Negetive outcomes when reviewers evaluate contribution:

1. Low incremental (So what? What's new?)

2. Overly narrow (Too specialized, scope of the contribution is very limited)

3. Not very surprising (Judging against common sense)

4. Unclear importance (What was done rather than why it was interesting or important)

Take a step back:

Potential for contribution is generally set at the very earliest stages of a research project. By the time the data are collected, it is usually too late to think about how to make a substantially larger contribution.

An important problem in theory/concept becomes guiding force for the research question, theoretical model, etc.

Identify, explain, and argue for why your research question matters.

Recognize that a contribution must have:

1. Value: add an important/relevant insight.

2. Originality: unique to your theory and model.

1. Define your work's contribution. Take initiative be clear.

2. Prensent new research opportunities? Spawn new research questions and areas for future study.

3. The contribution is generally more convincing if it is rooted in revising or expanding explanations and understandings.

Maturity

1. Many papers are submitted prematurely; the new conceptual stories are not developed. Within the discussion, the content tends to focus on findings rather than link them to supporting a story.

2. Prioritize your paper's story and use the data and findings in a supporting role. Evidence is used to substantiate the contribution and is not a substitute for it.

3. What do findings mean in terms of supporting a novel and valuable conceptual story before submitting the paper?

   Consider first your motivation for writing a paper

• Ask yourself how you can make your paper's story poignant and compelling?

• What is interesting about your research? Does it have broad appeal? Does it pertain to a critical social isssue? Think about what makes your research interesting.

• All this begins with a clear definition of your work's objective and why it is important.

Check list:

1. Ways to contribute to theory

2. Modes of theorizing

3. Causal mechanisms

4. Constructs/variables

5. Boundary conditions

6. Derive initial outputs from new theory.

7. Different types of outputs from existing theory.

8. Derive more specific outputs for special cases.

9. Derive new outputs by combining theories.

Discussion

1. The discussion is the most critical part of your paper because that is where you define and develop its contribution and unique value-added.?

2. All too often, discussions rehash empirical findings and go no further - a big red flag that the authors have not thought their way through the contribution.?

3. This is why I read the discussion first whenever I review a submission.

A strong discussion will trypically have four features.

1. The contribution is clearly articulated relative to a research question.

2. The contribution is explained and developed.

3. It is positioned relative to existing thinking so the reader can understand how the paper's unique story extends or revises current knowledge.

4. It sets a foundation for future research.

理論貢獻(xiàn)方式：擴(kuò)寬理論邊界。