meeting-how to prepare a manuscript

7/29/2019 Meeting-How to Prepare a Manuscript

1/53

1

How to Prepare a

Manuscript forPublication?

Delivered by: Dr. Qaisar Abbas

Department of Computer Science, NTU

Dated : 26/11/2012


2/53

2

Outline

Why do we publish?

What is a good manuscript?

How to prepare a good manuscript for an

international journal Preparations before writing

Construction of a manuscript

Some technical details that need special attention

Language Authorship

Revision

Review Process

Conclusion


3/53

3

Why do we publish?

Researchers today are all under

great pressure to publish MORE

(for funding, career success, etc. )

We are obliged to publish ourresults


4/53

4


Submit to the right journal (scope, speed

and prestige)

Submit to one journal only Submit one article only to one journal

Check the English!

Pay attention to the structure Pay attention tojournal requirements

Be honest!


5/53

5


Does the article fit the aims and scope ofthe journal?

Is the research novel and does it add tothe existing body of knowledge?

Are the right conclusions drawn fromthe data presented?

Is it of international relevance or uniquefeatures?

Is it well-presented in properEnglish?


6/53

6


A good manuscript makes readers(especially reviewers and editors)

grasp the scientific significance asEASILY as possible.

Writing a good manuscript is NOTeasy!

Be prepared to work hard on it!


7/53

7

How to prepare a good

manuscript for an international

journal?

Preparations before writing

Construction of a manuscript

Some technical details that need

special attention

Language

Revision


8/53

8


manuscriptIn the following sections, you will learn

how to raise your chances of getting

accepted, including

Basic principles that should always be

kept in mind

What editors and reviewers love, and

what they hate


9/53

9


manuscriptREMEMBER:

Appreciate your own work if you do nottake care, why should the journal?

There is no secret recipe for success justsome simple rules, dedication and hardwork.

Editors and reviewers are all busy scientists,just like you make things easy to save theirtime!


10/53

10

How to prepare a good manuscript

Before start1. Think about WHY you want to publish your work.

(Actually, you should check the originality of theidea at the very beginning of your research.)

Have you done something newand interesting?

Is there anything challenging in your work?

Is the work related directly to a current hot topic?

Have you provided solutions to some difficultproblems?

If all answers are yes, then start preparations foryour manuscript


11/53

11


Before start2. Decide on the type of the manuscript

Full articles/Original articles: the most important papers. Oftensubstantial completed pieces of research that are of

significance.

Letters/Rapid Communications/Short communications:usually published for the quick and early communication ofsignificant and original advances. Much shorter than full articles(usually strictly limited).

Review papers/perspectives: summarizing recentdevelopments on a specific topic. Highlighting important pointsthat have previously been reported and introduce no newinformation. Often submitted on invitation.


12/53

12


Before start3. Choose the target journal

Choose one right journal for your work. DO NOTgamble by scattering your manuscript to many journals.

Only submit once! You must get help from your supervisor or colleagues!!!

The supervisor (who is probably the correspondingauthor) has responsibility for your work.

Articles in your references will likely lead you to theright journal.

Read recent publications (at least go through theabstracts) in each candidate journal. Find out the hottopics, the accepted types of articles, etc.


13/53

13


Before start3. Choose the target journal

Check ISI Web of knowledgehttp://www.thomsonscientific.com/cgi-

bin/jrnlst/jloptions.cgi?PC=D

Check Local Journal Ranking/Class

Ranking:http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_produc

ts/a-z/journal_citation_reports/
http://www.thomsonscientific.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jloptions.cgi?PC=Dhttp://www.thomsonscientific.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jloptions.cgi?PC=Dhttp://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/journal_citation_reports/http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/journal_citation_reports/http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/journal_citation_reports/http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/journal_citation_reports/http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/journal_citation_reports/http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/journal_citation_reports/http://www.thomsonscientific.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jloptions.cgi?PC=Dhttp://www.thomsonscientific.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jloptions.cgi?PC=Dhttp://www.thomsonscientific.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jloptions.cgi?PC=D


14/53

14


Before start4. One more thing before typing your manuscript...

Read the Guide for Authors of the target journal!

Again and again!

Apply the Guide for Authors (GFA) to yourmanuscript, even to the first draft (text layout, papercitation, nomenclature, figures and table, etc.). It will

save your time, and the editors.

