Publishing landscape
2 000 publishers 20 000 journals (11022 JCR) 3 mln submitted papers 1.5 mln accepted papers 30 mln readers 30 mln citations
Knowledge Networks and Nations: Royal Society, 2011
Źrodło: radrichimagery.wordpress.com
30-60% rejected by Editors
10-20% rejected by Reviewers
Around 500 000 papers accepted
Elsevier, 2014
Why publish? Prosaic reasons: For title For money For fun
Idealistic reasons: To have impact on the knowledge
Harold Ross, 2008-2010
PUBLISH ONLY IN THE BEST JOURNALS
• Endurance • Ambition • Cooperation • Humility • Change • Promotion
ENDURANCE
• Don’t wait! • Stop searching for excuses!
• Write regularly • Choose the right hour • Don’t give up!
AMBITION Hit it with the best shot!
• Short publication period • Best Reviewers • Wide range of readers • Best scored
COOPERATION • Invite Co-authors • Let them work • Open to Co-authors suggestions
Jimmy Nelson “Before they pass away”
HUMILITY
• Don’t die for your hypothesis • It’s possible that you are wrong
• Most of the times Reviewer is right
• Accept Reject but don’t give I would never die for my beliefs, because I might be wrong Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)
up!
CHANGE
• Grammatical, lexical changes
• Hypothesis changes • Journal changes
Source: manuscriptedit.com
PROMOTE YOUR WORK
• Don’t forget about your readers
• Present your work professionally
• Present your work to students
• Blogs, Facebook, Twitter
HOW TO GET THERE?
WRITER’S STEPS 1. Choose your journal 2. Prepare your manuscript 3. Submit your manuscript 4. Wait for decision
HOW TO CHOOSE YOUR JOURNAL(S)?
• Journal profile
(references, hot topics)
• Publication type
(short report, conference, research, review)
• Publishing period • Impact factor
Conference paper • Preliminary results • Short (5-10 pg, 3 fig , up to 15 ref) • Reviewed by Conference Scientific Committee Letter/Short Communication • Important results • Short (up to 4 pg, 2 fig) • Preceding full paper
Research paper/Full paper • Presentation of the accomplished project • Long (8-10 pg, 5 fig, >25 ref) • Most frequent format Review paper • Synthesis of the knowledge • Long (>10 pg , 5 fig, 80 ref) • Frequently, invited
Impact Factor
HOW TO PREPARE YOUR MANUSCRIPT?
GUIDE TO AUTHORS IS YOUR BIBLE
HOW AUTHORS WRITE IT?
• Title • Abstract (250 words) • Keywords (5 terms) • Introduction (1.5-2 pages) • Methods (2-3 pages) • Results (6-8 pages) • Discussion (4-6 pages) • References (2-4 pages)
HOW THE READERS READ?
• Title (1000 people) • Abstract (100 people) • Introduction (100 people) • Methods (3 people) • Results (10 people) • Discussion (10 people)
HOW TO WRITE IT?
• There is an interesting problem • The problem is unsolved • I have the idea how to solve it • My idea works on data • Comparing to ideas of the others, mine works better
According to Simon Paton Jones, Microsoft Research
HOW I WRITE IT?
• Methods • Results (Tables & Figures) • Discussion & Conclusions • Introduction • Abstract • Title
GOOD TITLE Higher progesterone is associated with low levels of premenstrual aggressive behavior and fatigue
BAD TITLES Is progesterone level related to premenstrual symptoms?
Progesterone level and premenstrual symptoms
Introduction
Methods
Conclusions
Results
INTRODUCTION • Problem to solve? • Other solutions? • Limitations? • Your solution? MUST INCLUDE!
Aim of the paper
Hypothesis
METHODS Walk through the research
• Subjects • Measurements • Statistical methods
RESULTS
• Write the history with chapters • Statistical methods are part of the METHODS
• 1 Figure is better than 1000 words • Tables when comparing real values • Correct statistical notation
• Give necessary statistical parameters (F & p for ANOVA; R2, β, p for regression)
• For normal distrbution: mean & SD • For skewed distribution: median & quartiles
• Average with max 2 decimal places • p-value with max 3 decimal places • Only numbers for small samples
DISCUSSION
• Summarize the results • Underlie value of the results • Compare with other results • Don’t criticize too much • Don’t ignore other results • Interpret only based on existing knowledge
MANUSCRIPT READY TO SENT
• Clear and important message • Logical and understandable • Perfect English • Technical check-up
proteas.microlab.ntua.gr/ksiop/ phd_funny
SENT TO EDITOR DESK REJECTION
SENT TO REVIEWERS REJECTED
ACCEPTED
MINOR REVISION MAJOR REVISION
REJECTED BECAUSE OF:
• Technical problems • Beyond the Scope • Unfinished • Incorrect procedure/analysis • Conclusion too far from data • Incomprehensive • Boring myyeartothrive.files.wordpress.com
REJECTED? DON’T PANIC!
• SCREEM, SHOUT, CRY! • Start writing again • “Reject” brings message • Use Editor/Reviewers comments • Make necessary changes • Sent to next journal • Repeat until accepted
BORED WITH SUCCESS?
THANK YOU!
Comments, questions? Write me:
[email protected]
