Tshwane University of Technology Faculty Publication Shortcourse 12-13 June 2013

379
-1

Published on

Slides supporting the shortcourse on how to publish in technically refereed journals

0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
379
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Tshwane University of Technology Faculty Publication Shortcourse 12-13 June 2013

  1. 1. Facilitated byFacilitated bySTEPHEN MCCOOLSTEPHEN MCCOOLTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANATHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANAMISSOULA, MONTANAMISSOULA, MONTANABuilding a Faculty Publication Record:Building a Faculty Publication Record:A Course Presented byA Course Presented byTshwane University of TechnologyTshwane University of Technologyand The University of Montanaand The University of Montana
  2. 2. BackgroundBackground Life-long academicLife-long academic Over 200 publications emphasizingOver 200 publications emphasizing Visitor management in protected areasVisitor management in protected areas Sustainable tourismSustainable tourism Public engagement in planning and managementPublic engagement in planning and management New ways of thinking about planningNew ways of thinking about planning Served as an Associate Editor or Reviewer forServed as an Associate Editor or Reviewer fora number of journalsa number of journals Work collaboratively with African writersWork collaboratively with African writers
  3. 3. Course GoalsCourse Goals ImmediateImmediate Understanding of the manuscript preparation andUnderstanding of the manuscript preparation andsubmission processsubmission process Long termLong term Build confidence in writing and publicationBuild confidence in writing and publication Increase publication output of TUTIncrease publication output of TUT Enhance the contribution of TUT to national goalsEnhance the contribution of TUT to national goalsthrough respected research andthrough respected research anddevelopmentdevelopment
  4. 4. Course ProceduresCourse Procedures Facilitated discussionFacilitated discussion Everyone has experience or expertise to contributeEveryone has experience or expertise to contribute Small group exercisesSmall group exercises Provide opportunities to develop review skillsProvide opportunities to develop review skills Large group discussionsLarge group discussions Publication issues common across fieldsPublication issues common across fields ExamplesExamples Bring the abstract to reality; yours and mineBring the abstract to reality; yours and mine AdaptabilityAdaptability
  5. 5. Course ComponentsCourse Components Science Publications in ContemporaryScience Publications in ContemporaryAcademiaAcademia Emphasizes theEmphasizes the WhyWhy Constructing the ManuscriptConstructing the Manuscript Focuses on theFocuses on the WhatWhat Producing the PublicationProducing the Publication Highlights theHighlights the HowHow
  6. 6. Key ReferenceKey Reference Day, R.A., and B. Gastel. 2006. How to writeDay, R.A., and B. Gastel. 2006. How to writeand publish a scientific paper (6and publish a scientific paper (6ththedition).edition).Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.
  7. 7. Importance of Peer ReviewedImportance of Peer ReviewedPublicationPublication Knowledge has limited value if notKnowledge has limited value if notdisseminateddisseminated Scientific knowledge must be disseminated inScientific knowledge must be disseminated inparticular waysparticular ways Ensures credibility and quality of workEnsures credibility and quality of work Brings prestige and status to university,Brings prestige and status to university,attracting students and fundingattracting students and funding Completes the research processCompletes the research process Complements teachingComplements teaching
  8. 8. What Purposes DoesWhat Purposes DoesPublication Serve?Publication Serve? Advances knowledgeAdvances knowledge Makes others aware of workMakes others aware of work Helps build community of scientific practiceHelps build community of scientific practice Results in improved managementResults in improved management Builds sensitivity to consequences of actionsBuilds sensitivity to consequences of actions
  9. 9. But, Publication of Scientific FindingsBut, Publication of Scientific FindingsMust Meet Certain Quality StandardsMust Meet Certain Quality Standards Publication of findings occurs in scientificPublication of findings occurs in scientificjournals and at conferencesjournals and at conferences These are the principal means of formalThese are the principal means of formalcommunication among scientistscommunication among scientists Such publication requires an independentSuch publication requires an independentjudgment about quality of the research andjudgment about quality of the research andmanuscriptmanuscript Publication decisions follow a public andPublication decisions follow a public andexplicit processexplicit process
  10. 10. Writing Should Be Done With …Writing Should Be Done With … Clarity (to communicate)Clarity (to communicate) Explicitness (for understandability)Explicitness (for understandability) Detail (for reproducibility)Detail (for reproducibility)