All editors hate wasting time on poorly preparedmanuscripts. They may well think that the authorshows no respect.


15/53

15


ConstructionThe general structure of a full article

Title

Abstract

Keywords

Main text (IMRAD) Introduction

Methods

Results

And

Discussions

Acknowledgement Reference

Supplementary materials

Make them easy for indexing and searching!

(informative, attractive, effective)

Journal space is precious. Make your

article as brief as possible. If clarity

can be achieved in n words, neveruse n+1.

Avoid We and Repetition of words in the whole

manuscript


16/53

16


Construction However, we often use the following

order when writing:

Methods, Results and Discussion

Conclusions and Introduction

Abstract and title

Finalize Results & Discussion before you write the

introduction. If the discussion is insufficient, how can you

objectively demonstrate the scientific significance of your

work in the introduction?


17/53

17


Title Each section has a definite purpose

1. Title what is the paper broadly about?

Your opportunity to attract the readers attention.

Reviewers will check whether the title is specific andwhether it reflects the content of the manuscript. Editorshate titles that make no sense or fail to represent the

subject matter adequately; So, keep it informative and concise;

Avoid technical jargon and abbreviations if possible.

Discuss with your co-authors.


18/53

18


Title


19/53

19


Abstract2. Abstract tell the prospective readers what you did and what the

important findings were.

This is the advertisement of your article. Make itinteresting, and easy to be understood without reading

the whole article (Avoid using jargon and uncommonabbreviations if possible.)

You must be accurate! Use words which reflect theprecise meaning

A clear abstract will strongly influence whether or not

your work is further considered; Keep it as BRIEF as possible!!!

Spend Time at least two to three days.

Use Indirect ways to write it.


20/53

20


Keywords3. Keywords mainly used for indexing

It is the label of your manuscript. Avoid wordswith a broad meaning.

Check the Guide for Authors!

Usually 5 to 7 Keywords separated by comma Started from broader sense to narrow.


21/53

21


Introduction4. Introduction to convince readers that you clearly

know why your work is useful

What is the problem? Are there any existing solutions? Which is the best? What is its main limitation? And what

do you hope to achieve?

Editors like to see that you have provided a perspectiveconsistent with nature of the journal. You need to

introduce the main scientific publications on which yourwork is based.

However, they hate improper citations of too manyreferences irrelevant to the work, or inappropriate

judgments on your own achievements. They will think

that you have no sense of purpose at all!


22/53

Introduction

The 1/32/3 Rule from a reviewers perspective:

1/3 time to read your introduction and make a decision

Remaining 2/3 time to find evidence for the decision

A good introduction with a good

Motivation is half of your success!

What to cover in the introduction

The research problem

The motivation of your research on the research problem The claim of your contribution

A summary of your evidence to support your claim

The significance of your contribution

22


23/53

23


IntroductionWatch for the following: Never use more words than necessary. Never make this

section into a history lesson. Long introductions put readersoff.

Introductions of Letters are even shorter. We all know that you are keen to present your new data.

But do not forget that you need to give the whole picture atfirst.

Do not mix introduction with results, discussion, and

conclusion. Always keep them separate to ensure that the manuscript

flows logically from one section to the next.

Expressions such as novel, first time, first ever,paradigm changing are not preferred. Use them carefully.


24/53

24


Methods5. Methods how was the problem studied

Include detailed information, so that aknowledgeable reader can reproduce the

experiment. However, use references and Supporting

Materials to indicate the previously publishedprocedures. Do not repeat the details of

established methods. Broad summaries aresufficient.

Reviewers will criticize incomplete or incorrectdescriptions (and may recommend rejection).


25/53

25


Results6. Results What have you found?

Only representative results should be presented. Theresults should be essential for discussion. Use

Supporting Materials freely for data ofsecondaryimportance.

Do not attempt to hide data in the hope of saving it fora later paper. You may lose evidence to reinforce yourconclusion.

Use sub-headings to keep results of the same typetogether easier to review and read. Number these sub-sections for the convenience of internal cross-referencing. Decide on a logical order of the data thattells a clear and easy way to understand story.


26/53

26


Results A figure is worth a thousand words

Illustrations, including figures and

tables, are the most efficient way topresent the results.

Your data are the driving force of the

paper . Therefore, your illustrations are critical!


27/53

27


Results Generally, tables give the actual

experimental results.

