Writer's Remorse: post publication

I realized a few things after the paper was published.  The manuscript that I submitted bore the changes as recommended by the peer reviewer but these were not included in the published paper.  This failure can be attributed to any of the following: 

• Oversight on the part of the proof reader.
• Absence of diligence on my part.  
• Oversight on the part of my editor.

This post is not to blame on the Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies.  They do quick and fast work.  I just realized that it is very easy to criticize a published work when in fact we were not party to the arduous work involved to the publication.

I found the errors to my published paper when I was presenting it to my colleagues over the University of the Visayas Graduate School last Sunday.  It was nice to see their faces lit up and find the study interesting. 

Sadly, I also found first hand how people consider Qualitative Studies as "not real researche".  Often the problem lies when comparing Quantitative Researches (which has been around for a long time) with QUALITATIVE as an emergent design.  As Dr. Talili of Liceo De Cagayan would point out qualitative writing is a creative process.  This is because the primary tool for Qualitative Studies is the researcher hence his philosophical views must be inserted and his biases be blatantly obvious.

It maybe normal for writer's to suffer regret on things that could have been added.  Writing can be akin to a relationship, we regret things we did not or should have done when the relationship has ended.