  11. 11. Types of Scientific ManuscriptsTypes of Scientific Manuscripts Data basedData based QuantitativeQuantitative PrimaryPrimary SecondarySecondary QualitativeQualitative ReviewReview Synthesize literatureSynthesize literature Propose new theories, approachesPropose new theories, approaches OthersOthers Book reviews, opinion, responseBook reviews, opinion, response
  12. 12. What Does “peer reviewed” Mean?What Does “peer reviewed” Mean? Peers are colleagues with similar interests andPeers are colleagues with similar interests andexpertiseexpertise Peer review generally conductedPeer review generally conductedindependently and anonymouslyindependently and anonymously Peers use their experience and expertise toPeers use their experience and expertise tojudge how well a manuscript meets thejudge how well a manuscript meets thejournal’s criteria and general scientific criteriajournal’s criteria and general scientific criteria
  13. 13. What is a “technically refereed”What is a “technically refereed”Journal?Journal? Technically refereed means another personTechnically refereed means another personmanages the review process and makes themanages the review process and makes thepublication decisionpublication decision Selected and managed by another person,Selected and managed by another person,usually a journal editorusually a journal editor Decision to publish is held by editorDecision to publish is held by editor
  14. 14. Peer Review ProcessPeer Review Process Submit unpublished manuscriptSubmit unpublished manuscript Editor selects Associate Editor to manageEditor selects Associate Editor to managereviewsreviews Peers review and evaluate manuscriptPeers review and evaluate manuscript Associate Editor reads reviews and manuscriptAssociate Editor reads reviews and manuscript Makes recommendation to EditorMakes recommendation to Editor Editor makes decision and notifies author(s)Editor makes decision and notifies author(s)
  15. 15. Criteria for Evaluating ManuscriptCriteria for Evaluating Manuscript Each journal has ownEach journal has own But, generally:But, generally: Problem framedProblem framed Research is new and of interest to journal readersResearch is new and of interest to journal readers Methods appropriately described and usedMethods appropriately described and used Conclusions based on resultsConclusions based on results OthersOthers Clarity of presentationClarity of presentation Importance of problemImportance of problem Salience to journal goalsSalience to journal goals
  16. 16. Overview of Publication ProcessOverview of Publication Process Prepare proposal to conduct researchPrepare proposal to conduct research Conduct researchConduct research Write manuscript draftWrite manuscript draft Submit to journalSubmit to journal Manuscript reviewedManuscript reviewed Editor decisionEditor decision Manuscript revisedManuscript revised Manuscript acceptedManuscript accepted Manuscript publishedManuscript published
  17. 17. Prepare Proposal and ConductPrepare Proposal and ConductResearchResearch Successful publication starts with the proposalSuccessful publication starts with the proposaland continues with the researchand continues with the research Research that is not well founded, lacks aResearch that is not well founded, lacks aconceptual basis, executed poorly, or usesconceptual basis, executed poorly, or usesinappropriate methodology is unlikely to beinappropriate methodology is unlikely to bepublishablepublishable Only stage of the process that cannot beOnly stage of the process that cannot bechangedchanged
  18. 18. Proposal KeysProposal Keys Find colleagues to review proposalFind colleagues to review proposal Do adequate literature searchDo adequate literature search Document relevancy and significance ofDocument relevancy and significance ofproblemproblem Link research to a conceptual foundationLink research to a conceptual foundation
  19. 19. To What Journal Do You Submit?To What Journal Do You Submit? Decision to be made prior to writingDecision to be made prior to writingmanuscriptmanuscript Tailor manuscript to journal audienceTailor manuscript to journal audience Need to know format requirementsNeed to know format requirements Journals vary in their reputation and respectJournals vary in their reputation and respectthey receive—journal impactthey receive—journal impact Read Aims and Scope for journalRead Aims and Scope for journal Review articles published in issues to get aReview articles published in issues to get asense of the topicssense of the topics
  20. 20. So, How Do You Prepare aSo, How Do You Prepare aManuscript?Manuscript? What is the goal?What is the goal? What story do you want to tell?What story do you want to tell? Who will be the audience?Who will be the audience? What are the journal requirements ?What are the journal requirements ? Length, organization, etc.Length, organization, etc. Who are the authors?Who are the authors? What time do you have for writing?What time do you have for writing? What kind of manuscript?What kind of manuscript?
