Taller de Autores (Elsevier). Biblioteca de la Universidad de Zaragoza. Mayo 2012

1. Chemical Engineering
Journal
Jesus Santamaria, Editor
(with invaluable help from
Angela Welch, Publishing Editor)
1

2. Bibliometry (2007-2010)
ISI ranking*
(2010 IF):
Engineering,
Environmental:
8/45
Engineering,
Chemical:
10/135
*Thompson ISI, Journal
Citation Report, © 2011
2

3. ScienceDirect Usage: Downloads (2008-2011)
3

4. Geographical breakdown of Authors (2011)
4

5. Final Decisions (2007-2011)
5

6. Revise
Make
decision Accept
Presented by:
Submit Cover
Title: Image?
Date:

7. Breakdown of rejected manuscripts from Chemical Engineering Journal in 2011 based on decision
terms in EES. The difference between the total rejected articles (green) and the rejected without review
(blue) indicates the number of articles that were rejected post-review. The majority of manuscripts were
rejected for not meeting the journal’s standards for research/experimental quality.
7

8. Publication speed (2007-2011)
average editorial time for Elsevier chemical
8 engineering journals (approx 20 weeks)

9. Journal Homepage
9

10. Common author mistakes
 Overlook
aims &
scope
10

11. Common author mistakes
 Overlook guide for authors
11

12. Guide for Authors
12

13. Some useful tips (often overlooked)
 Choose well your Journal
 Why Chemical Engineering Journal?
 Choose well your type of manuscript
13

14. Some useful tips (often overlooked)
 Choose well your Editor
14

15. Some useful tips (often overlooked)
 Spend time on your cover letter (and abstract)
 Explain the main findings and motivation of the work
 Highlight the novelty and significance of the results
 Choose well the suggested reviewers
 The Editor will be more likely to use some of them:
 If they are obviously experts in the field
 If they are from a different country without
obvious link to the authors
 (If he/she has difficulties finding candidates)
15

16. Some useful tips (often overlooked)
 Introduction is especially important!
 You are telling a story. Introduction sets the scenario
 Quote what is necessary for background and to give
credit to previous works. Do not add superfluous
references.
 Editors will often choose reviewers from cited work
 Give a clear motivation for the work.
 Explain what is novel compared to what is already
available in the literature
16

17. Some useful tips (often overlooked)
 Results and discussion
 Together or separate?
 You are telling a story. Keep the narrative flowing,
concise, well organized.
 Be rigorous. Do not make statements that are not
supported by your data.
17

18. Some useful tips (often overlooked)
 Conclusions
 Not the same as a summary!
 Give conclusions that are supported by your resuts
 Do not overreach. Statements such as “this method
can be potentially used…” do not belong to the
conclusions (and often irritate referees)
18

19. Once you receive your reviews
 Minor revision
 Good job. Just do what you are told and resubmit quickly.
 Rejection
 It may be disappointing, but most of the times the reviewers
are right (and yes, they did understand the paper; and no,
they are not biased against you)
 If you think you have been unfairly treated you may appeal.
But this should be exceptional.
19

20. Once you receive your reviews
 Major revision
 Major is “major”. Take it very seriously.
 Answer all the comments received, one by one, explaining the
changes made to the manuscript in response to the remarks (or
the reason why a modification is not required).
 Go straight to the point. Refer to what the comment is about, and
not something else.
 If you feel a remark is not justified or a request is unreasonable,
say so, but substantiate your response.
 If in doubt, the Editor is likely to send it back to the referees.
 Submit a revised version where the changes have been
highlighted.
20

21. After acceptance
 Be diligent with any last minute requests (e.g. Quality of
figures, format adjustments)
 Return the proofs quickly. But make sure you revise
them thoroughly (it is your last chance to correct any
mistakes before your manuscript is published)
 Decide whether or not to submit a figure for the Journal
cover. Decision will be based on both paper quality and
figure impact.
21

22. Journal Covers & Featured Articles
Featured Articles (2012) FREE on ScienceDirect until 8 August 2012
Submission details available on the CEJ homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cej
22

23. YO UR
OR !
S F ION
HA NK NT
T TE
AT
23