sarah quin, senior publisher, iop publishing -...
TRANSCRIPT
Publishing your paper in a high-quality journal – a guide for authors Sarah Quin, Senior Publisher, IOP Publishing Date: 5th November 2014
● Introduction to IOP ● Choosing your journal ● Writing your paper ● Top 10 tips for getting published ● Peer review ● Introduction to refereeing
Publishing your paper in a high-quality journal – a guide for authors
Choosing Your Journal
● First things first: ● Decide on your first-choice journal
before even writing your paper! ● What is the best journal for the
work that you have done? ● Which journal will give you the most
recognition for your work? ● What is your second choice? ● What other factors do you need to
consider?
● You could have many things to think about
Deciding on the right journal for your paper
● Considerations for your preferred journal: ● Audience – who reads it? ● Scope – does your paper fit? ● Reputation of the journal ● Quality criteria and acceptance levels ● Impact/visibility ● Speed of publication ● Recommendation from colleagues ● Open access or subscription model ● Copyright policy ● Costs (pages/figures/APCs etc.) ● Others?
Deciding on the right journal for your paper
● Each publisher or journal may have different submission requirements
● Make sure that you know what your chosen journal needs ● Some journals have set submission formats ● Have all the required information available – all the author
details, copyright forms, permissions for reproduced articles, supplementary data, etc, etc.
● At IOP we try and make this process as easy as possible for authors
Submission requirements
IOP Journals use Scholar One
Writing Your Paper
● Before you start: ● Consider your choice of journal ● Decide on the key message of your
paper ● Assess your main results ● Prepare an outline: topic, contexts,
significance
Writing Your Paper – Start
● Any paper in a leading research journal should clearly and concisely demonstrate a substantial, novel and interesting scientific result.
● Title and abstract: ● The most visible part of your paper ● Title: Concise and informative; draws
attention of the reader immediately ● Should distinguish your paper from
other published work ● Abstract: Summarizes paper into a
single paragraph ● Allows readers to decide whether
they are interested in your paper
Writing Your Paper – Title and abstract
● The introduction should: ● Describe the main goals of your work ● Give an overview of methods ● Set the work in the context of
previous research ● Cite all relevant references ● Use your own words and
interpretation
Writing Your Paper – Introduction
● Methods, results and discussion need to: ● Show your data in an organized
manner ● Give enough information to allow
duplication of your results ● Show the significance and impact of
your results ● Compare with other published work ● Discuss the implications and
applications
Writing Your Paper – Methods, results and discussion
● Your conclusion needs to: ● Summarize your major points ● Highlight the novelty and
significance of your work ● Clearly demonstrate what your work
has achieved ● Answer questions put in the
Introduction ● Include your plans for future work
Writing Your Paper – Conclusion
● References and acknowledgments: ● Cite the right references ● Original works both historical and
recent ● Check for accuracy ● Follow the reference style of the
journal ● Recognize the contribution of funders
or other assistance
Writing Your Paper – References
● Get feedback and comments on your paper before submission ● Your supervisor ● Other colleagues ● Internal review
● Make changes following their input ● Get help from a fluent English speaker
if you need it
Writing Your Paper – Finally
● Copyright and permissions have to be considered
● Do you need permission to use photographs, images, charts, tables or graphs you have included in your work?
● You’ll need permission to use anything where copyright is owned by a third party
● Guidance can be found here: copyright.iop.org
Writing Your Paper – Copyright and permissions
IOP’s
Tips for successfully writing up your research
1. Check the literature for similar results in your field
2. Use references that show the context of your work and why it is new and significant
3. Decide whether you are writing for a specialist or non-specialist audience
4. Choose which journal you want to publish in before writing your paper
5. Spend a lot of time on your title and abstract – this will be what most people will see first
Do…
6. Keep abbreviations or technical terms to a minimum or clearly define them
7. Avoid speculation or anecdotes – keep to the facts and clearly state your conclusions
8. Keep it concise – even when there are no word limits – and use your own words
9. Allow plenty of time for rewriting
10. Get feedback from colleagues before submitting your article
Do…
Some definite ethical don’ts
1. Fabricate, falsify or misrepresent data or results
2. Submit an article to more than one journal at a time
3. Add someone as a co-author without their permission
4. Exclude anyone who has made a significant contribution
5. Sign any forms on behalf of your co-authors unless you are authorized to do so
Don’t
6. Copy and paste from other articles, including your own – this will be classed as plagiarism or duplicate publication
7. Forget to check your funder’s copyright/open access policy
8. Forget to disclose any potential conflicts of interest
9. Ignore any part of a reviewer’s reports
10. Take any criticisms of your work personally
Don’t
IOP’s ethical policy for authors can be found on authors.iop.org
Any questions on writing papers?