  21. 21. Manuscript PreparationManuscript Preparation Two prerequisites to successful publicationTwo prerequisites to successful publication Good research designGood research design Only part of process that cannot be changedOnly part of process that cannot be changed Framing of the question or subject of the researchFraming of the question or subject of the research Necessary but not sufficientNecessary but not sufficient
  22. 22. Other ConditionsOther Conditions Facilitative administrative climateFacilitative administrative climate Time to writeTime to write Don’t drop ms. for long periods of timeDon’t drop ms. for long periods of time Find a time of day to think and writeFind a time of day to think and write Good command of languageGood command of language Get editor if notGet editor if not Grasp of the relevant literatureGrasp of the relevant literature Open to critiqueOpen to critique Tough at times, reviewers constructiveTough at times, reviewers constructive PersistencePersistence
  23. 23. Some Ethical ConsiderationsSome Ethical Considerations Authorship (more on this later)Authorship (more on this later) Acknowledgements of prior researchAcknowledgements of prior research AuthenticityAuthenticity OriginalityOriginality Always credit othersAlways credit others
  24. 24. Who Are the Authors?Who Are the Authors? Single or multiple authorshipSingle or multiple authorship Authorship order is a BIG dealAuthorship order is a BIG deal Role of each authorRole of each author How do you decide?How do you decide? Generally speaking, first author did most ofGenerally speaking, first author did most ofthe work or developed ideathe work or developed idea Special case of graduate studentsSpecial case of graduate students
  25. 25. Elements of the ManuscriptElements of the Manuscript Conceptual organizationConceptual organization Practical organizationPractical organization
  26. 26. Conceptual OrganizationConceptual Organization The questionThe question What is the paper about?What is the paper about? MethodsMethods How was the research collected?How was the research collected? ResultsResults What were the outcomes of the research?What were the outcomes of the research? DiscussionDiscussion What does it all mean?What does it all mean?
  27. 27. Practical OrganizationPractical Organization Varies somewhat by journalVaries somewhat by journal But most likely:But most likely: AbstractAbstract IntroductionIntroduction Conceptual Framework/Literature ReviewConceptual Framework/Literature Review MethodsMethods ResultsResults DiscussionDiscussion ConclusionConclusion But seeBut see Instructions to AuthorsInstructions to Authors
  28. 28. Group ExercisesGroup Exercises Four groups, participants randomly assignedFour groups, participants randomly assignedTourism Carrying Capacity …Tourism Carrying Capacity …
  29. 29. Small Group ExerciseSmall Group Exercise Review assigned manuscriptReview assigned manuscript How well has the author(s) described theHow well has the author(s) described theproblem and the conceptual foundation for theproblem and the conceptual foundation for themanuscript?manuscript?Purpose of the manuscriptPurpose of the manuscriptReview of the conceptual foundationReview of the conceptual foundationRecommendations for improvementRecommendations for improvement
  30. 30. Introduction SectionIntroduction Section PurposePurpose Describe scope, context and importance ofDescribe scope, context and importance ofresearch questionresearch question IssuesIssues Lack of statement ofLack of statement of Research questionResearch question ObjectivesObjectives Organization of paperOrganization of paper
  31. 31. The Introduction:The Introduction:What it DoesWhat it Does Describes/frames the questionDescribes/frames the question its context andits context and why it is importantwhy it is important
  32. 32. The Introduction:The Introduction:Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation Generally, relatively short (500-750 words orGenerally, relatively short (500-750 words orso)so) Cites a bit of literatureCites a bit of literature Finishes with the goals of the paperFinishes with the goals of the paper Goes from the broad to the narrowGoes from the broad to the narrow Funnel approachFunnel approach Describes context and place of research in thatDescribes context and place of research in thatcontextcontext
  33. 33. Introduction SectionIntroduction Section Write in one sentence to yourself the purpose ofWrite in one sentence to yourself the purpose ofthe paperthe paper ““This paper addresses the relationship betweenThis paper addresses the relationship betweenvulnerable populations and access to health care.”vulnerable populations and access to health care.” Provide sense of importance:Provide sense of importance: ““low income families are at a higher risk of disease;low income families are at a higher risk of disease;reducing such risk requires access to healthcare”reducing such risk requires access to healthcare” Provide salience:Provide salience: ““Health care costs can be reduced by providingHealth care costs can be reduced by providingefficient, equitable access to vulnerable populations”efficient, equitable access to vulnerable populations”
