. E., Richardson, W. S., Rosenberg, W. R., & Haynes, R. B. (2000). Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM (2nd Edition). Churchill Livingstone.Sanchez-Ruiz, L., & Blanco, B. (2019). Survey dataset on reasons why companies decide to implement continuous improvement. Data in Brief, 26, 104523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2019.104523Sanchez-Ruiz, L., & Diez-Busto, E. (2020). Avances de los investigadores españoles de Dirección de Operaciones en el año 2019: el caso de los miembros de ACEDEDOT. WPOM-Working Papers on Operations Management, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.4995/wpom.v11i1.13637Schöpfel, J., Farace, D., Prost, H., & Zane, A. (2019). Data papers as a new form of knowledge organization in the field of research data [Article]. Knowledge Organization, 46(8), 622-638. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2019-8-622Serghiou, S., Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D. G., Boyack, K. W., Riedel, N., Wallach, J. D., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2021). Assessment of transparency indicators across the biomedical literature: How open is open? [Article]. PLOS Biology, 19(3), 26. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001107Soyyılmaz, D., Griffin, L. M., Martín, M. H., Kucharský, Š., Peycheva, E. D., Vaupotič, N., & Edelsbrunner, P. A. (2017). Formal and Informal Learning and First-Year Psychology Students' Development of Scientific Thinking: A Two-Wave Panel Study [Protocols]. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(133). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00133Straus, S. E., Glasziou, P., Richardson, W. S., & Haynes, R. B. (2019). Medicina basada en la evidencia. Cómo practicar y enseñar MBE ((5th ed. 1st in 1997) ed.). Elservier.Thyer, B. A. (2004). What is evidence-based practice? Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 4(2), 167. https://doi.org/10.1093/brief-treatment/mhh013Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349-357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042Toth, A. A., Banks, G. C., Mellor, D., O'Boyle, E. H., Dickson, A., Davis, D. J., DeHaven, A., Bochantin, J., & Born

The “License as Tax” Fallacy

Intellectual property licenses are commonly portrayed as a “tax” that limits access to technology assets, which in turn stunts innovation by intermediate users and inflates prices for end-users. Renewed skepticism toward IP licensing, and associated judicial and regulatory interventions that apply per se-like liability rules under patent and antitrust law to IP licensing, overlook the fact that IP licenses typically play a “positive-sum” enabling function, rather than a “zero-sum” exclusionary function, by mitigating expropriation risks that would otherwise frustrate transactions between the holders of complementary specialized IP and non-IP assets. As illustrated by paradigm examples of licensing and other IP-dependent arrangements in content and technology markets, these transactional structures facilitate value-creating exchanges of knowledge assets, promote the division of labor among innovation and production specialists, and lower entry costs for firms that have strong innovation capacities but weak production and distribution capacities. An analytical framework that overlooks the enabling function of IP licensing is prone to recommend “false positive” policy actions that undermine the formation of markets in IP assets and, more generally, induce organizational distortions and reduce competitive intensity by disadvantaging R&D-specialist entities that rely on licensing-based monetization mechanisms while favoring integrated firms that maintain end-to-end commercialization structures