⚙️ Task Mapping Paper Writing Progress Updates

[xehu]

Paper Writing and Manuscript Preparation

Update 5/25: This week, I just went through another round of revisions on the paper. We were also able to share the draft with Matthew Cronin, to see if he thinks it would be a good fit for an Academy of Management journal instead. I see that @duncanjwatts has left some new comments, so I will continue to iterate!

A few open / unresolved steps:

• Finishing up a public-facing website where we can direct users to actually see the data and play with it for themselves;
• Cleaning up and adding to appendices --- @linneagandhi made some suggestions about more detail we could add to our description of the rating process.

Update 5/04: I just met with Abdullah this morning, and we have a plan for new revisions, which I will work on starting from early next week (have to get through a machine learning final)!

• Thank you so much to @linneagandhi for your suggestions on improving the results. We'll be doing a major rework of that section, taking most of your feedback into account!
• Abdullah and I also had a discussion about whether we want to submit to Management Science, or perhaps an Academy of Management venue (there is an individual, Matthew Cronin, who emailed us with related work and great interest).

Update 4/20: We are gearing up to get this paper submitted. Thank you to everyone who has been able to provide feedback thus far --- your help is greatly appreciated!

Here's the progress this week / something we can discuss:

• I wrote the cover letter for submitting this paper to Management Science. If you have a chance, please take a look and let me know what you think (plus, suggest good reviewers)!
• I want to think about a good way to create a public-facing version of the repository, and make it easier for people to contribute their own tasks/dimensions (as we promised). Do people think it's a good idea to hire someone on Upwork and get them to help set up a front-end/back-end system?

Update 4/13: I have now finished another pass of the paper, and I am ready for your feedback! You can read the latest draft at the previous link, here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IdcgZ1QTHsn-ntpEWJPQ_hlWGTq48UC-OTnP-K6bDH8/edit

Please let me know your thoughts / drop comments!!

Update 3/23: I've been iterating on this paper for a few weeks now with Abdullah, and we're now quite close to a journal submission. My soft target is to get this done and in some editor's mailbox by May 1, 2023.

I wanted to let you all know about the expected timeline (which may evolve over time, but I wanted to get something down in writing)!

By ~April 3, 2023: Emily to finish a last pass / revision of the paper based on Abdullah's feedback. Will send to Mark (@markwhiting), Linnea (@linneagandhi), Duncan (@duncanjwatts), and Abdullah (@amaatouq) for feedback. By ~April 17, 2023 (2 weeks later): Mark, Linnea, Duncan, and Abdullah to provide feedback. Emily to clean up appendices, write cover letter, identify reviewers. At some point in between: post to internal lab channel for anyone interested to give feedback. By ~May 1, 2023: Submit to Management Science, once 4 coauthors sign off.

Can you all let me know if this timeline works for all of you?

Update 2/2: Based on comments and feedback from Duncan and Abdullah, I've been working on (yet) another rewrite! I've taken a pass on the introduction so far, and have moved the working edits to this document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IdcgZ1QTHsn-ntpEWJPQ_hlWGTq48UC-OTnP-K6bDH8/edit

I'll be meeting with Abdullah on 2/6 and will continue the process of refining and preparing this work for submission!

Update 1/19: As of the new year, the paper is fully written up: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RqCUjMYTUeKdUegSu8ffZCbu3UU7kY1JA24brMKv7eM/edit?pli=1#

Here are my thoughts on next steps [looking for getting everyone on the same page / discussion]:

• Duncan and Abdullah are taking a first pass. After they do so, I will go through and resolve their comments and make another round of edits.
• A collective discussion topic is: what journal are targeting? Can we make a plan for submission?
• Once I get through a first round of comments by Abdullah and Duncan (just to get the initial framing and set-up on the right track), I would love to open up the paper to additional comments. As 2nd reviewers: @markwhiting, @linneagandhi, and @JamesPHoughton perhaps?
• Once everyone is on the same page, we might let some other people outside review the paper / provide feedback.
• Then, SUBMIT TO JOURNAL! (Should this step be concurrent with the previous step? E.g., should we release on ArXiv or something, once we have internally agreed with everything?)

Additionally, there is some analysis/actions outstanding, mostly on my end:

• @xehu will create a clean list of tasks (this is a conversation I already had with @markwhiting), and this will be one of our appendices. This is still in flight, and is also somewhat dependent on the next bullet (adding 30 new tasks to the map).
• @xehu is leading a group of RA's to map out the ~30 game theory tasks and add them to the task map. As of now, they are almost done being written. We are waiting on just one more RA to finish up the last 4. Once these are written, I would love to get back in touch with @markwhiting and @TutiGomoka to get the ratings all set up!

Update 8/7: After discussion, will plan a restructuring of the paper as a next step.

• Notes from the meeting are here.

Update 9/30: Emily to discuss with Duncan and Abdullah on 10/5 to plan next steps for the paper.

Update 9/23: The Trouble With Taxonomies paper is written up (draft here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P5RzV3YvDO5xbuTo7jIbQTxMRQamVfeoQZSb9Q3mxoU/edit#heading=h.1mhpyox6oew7) I present it at 3PM today!

[markwhiting]

Exciting. Looking forward to it!

[JamesPHoughton]

Happy to look at it =) Are you getting chatGPT as a reviewer?

[xehu]

Haha @JamesPHoughton I have not given it to ChatGPT yet lol....human reviewers only for now!

[markwhiting]

Awesome! Excited for the paper. The timeline seems good.

[markwhiting]

Awesome! Will be feed backing shortly!

[markwhiting]

I want to think about a good way to create a public-facing version of the repository, and make it easier for people to contribute their own tasks/dimensions (as we promised). Do people think it's a good idea to hire someone on Upwork and get them to help set up a front-end/back-end system?

I think theres a lot to be done for this as we have outlined, but we can do it after the paper submission. I think hiring someone on upward or an RA would be fine, but I think we should perhaps refine our design a bit before launching into that.

[xehu]

@markwhiting yes; the proposal here is that we figure out a bare-minimum/MVP release now, so that we can write about it in the paper that we will be sending to publication very soon. I don't think it should wait, because as @linneagandhi pointed out in her feedback this week, it's good to strike while the iron is hot; and to essentially create a mechanism for people to take action if they are inspired when they read the paper.

Thus, I'm wondering if you all have thoughts on some initial designs that we could get quickly implemented via Upwork?

[linneagandhi]

@xehu I wonder if maybe you could be even lighter with an MVP? Meaning, you could setup a public website that has a D3 style visualization of the current state tasks. (Something pretty with dimensions + images of the tasks). Then have a "contact us" section for people to submit ideas - and you could even have a second page on the site where you log those (maybe weekly, in batches) with credit (for incentive). That way the code involved would be super light touch. Another tool that an engineering friend suggested to me was 'retool - but I haven't explored it in depth. He suggested it would be a super light way to spin up a backend/frontend with little technical knowledge reqd.

[markwhiting]

Sorry on my delay this week — aiming to provide more feedback tonight!