  34. 34. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/ConceptualFramework SectionFramework Section PurposePurpose Refine the problem statement, identify keyRefine the problem statement, identify keyvariables, develop hypothesesvariables, develop hypotheses IssuesIssues AdequacyAdequacy RelevancyRelevancy FoundationFoundation
  35. 35. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/ConceptualFramework:Framework:What it DoesWhat it Does Refines the problem statementRefines the problem statement Develop a conceptual background needed forDevelop a conceptual background needed forthe methodologythe methodology Identify and provide foundation for researchIdentify and provide foundation for researchhypotheseshypotheses Provide reader with understanding of gaps inProvide reader with understanding of gaps inknowledge or priority needsknowledge or priority needs
  36. 36. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/ConceptualFramework:Framework:Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation Often requires considerable “library” timeOften requires considerable “library” time Much of this can be conducted in researchMuch of this can be conducted in researchproposal stageproposal stage Literature is searched for papers working onLiterature is searched for papers working onsimilar questions and/or conceptssimilar questions and/or concepts Written in present tense primarilyWritten in present tense primarily
  37. 37. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/ConceptualFramework SectionFramework Section AdequacyAdequacy What are the principal references dealing with theWhat are the principal references dealing with theresearch question?research question? How do those references help you and the readerHow do those references help you and the readerunderstand the problem?understand the problem? What key findings exist that help you frame theWhat key findings exist that help you frame thequestion?question?
  38. 38. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/ConceptualFramework SectionFramework Section RelevancyRelevancy Do the references help identify key variables orDo the references help identify key variables orestablish hypotheses?establish hypotheses? Literature provides foundation for methods andLiterature provides foundation for methods andhelps interpret resultshelps interpret results What literature helps develop a framework for theWhat literature helps develop a framework for thequestion?question?
  39. 39. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/ConceptualFramework SectionFramework Section Introduce concepts to lay a foundation forIntroduce concepts to lay a foundation forlater uselater use Use a segue to introduce conceptsUse a segue to introduce concepts ““Smith and others (1990) found thatSmith and others (1990) found thatvulnerability to disease was a function ofvulnerability to disease was a function ofseveral variables, including location ofseveral variables, including location ofresidency and income. The “V” index is anresidency and income. The “V” index is anoverall measure of such vulnerability .”overall measure of such vulnerability .”Rather than in the methods “the V-index wasRather than in the methods “the V-index wascalculated by …” without a previous mentioncalculated by …” without a previous mention
  40. 40. Methods SectionMethods Section PurposePurpose Explain/describe methods used in just enoughExplain/describe methods used in just enoughdetail so that the research can be replicateddetail so that the research can be replicated Population and how sampledPopulation and how sampled Independent and dependent variables and howIndependent and dependent variables and howmeasuredmeasured Analysis approach and techniquesAnalysis approach and techniques
  41. 41. Methods:Methods:What it DoesWhat it Does Experimental designExperimental design TreatmentsTreatments Population and how sampledPopulation and how sampled Materials usedMaterials used Principal dependent and independent variablesPrincipal dependent and independent variables(e.g., what was measured and how)(e.g., what was measured and how) Why these methods were chosenWhy these methods were chosen
  42. 42. Methods SectionMethods Section Behind every measure is a conceptBehind every measure is a concept Was it discussed in the literature review?Was it discussed in the literature review? Behind every analysis is a hypothesisBehind every analysis is a hypothesis Were potential relationships mentioned in theWere potential relationships mentioned in theliterature review?literature review?
