130220 Edanz SUP 4


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

130220 Edanz SUP 4

  1. 1. Hints and tips for getting your research published Sharif University of Technology Warren Raye, PhD Senior Editor Edanz Group 20 February 2013
  2. 2. Coverage and Readability Staffing Plan Reader expectations• Information is easier to interpret when placed where most readers expect to find it• Good writers are aware of these expectations
  3. 3. Coverage and ReadabilityStaffing Plan Your reader should … Only have to read once Not have to read slowly Understand your logic immediately
  4. 4. Coverage and Readability Staffing Plan 1. Verb placement• Readers expect verbs to closely follow subjects Subject Sentence Verb Verb . Subject and verb far apart = poor readability
  5. 5. Coverage and Readability Staffing Plan Avoid reader confusion• Readers become confused if subject and verb are separated by too much contentThe smallest of the URFs (URFA6L), a 207-nucleotide (nt)reading frame overlapping out of phase the [NH2]-terminalportion of the adenosinetriphosphatase (ATPase) subunit 6gene, has been identified as the animal equivalent of therecently discovered yeast H-ATPase subunit 8 gene.
  6. 6. Coverage and Readability Staffing Plan Avoid reader confusionThe smallest of the URFs is URFA6L, a 207-nucleotide (nt) reading frame overlapping out of phasethe [NH2]-terminal portion of the adenosinetriphosphatase (ATPase) subunit 6 gene, has beenidentified as the animal equivalent of the recently discovered yeast H-ATPase subunit 8 gene.The smallest of the URFs (URFA6L) has been identified as theanimal equivalent of the recently discovered yeast H-ATPasesubunit 8 gene; URFA6L is a 207-nucleotide (nt) reading frameoverlapping out of phase the [NH2]-terminal portion of theadenosinetriphosphatase (ATPase) subunit 6 gene.We identified the smallest of the URFs (URFA6L) as the animalequivalent of the recently discovered yeast H-ATPase subunit 8gene. URFA6L is a …
  7. 7. Coverage and Readability Staffing Plan Which voice?• Active or passive? – Blood samples were collected from 256 patients. – We collected blood from 256 patients.
  8. 8. Coverage and ReadabilityStaffing Plan 2. Active voice Subject Verb Active• Sentences written in the active voice are: simple direct clear easy to read
  9. 9. Coverage and Readability Staffing Plan 3. Stress position• Readers focus on information at the end of a sentence. Subject Verb take-home information .
  10. 10. Coverage and Readability Staffing Plan Stress positionThe dog sat when her mistress offered a treat.The dog sat when a treat was offered by her mistress.When the mistress offered her a treat, the dog sat.• Readers, without thinking, concentrate on the end of a sentence.
  11. 11. Coverage and Readability Staffing Plan 4. Topic position• Readers expect a sentence/phrase to be a story about whoever shows up first Subject Topic position Verb Stress position .
  12. 12. Coverage and Readability Staffing Plan Topic position sentence idea idea idea idea Topic link• Linkage and contextThe family went into the courtyard to see the new puppy.The dog sat when her owner offered a treat. Everyone wasso excited they broke into applause. However, as thecourtyard was situated right next to my bedroom, thesound woke me from my sleep.
  13. 13. Coverage and ReadabilityStaffing Plan 5. Short sentences Reading once…4% of readers can understand a 27-word sentence75% of readers can understand a 17-word sentence Pinner and Pinner (1998) Communication Skills Goals to aim for: One idea per sentence Maximum 25 words per sentenceLess than four 30-word sentences in the manuscript
  14. 14. Coverage and ReadabilityStaffing Plan Simple is best • Simple language is best • Makes your science more relevant • Minimizes confusion—maximizes understanding • Science is complex • More people will understand your work – More citations!
  15. 15. Cover letters Why are they important? Why your Significance work is Relevance important First impression for journal editors Level of Recommend English reviewers?
  16. 16. Cover letters Their purpose • Introduces manuscript to journal editor • Acts as a guide for the editor • ‘Sells’ your work • Speeds up the publication process
  17. 17. Cover letters Bad example Not personal Dear Editor-in-Chief, No information about the manuscript I am sending you our manuscript entitled “Techniques to detect circoviruses in Australian bird species” by Raye et al. We would like to have the manuscript considered for publication in Virology Methods Online. Please let me know of your decision at your earliest convenience. Sincerely yours, Too short Warren Raye, PhD
  18. 18. Cover letters A good cover letterDear Dr Graeber,Please find enclosed our manuscript entitled “Amyloid-like inclusions in the brains of Huntington’s disease patients”, byMcGowan et al., which we would like to submit for publication as a Research Paper in Neurogenetics.Recent immunohistochemical studies have revealed the presence of neuronal inclusions containing an N-terminal portion ofthe mutant huntingtin protein and ubiquitin in the brain tissues of Huntington’s disease (HD) patients; however, the role of Give thethese inclusions in the disease process has remained unclear. One suspected disease-causing mechanism in Huntington’s background todisease and other polyglutamine disorders is the potential for the mutant protein to undergo a conformational change to a the researchmore stable anti-parallel β-sheet structure…To confirm if the immunohistochemically observed huntingtin- and ubiquitin-containing inclusions display