Graphs are often used for comparison ofexperimental results with those of previous

works, or with calculated/theoretical values.

No illustrations should duplicate the

information described elsewhere in themanuscript.


28/53

28


ResultsIllustrations should be used for ESSENTIAL data only.

Comment from an Editor: Can't you describe the resultsof Fig. 13 in the text, since this figure does not show

much information of interest? You should realize thatspace is valuable!!

The legend of a figure should be brief. And it shouldcontain sufficient explanatory details to make thefigure understood easily without referring to the text.

Indication from a reviewer: readers often look at thefigures first and many times go no further.


29/53

29


ResultsAppearances count!

Un-crowded plots: 3 or 4 data sets per figure; wellselected scales; appropriate axis label size; symbols

clear to see and data sets easy to discriminate. Each photograph must have a scale marker of the

professional quality on one corner.

Use colorONLY when necessary. If different line styles

can clarify the meaning, never use colors or otherthrilling effects.

Do not include long boring tables!


30/53

30


Discussion7. Discussion What the results mean

It is the most important section of your article. Here youget the chance to SELL your data! A huge numbers of

manuscripts are rejected because the Discussion isweak.

Make the Discussion corresponding to the Results. Butdo not reiterate the results.

You need to compare the published results with yours.

DO NOT ignore work in disagreement with yoursconfront it and convince the reader that you are corrector better.


31/53

31


DiscussionCheck for the following:

How do these results relate to the original question orobjectives outlined in the Introductionsection?

Do the datasupport yourhypothesis? Are yourresultsconsistent with what other

investigatorshave reported?

Discuss weaknessesand discrepancies. If your resultswere unexpected, try to explain why

Is there anotherway to interpret your results? What furtherresearch would be necessary to answer

the questions raised by your results?

Have you explained what is new without exaggerating?


32/53

32


Conclusion8. Conclusion How the work advances the field from

the present state of knowledge

Without a clear conclusion section reviewers andreaders will find it difficult to judge the work, and whetheror not it merits publication in the journal.

DONT REPEAT THE ABSTRACT, or just listexperimental results. Trivial statements of your resultsare unacceptable in this section.

You should provide a clear scientific justification for yourwork in this section, and indicate uses and extensions ifappropriate. Moreover, you can suggest futureexperiments and point out those that are underway.


33/53

33


References 9. References Typically, there are more mistakes in

the references than any other part of the manuscript. Itis one of the most annoying problems, and causesgreat headaches among editors

Cite the main scientific publications on which your work is based

Do not over-inflate the manuscript with too many references itdoesnt make a better manuscript!

Avoid excessive self-citations

Avoid excessive citations of publications from the same region. Use Consistent style according to Journal

Paid attestation to write authors name, reference title and pagenumbers.

Cite reputable journal papers according to year, number of citations.

Use Google Scholar for help.


34/53

34


References


35/53

35


References Make the reference list and the in-text

citation conform strictly to the style given inthe Guide for Authors!!!

Presentation in the correct format is theresponsibility of the author, not the Editor!

Checking the format is normally a large jobfor the editors. Make their work easier and

they will appreciate the effort. Check the following:

spelling of author names, year of publications

Usages of et al. after 6 authors, and

punctuations.


36/53

Reference manager

EndNote Web

www. zotero.org

36


37/53

37


Cover Letter10. Cover letter your chance to speak to the Editor

directly

Do not summarize your manuscript, or repeat theabstract, but mention what makes it special to thejournal.

This is also the place to remark specialrequirements, for instance

Many editors wont reject a manuscript only becausethe cover letter is bad. However, a good cover lettermay accelerate the editorial process of your paper.


38/53

38

Some special technical aspects of

the manuscript Length of the manuscript:

25- 30 pages is the ideal length for a submitted manuscript,

including ESSENTIAL data only.

Title page

Abstract 1 paragraph Introduction 1.5-2 ms pages

Methods 2-4 ms pages

Results and Discussion 10-12 ms pages

Conclusions 1-2 ms pages

Figures 6-8

Tables 1-3 References 20-50 papers

Letters or short communications have a stricter limitation of thelength. For example, 3000 words with no more than 5 illustrations.


39/53

39

Additional aspects

Text layout:

Keep consistent throughout the

manuscript.

Double line spacing and 12 font is

preferred: make it convenient for

reviewers to make annotations.