  43. 43. Methods SectionMethods Section IssuesIssues Principally, lack of detailPrincipally, lack of detail Limitations not recognizedLimitations not recognized Discussion of results included in sectionDiscussion of results included in section
  44. 44. Methods SectionMethods Section ““The population for this study consisted of adults (agedThe population for this study consisted of adults (aged18 and over) living in the Caprivi region of Namibia.”18 and over) living in the Caprivi region of Namibia.” ““This population was sampled through a hierarchalThis population was sampled through a hierarchalmethodology: First, clinics were randomly sampled formethodology: First, clinics were randomly sampled forthe study, then residents visiting those clinics werethe study, then residents visiting those clinics wereselected as they entered the clinic on randomly selectedselected as they entered the clinic on randomly selecteddays during the three summer months of 2010.”days during the three summer months of 2010.” ““This sampling methodology is designed to beThis sampling methodology is designed to berepresentative only of those with illness and withrepresentative only of those with illness and withaccess to the clinic. Thus, the results may notaccess to the clinic. Thus, the results may notadequately represent those ill patients without means ofadequately represent those ill patients without means ofaccess.”access.”
  45. 45. Methods:Methods:Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation Written in past tenseWritten in past tense Summarize research design from proposal orSummarize research design from proposal orstudy planstudy plan Do not need all the detail, just enough forDo not need all the detail, just enough forsomeone else to replicate the studysomeone else to replicate the study
  46. 46. Small Group Exercise 2Small Group Exercise 2 What methodologies were used and do thoseWhat methodologies were used and do thosemethodologies seem appropriate for themethodologies seem appropriate for thequestion?question? Research design, population, independentResearch design, population, independentvariables, dependent variablesvariables, dependent variables How variables measuredHow variables measured Recommendations to strengthenRecommendations to strengthenmethodologies, particularly analysismethodologies, particularly analysis
  47. 47. Results:Results:What it DoesWhat it Does Describes the outcome of the researchDescribes the outcome of the researchidentified in the introduction and conceptualidentified in the introduction and conceptualframework sectionframework section Involves a simple reporting of outcomesInvolves a simple reporting of outcomes
  48. 48. Results:Results:Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation May involve two components:May involve two components: 1. description of principal variables1. description of principal variables 2. testing of hypotheses with inferential statistics2. testing of hypotheses with inferential statistics Focused on the hypotheses or questionsFocused on the hypotheses or questions Use tables or figures only when neededUse tables or figures only when needed Do not repeat data or statistics shown in tablesDo not repeat data or statistics shown in tablesor figuresor figures Use past tenseUse past tense
  49. 49. Implications/Discussion:Implications/Discussion:What it DoesWhat it Does Interpret results within the context of theInterpret results within the context of theliterature review/conceptual frameworkliterature review/conceptual framework Discusses relationships between variablesDiscusses relationships between variables Challenge existing results or theoriesChallenge existing results or theories Suggest future researchSuggest future research Describe implications for practiceDescribe implications for practice
  50. 50. Implications/Discussion:Implications/Discussion:Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation Nature of this section varies from journal toNature of this section varies from journal tojournaljournal Refer back to literature and introductionRefer back to literature and introduction Point out particularly significant results, suchPoint out particularly significant results, suchas surprises or inconsistenciesas surprises or inconsistencies Do not repeat resultsDo not repeat results Mixture of past and present tenseMixture of past and present tense