amyloid features, weperformed Congo red staining and both polarizing and confocal microscopy on post-mortem human brain tissues obtained What wasfrom five HD patients, two AD patients, and two normal controls. Congo red staining revealed a small number of amyloid-likeinclusions showing green birefringence by polarized microscopy, in a variety of cortical regions.... ….detected inclusions done and whatobserved in parallel sections, suggesting that only a relatively small proportion of inclusions in HD adopt an amyloid-like was foundstructure.We believe our findings will be of particular interest to the readership of Neurogenetics, which includes researchers and Interest toclinicians studying the genetic and molecular mechanisms underlying neurodegenerative diseases. Therefore, we feel that your journal’s readersjournal provides the most suitable platform for the dissemination of our work to the research community.Please address all correspondence to….
  19. 19. Cover letters General rules Address editor Manuscript title/ Background, personally Publication type rationale, results General rules Why are your Corresponding Reviewerfindings important? author details recommendations “Must-have” statements
  20. 20. Cover letters General rulesOriginal and Not submitted Authors agree onunpublished to other journals paper/journal “Must-have” statementsNo conflicts of Source of Authorship interest funding contributions
  21. 21. Cover letters Recommending reviewers “When submitting a paper authors are requested to suggest 6 international referees…” “The following items are also required as part of the manuscript submission process:…The names, addresses, phone numbers, and e-mail addresses of four or five potential independent reviewers…”
  22. 22. Cover letters Where do I find reviewers?• From your reading and references• Networking• Aim for younger and mid-level scientists• Editors have the final decision on reviewer choice
  23. 23. Responding to reviewers Reviewers
  24. 24. Responding to reviewers Point-by-point Respond to Be polite every comment Revision Refer to line and page numbers Easy to see Use a different color font changes Highlight the text
  25. 25. Responding to reviewers Revision• Conduct additional experiments and analyses as suggested – If this is impossible, you must explain why• You can disagree with reviewers, but provide evidence – Cite published work• Comply with deadlines – Extensions are granted
  26. 26. Responding to reviewers Point-by-point response Dear Dr. _____________: [address editor by name] Thank you for your consideration of our manuscript entitled _____________ [insert manuscript title]. We have reviewed the comments of the reviewers and have thoroughly revised the manuscript. We found the comments helpful, and believe our revised manuscript represents a significant improvement over our initial submission. In response to the reviewers’ suggestions we have [summarize the key changes here]
  27. 27. Responding to reviewers AgreementReviewer Comment: In your analysis of the data you have chosento use a somewhat obscure fitting function (regression). In myopinion, a simple Gaussian function would have sufficed.Moreover, the results would be more instructive and easier tocompare to previous results.Response: We agree with the reviewer’s assessment of theanalysis. Our tailored function makes it impossible to fullyinterpret the data in terms of the prevailing theories. In addition, inits current form it would be difficult to tell that this measurementconstitutes a significant improvement over previously reportedvalues. We have redone the analysis using a Gaussian fittingfunction.
  28. 28. Responding to reviewers DisagreementReviewer Comment: In your analysis of the data you have chosento use a somewhat obscure fitting function (regression). In myopinion, a simple Gaussian function would have sufficed.Moreover, the results would be more instructive and easier tocompare to previous results.Response: We agree with the reviewer that a simple Gaussian fitwould facilitate comparison with the results of other studies.However, our tailored function allows for the analysis of the datain terms of the Smith model [Smith et al, 1998]. We have addedtwo sentences to the paper (page 3 paragraph 2) to explain theuse of this function and Smith’s model.
  29. 29. Responding to reviewers Cryptic questions“The authors hypothesized to look for thepharmacokinetics of the insulin using this 4 mmneedle; However they didnt do bioequivalenceanalyses for glucose pharmacodynamics. Thatis one of my concerns about this methodology.”
  30. 30. Responding to Understanding reviewer reviewers comments “The English needs to be improved” “Your writing is difficult to understand”• Grammar & spelling• Long, complex sentences and paragraphs• Gaps in the logic• Poor manuscript organization• Too much information
  31. 31. Customer Service Hints and tips Free online resources • Edanz edanzediting.com • Springer Exemplar springerexemplar.com/ • Google Scholar scholar.google.com/ • Purdue Online Writing Lab owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/
  32. 32. Customer Service Hints and tips Springer Author Academy
  33. 33. Customer Service Hints and tips Help your readers understand“If you can’t explain somethingsimply, you don’t understand it well.” – Albert Einstein• Write to express not impress• Consider your audience – their native language may not be English
  34. 34. Any questions? Thank you!edanzediting.com/iran022013Download and further reading@JournalAdvisorFollow us on Twitterfacebook.com/JournalAdvisorLike us on Facebook