40/53

40

Additional aspects

Suggest potential reviewers

Your suggestions will help the Editor to passyour manuscript to the review stage more

efficiently. You can easily find potential reviewers and their

contact details in various ways.

The reviewers should represent at least two

regions of the world. And they should not beyour supervisor or close friends.

Generally you are requested to provide 3-6potential reviewers.


41/53

41

Language

Attention! If the language prevents reviewersfrom understanding the scientific content of yourwork, the possibility of acceptance will be

lowered greatly. At the minimum, you should provide the best

English you can manage along with your highquality science.

Please have a skilled writer or someone fluent inEnglish help to check your manuscript beforesubmission.

Use WhiteSmoke to check grammar mistakes.


42/53

42

Languagelong sentences

Direct and short sentences are preferred!

Long sentences will not make the writing moreprofessional. They only confuse readers.

Nowadays, the average length of sentences in scientificwriting is about 12-17 words.

It is said that we read one sentence in one breath. Longsentences choke readers.

your style when writing in English. One idea or piece ofinformation per sentence is sufficient.

Avoid multiple statements in one sentence.


43/53

43

LanguageRepetition and

Redundancy


44/53

44

Authorship

Decided as early as possible

Should include persons who:

Can defend the intellectual content, includingdata and conclusions

Must be willing to concede publicly any errors

In the case offraud be willing to state publicly

the nature and extent, and account for itsoccurrence


45/53

45

Authorship: Criteria

All the following criteria should be met:

Generate at least part of the intellectual

content (conception or design, dataanalysis and interpretation)

Drafting, reviewing or revising critically for

important intellectual content

Final approval of the version to be

published


46/53

46

Authorship: Order

Most of journals assume an order based on

each authors importance to the study

The first author is primarily responsible forcollecting and analyzing data, and writing

The last one, an established investigator,

assumes the overall responsibility for the

study The middle authors are listed according to

their order of importance to the study


47/53

47

Authorship: Responsibilities

The authors must comply with the following rules whensubmitting the manuscript for publication:

The manuscript is not under consideration elsewhereand the research will not be submitted elsewhere until afinal decision has been made by the journal

The manuscript is a trustful, original work without fabrication,fraud or plagiarism

The authors have made an important scientific contribution

and are familiar with the primary data The authors have read the manuscript and take

responsibility for its content, and understand that if the paper,or part of it, is found to be faulty or fraudulent, they shareresponsibility


48/53

48

Authorship: Conflict of Interest

1. All funding sources supporting the work

and all institutional or corporate

affiliations of the authors must be

acknowledged

2. The authors must certify that they have no

commercial association that might pose a

conflict of interest in connection with thesubmitted paper


49/53

49

Revision

Remember:editors and reviewers hate to see the samemistake twice!

If you want to submit the rejected manuscript to adifferent journal, begin as if you are going to write a newarticle.

Please re-evaluate your work according to the commentsfrom the reviewers. And you MUST read the Guide for

Authors of the new journal, again and again

Do not resubmit the rejected manuscript directly toanother journal without any significant revision!!!It wontsave any of your time and energy


50/53

Revision Feedback

How to deal with Handling Editors:

Be polite, but to the point

Ask for a change, if a clearly biased or unfair case

How to deal with conflicting review reports

For journal submissions

Try every effort to address every concern

Provide a point-by-point statement of changes

Use other reviewers comments to disagree with the negative ones

For conference submissions Rebut if you think you have a reasonable chance to win

Nothing to lose

Get senior rebuttal authors

50


51/53

Revision Feedback

How to deal with arrogant and ignorant reviewers

If there is no chance to win them over, provide a gentle statement for the

unreasonable criticisms that you are not addressing

You should still try and resolve some of their comments

Your attitude towards the reviewers comments is important

all reviewers will read your statement of changes, and an accommodating

approach is useful.

Critical reviews are always expected from first-rate

journals and conferencesDont get emotional with

negative comments

Be accommodating and persistent in journal submissions & Good luck

51


52/53

52

Conclusion: what leads to

Acceptance? Attention to detail

Check and double check your work

Consider the reviews

English must be as good as possible Presentation is important

Take your time with revision

Acknowledge those who have helped you

New original and previously unpublished

Critically evaluate your own manuscript

Ethical rules must be obeyed


53/53

More Information

Questions?

Thanks!

meeting-how to prepare a manuscript

Documents