  51. 51. Conclusion:Conclusion:What it DoesWhat it Does Provides final summary of research andProvides final summary of research andimplicationsimplications May suggest new research lines resulting fromMay suggest new research lines resulting fromDiscussion sectionDiscussion section Describes overall results and implications forDescribes overall results and implications forbroader contextbroader context May suggest a few lines of future researchMay suggest a few lines of future research
  52. 52. Conclusion:Conclusion:Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation Sometimes a separate sectionSometimes a separate section Usually short; < 300 wordsUsually short; < 300 words
  53. 53. Literature CitedLiterature Cited Ideas, facts, concepts not your own must beIdeas, facts, concepts not your own must becitedcited Generally, citation is of scientific/technicalGenerally, citation is of scientific/technicalarticlesarticles Gray literature versus white literatureGray literature versus white literature Citation style – see journal guidelinesCitation style – see journal guidelines Gather literature before writingGather literature before writing Use citation softwareUse citation software
  54. 54. Abstract:Abstract:What it DoesWhat it Does Single paragraph summarizing researchSingle paragraph summarizing researchreportedreported 150-300 words150-300 words Last component of the paper writtenLast component of the paper written Note: conferences sometimes differentNote: conferences sometimes different No cited literature, tables or figuresNo cited literature, tables or figures
  55. 55. Tables and FiguresTables and Figures Basic purpose is to display information that isBasic purpose is to display information that isdifficult for a narrativedifficult for a narrative Information may be:Information may be: Quantitative statisticsQuantitative statistics Trends or relationships graphedTrends or relationships graphed Qualitative data such as quotesQualitative data such as quotes
  56. 56. Tables and FiguresTables and Figures Keep simpleKeep simple Independent variables columns (or X axis)Independent variables columns (or X axis) Dependent variables rows (or Y axis)Dependent variables rows (or Y axis) Tables explicitly labeled, should stand byTables explicitly labeled, should stand bythemselvesthemselves Consider page size of journalConsider page size of journal
  57. 57. Writing and EditingWriting and Editing Which authors will do whatWhich authors will do what Clarify rolesClarify roles Lead author writes initial draftLead author writes initial draft Authors write various sectionsAuthors write various sections Create a statement of purpose firstCreate a statement of purpose first Develop outlineDevelop outline Use complete sentencesUse complete sentences Write from outlineWrite from outline
  58. 58. Writing and EditingWriting and Editing Circulate drafts of everythingCirculate drafts of everything Find non-involved colleague(s) for review orFind non-involved colleague(s) for review ortalking throughtalking through Be familiar with journal requirements (e.g.,Be familiar with journal requirements (e.g.,manuscript length, organization, citation style,manuscript length, organization, citation style,etc.)etc.) May need to get an editor to help withMay need to get an editor to help withlanguage and organizationlanguage and organization
  59. 59. Submitting the ManuscriptSubmitting the Manuscript Invited submissionsInvited submissions Normal submissionsNormal submissions Both will go through a review processBoth will go through a review process Most journals now have online submissionMost journals now have online submission Manuscript should be written cognizant ofManuscript should be written cognizant ofjournal audiencejournal audience
  60. 60. Submitting the ManuscriptSubmitting the Manuscript Prior to submission,Prior to submission, Understand manuscript requirements, e.g., format,Understand manuscript requirements, e.g., format,tables and figures, literature citation method,tables and figures, literature citation method,lengthlength Carefully review submission process, e.g.,Carefully review submission process, e.g.,cover letter, where and how the file iscover letter, where and how the file isuploaded, need for separate files for tables anduploaded, need for separate files for tables andfiguresfigures
  61. 61. Small Group Exercise 3Small Group Exercise 3 Are the conclusions consistent with the dataAre the conclusions consistent with the datapresented?presented? How did you make your decision?How did you make your decision? What changes in the conclusion would youWhat changes in the conclusion would yourecommend?recommend?