Peer Review
● Peer review is “a process of subjecting an author's scholarly work or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the field” (Wikipedia)
● Vital part of publishing ● Gives the scientific community and the
public a reliable indicator on what to believe
● Gives authors feedback that can help to improve a paper
● Critical filter for 1 million plus research papers written every year
● Helps editors decide what to publish
Peer Review
Peer review
● The editorial team review all submissions ● Check for content, originality, novelty and scope ● Use to detect plagiarism or duplication ● Consult the journal’s Editorial Board if necessary ● If the paper is not suitable it will be rejected at this stage
Peer review at IOP: Pre-refereeing assessment
● We check for: ● Incremental papers – a very small advance on earlier work ● Papers outside of the journal’s scope ● Papers that do not have enough content or new data for the
journal - the expected quality level may vary between journals ● Papers that reproduce earlier work – including text and
including the author’s own previous work
Peer review at IOP: Pre-refereeing assessment
● Referees are chosen based on their:
Peer review: Referee selection
● Expertise ● Independence ● Availability ● Previous record
● Generally, the referee knows who the author is (Single Blind)
● The authors don’t know who the referee is
● We normally require at least two referee reports – An adjudicator is consulted if reports disagree
● Decision is based on the reports sent to the editorial team ● Immediate acceptance is unusual but does happen ● Usually revisions based on suggestions by the referees ● Rejection rate can be high - 50% common in quality journals
Peer review: Making a first decision
● Authors should: ● Read each referee’s report carefully ● Respond to each and every comment specifically ● Keep a list of all your changes ● If you disagree with the referees, clearly explain
why this is ● Never ignore a comment ● This is free advice - use it!
Peer review: Referees’ comments sent to authors
Peer review: Revised paper resubmitted
● Paper will be accepted if the referees are satisfied ● …or rejected if the revisions are not strong enough
● Use the advice you received to improve your paper ● You can re-write your paper and re-submit it to another journal ● If you think the decision was wrong most journals give you an
opportunity to appeal
Peer review: What if your paper is rejected?
● Congratulations!
What if your paper is accepted?
Any questions on peer review?
Introduction to Refereeing
● Referees are a vital part of the peer review process ● Provide validation for over 1 million scientific articles published
every year ● Provide a stamp of trust and authority on published work ● Referees are selected for their:
● Expert knowledge ● Reliability ● Availability ● Quality of previous reports ● Impartiality
Referees
● Is the work understandable and correct? ● Is it clear what the authors want to achieve? ● Do the references provide background and context for the
work? ● Are the results backed up with evidence? ● Are there any unsupported claims? ● Is the work correct – no errors, flaws or mistakes? ● Are the mathematics or statistics correct?
What should referees check for?
● Is the work interesting? ● How relevant is the work to researchers in the subject? ● Is the research important and do the authors explain why it is
important, or how it advances understanding of the field? ● Will the paper be cited by other researchers?
● Is the work original? ● Does it contain new material? ● Have any parts of the paper been published before? ● Is this just an incremental advance over previous work?
What should referees check for?
● Is the work well presented? ● Does the title reflect the contents of the paper? ● Does the abstract include all essential information? ● Are the figures and tables correct and informative? ● Are there too many figures, or too few? ● Does the conclusion summarize the work well and explain
why it is interesting and useful? ● Is the text clear and concise? ● Is the paper an appropriate length for its content?
What should referees check for?
● Professional and polite, without personal comments ● Fair and impartial approach ● Clear and constructive – what is interesting about the paper,
what needs to be improved ● Specific about any criticism given ● Clear discussion of any recommended changes ● No need to correct the English – unless the science is unclear ● Makes a clear recommendation to the Editors
A good referee report
● Any paper sent for review is confidential until it is published ● Referees must not use or cite a paper until it has been formally
published ● Authors must feel confident that their results will not be
misused or misappropriated
● Referees should avoid any conflict of interest, for example: ● A close colleague of the authors ● Someone who has helped the authors with their work ● A direct competitor of the authors ● In a position to exploit the authors’ work
Confidentiality and conflict of interest
More information