  62. 62. The Review ProcessThe Review Process Can send shudders through your whole body!Can send shudders through your whole body! Purpose of the review is to ensure the researchPurpose of the review is to ensure the researchportrayed has been conductedportrayed has been conducted AppropriatelyAppropriately EthicallyEthically With high standards of professional conductWith high standards of professional conduct And is originalAnd is original
  63. 63. The Review ProcessThe Review Process Editor assigns Associate EditorEditor assigns Associate Editor Associate Editor requests two peers,Associate Editor requests two peers,sometimes three, to review manuscriptsometimes three, to review manuscript Peers read and comment on the paper; theyPeers read and comment on the paper; theymay be asked to recommend:may be asked to recommend: Accept with no revisionsAccept with no revisions Accept with minor revisionsAccept with minor revisions Accept with major revisionsAccept with major revisions RejectionRejection
  64. 64. The Review ProcessThe Review Process Peer or refereedPeer or refereed Peer – scientists with similar research expertisePeer – scientists with similar research expertise Refereed – a decision to publish is made byRefereed – a decision to publish is made bysomeone other than the authorsomeone other than the author So, most journal articles are technically refereedSo, most journal articles are technically refereedand peer reviewedand peer reviewed
  65. 65. Small Group Exercise 4Small Group Exercise 4 How well does the manuscript meet theHow well does the manuscript meet thecriteria used for evaluation by the Journal?criteria used for evaluation by the Journal? What criteria were used?What criteria were used? How did the ms. meet each of the criteria?How did the ms. meet each of the criteria? What would be your decision for publicationWhat would be your decision for publicationand why?and why?
  66. 66. Open, Blind or Double BlindOpen, Blind or Double BlindReview ProcessReview Process Open review – reviewers and authors namesOpen review – reviewers and authors namesare known to each otherare known to each other Blind – reviewers know who authored theBlind – reviewers know who authored themanuscript they are reviewing, but the authorsmanuscript they are reviewing, but the authorsdo not know who the reviewers aredo not know who the reviewers are Double Blind – The names of reviewers andDouble Blind – The names of reviewers andauthors are kept confidential; only theauthors are kept confidential; only theassociate editor and editor knowassociate editor and editor know
  67. 67. Purpose of Blind ReviewsPurpose of Blind Reviews Objectivity and candidnessObjectivity and candidness Removes any potential bias resulting fromRemoves any potential bias resulting frominterpersonal relationshipsinterpersonal relationships NegativesNegatives Sometimes reviews are very, and unnecessarily.Sometimes reviews are very, and unnecessarily.criticalcritical Most journals use double-blind reviewsMost journals use double-blind reviews Some journals have an option of a reviewerSome journals have an option of a reviewerletting the author know his or her nameletting the author know his or her name
  68. 68. The Review ProcessThe Review Process Recommendations are based on the journal’sRecommendations are based on the journal’sreview criteria and the reviewers’review criteria and the reviewers’understanding of the scienceunderstanding of the science Associate Editor reads reviews and manuscriptAssociate Editor reads reviews and manuscriptand makes recommendation to editorand makes recommendation to editor Editor makes decision and notifies authorEditor makes decision and notifies author Editor lists needed revisionsEditor lists needed revisions
  69. 69. The Review ProcessThe Review Process In many journals, the rejection rate is betweenIn many journals, the rejection rate is between60 and 80%60 and 80% Most manuscripts that are accepted areMost manuscripts that are accepted arereturned with either a “minor revision” or areturned with either a “minor revision” or a“major revision” recommendation“major revision” recommendation
  70. 70. Author’s Response to ReviewsAuthor’s Response to Reviews For rejected manuscripts:For rejected manuscripts: Forget itForget it But better, take into account comments, revise andBut better, take into account comments, revise andsubmit someplace elsesubmit someplace else For manuscripts with a revisionFor manuscripts with a revisionrecommendationrecommendation Take into account comments and reviseTake into account comments and revise Resubmit with reconciliation document toResubmit with reconciliation document toshow how the comments were addressedshow how the comments were addressed
  71. 71. Critique of Peer Review ProcessCritique of Peer Review Process Slow – may take months, even more than aSlow – may take months, even more than ayearyear Reviewers may not hold expertiseReviewers may not hold expertise Non constructive, negative, competitiveNon constructive, negative, competitivecommentscomments Dissenting theories suppressedDissenting theories suppressed
  72. 72. Critique of Peer Review ProcessCritique of Peer Review Process Drummond Rennie, deputy editor ofDrummond Rennie, deputy editor of Journal of the AmericanJournal of the AmericanMedical AssociationMedical Association is an organizer of the Internationalis an organizer of the InternationalCongress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, whichCongress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, whichhas been held every four years since 1986.has been held every four years since 1986.[23][23]He remarksHe remarks,, There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial,There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial,no literature too biased or too egotistical, no design too warped, nono literature too biased or too egotistical, no design too warped, nomethodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, toomethodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, tooobscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self-serving, noobscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self-serving, noargument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified,argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified,and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print.and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print.
  73. 73. Critique of Peer Review ProcessCritique of Peer Review Process Richard Horton, editor of the British medical journalRichard Horton, editor of the British medical journal TheTheLancetLancet, has said that, has said that The mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was anyThe mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was anymore than a crude means of discovering the acceptability — not themore than a crude means of discovering the acceptability — not thevalidity — of a new finding. Editors and scientists alike insist on thevalidity — of a new finding. Editors and scientists alike insist on thepivotal importance of peer review. We portray peer review to the publicpivotal importance of peer review. We portray peer review to the publicas a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objectiveas a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objectivetruth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased,truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased,unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usuallyunjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usuallyignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrongignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong
  74. 74. Re-SubmissionRe-Submission Following revision, the ms is again submittedFollowing revision, the ms is again submitted Editor makes a preliminary decision aboutEditor makes a preliminary decision aboutwhat should be done with the ms.what should be done with the ms.
  75. 75. Editor’s DecisionEditor’s Decision Sometimes revision referred back to AssociateSometimes revision referred back to AssociateEditorEditor Sometimes additional reviews are conductedSometimes additional reviews are conducted Generally, though if the author has made goodGenerally, though if the author has made goodfaith effort to revise, the ms. is accepted, butfaith effort to revise, the ms. is accepted, butstill may need more revisionstill may need more revision
  76. 76. Publication ProcessPublication Process Following the decision to accept, the ms. isFollowing the decision to accept, the ms. isqueued for publicationqueued for publication This may take several monthsThis may take several months Once it has been assigned to an issue, a galleyOnce it has been assigned to an issue, a galleyproof is madeproof is made The proof is the mockup of the actual printThe proof is the mockup of the actual print Author is responsible for quality controlAuthor is responsible for quality control In some cases, a copy editor will makeIn some cases, a copy editor will makequeries to the authorqueries to the author
  77. 77. The Publication ProcessThe Publication Process Such queries mostly deal with grammar,Such queries mostly deal with grammar,citations and figurescitations and figures Few other changes are permitted at this pointFew other changes are permitted at this point Following revision of any changes, the authorFollowing revision of any changes, the authorapproves the galley proofapproves the galley proof The journal often provides author with orderThe journal often provides author with orderform for reprintsform for reprints Following receipt of galleys, journal putsFollowing receipt of galleys, journal putsms. in printing queuems. in printing queue
  78. 78. PublicationPublication The ms. appears in the printed publicationThe ms. appears in the printed publication Author usually receives a few free copies of theAuthor usually receives a few free copies of thejournaljournal Many traditional journals now have earlyMany traditional journals now have earlypublication on the Web, prior to a physicalpublication on the Web, prior to a physicalprintprint
  79. 79. ConclusionConclusion That is the A to Z of publicationThat is the A to Z of publication LessonsLessons Ms. never perfectMs. never perfect Think ahead about what story you want to tellThink ahead about what story you want to tell Tend to methodology early, and in the proposalTend to methodology early, and in the proposal When reviewing, be constructiveWhen reviewing, be constructive Now, start writingNow, start writing
  80. 80. Thank YouStephen.McCool@umontana.eduPerspectives on Protected Area Planninghttp://pasqueflowerparadigms.blogspot.com

×