Publication in scientific journals. Impact factors

2,949 views

Published on

5 hours course taught by Nicolás Robinson-García and Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras in June 23-July 3, 2014 in the University of Granada within the exchange program with Al-Faraby Kazakh National University students 'Current problems of modern philology'.

Published in: Education, Technology

Publication in scientific journals. Impact factors

  1. 1. Publication in scientific journals IMPACT FACTORS Grupo de investigación EC3 Evaluación de la Ciencia y de la Comunicación Científica Course: Current problems of modern philology Date: June 23-July 3, 2014 Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras & Nicolás Robinson-García
  2. 2. Introduction Why do we need to publish?
  3. 3. Introduction Why do we need to publish?  To disseminate our work to our community  To gain prestige and recognition from our peers  To show our research perfomance to our funding bodies  To validate our findings
  4. 4. Introduction Why should we publish in journals?  Journals are currently the main vehicle for scholarly communication  Journals ensure peer review and quality control  Journals are one of the main evaluation measures for funding bodies  Journals represent a fast way to communicate our findings ¿?
  5. 5. Objectives of this course 1. Understand the way researchers communicate and the different cultures among disciplines 2. Learn the meaning of peer review, how it works and its relevance 3. Know which are and how to use the main scientific databases 4. Learn the publication process and the ‘ways’ for publishing in a scientific journal
  6. 6. Week planning (I) 1. Brief introduction to scholarly communication  The role of scientific papers  The role of journals  The role of citations/references 2. Defining impact and impact journals  What is scientific impact and why does it matter?  Introducing bibliometrics and research evaluation  What is the Journal Impact Factor and why does it matter?
  7. 7. Week planning (II) 3. Selecting journals in our specialty  Searching for scientific literature  Searching for journals in our specialty  Searching for impact journals 4. Getting published: The How-to guide  Tips and hints on scientific writing  Establishing a publication strategy  The peer review process
  8. 8. Brief introduction to scholarly communication
  9. 9. 1637 1660 Evolution of the scientific method Timeline of the scholarly communication channels 1620 Francis Bacon’ eliminative induction Discourse on the method by René Descartes Foundation of the Royal Society in the UK 1665 The first two scientific journals are published 1675 Peer review begins
  10. 10. 1950s Evolution of scientific method and writing Timeline of the scholarly communication channels End of the 19th Century The IMRAD structure is introduced in the scientific discourse Exponential increment of scientific journals 1967 Nature institutes formal peer review 1991 The launch of ArXiv and the rise of e-journals 2014 Questioning peer review and the need for reproducibility
  11. 11. The scientific method A method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses. Oxford English Dictionary STEPS TO FOLLOW 1. Define a question 2. Gather information 3. Form an explanatory hypothesis 4. Test the hypothesis 5. Analyze the data 6. Interpret the data 7. Publish the results through the right channel
  12. 12. The scientific method DEFINE A QUESTION What do we want to know? -> Defining the problem Why is it important? -> Justifying the study Why do we want to know it? -> Set the aims
  13. 13. The scientific method GATHER INFORMATION Has is been already studied? If it has, let’s review the state-of-the-art This will allow us to:  Learn about its novelty  Define the problem  Establish the theoretical framework  Compare results
  14. 14. The scientific method FORM AN EXPLANATORY HYPOTHESIS -Define the topic (time period, unit of analysis, geographical limits, theoretical framework) - Set the objectives -Formulate the hypothesis - Value the importance (novelty, viability, relevance)
  15. 15. The scientific method TEST THE HYPOTHESIS  Establish a methodology: o What are we going to do? How? With which tools? When? Where? o Unit of analysis? Which is the sample?  Gather and process the data o Systematic data retrieval o Statistical techniques
  16. 16. The scientific method ANALYZE AND INTERPRET THE DATA Write a manuscript following the IMRAD structure (or a variant depending on the discipline and nature of the study) This manuscript is the one that will be later on submitted to a journal in order to… PUBLISH THE RESULTS
  17. 17. Scientific paper [Peer Review, Final and Public, Specialized] Books and monographs Reference books Congress [Peer Review, interpersonal, public] Web 2.0: blogs, facebook, twitter. [without Peer Review, interpersonal, public] University cafeteria, e-mail, telephone [interpersonal, private] How do researchers communicate? Data Sharing Data Banks Repositories preprints Data papers Proceedings papers
  18. 18. Data Sharing Data Banks Repositories preprints Data papers Proceedings papers Scientific paper [Peer Review, Final and Public, Specialized] Books and monographs Reference books Congress [Peer Review, interpersonal, public] Web 2.0: blogs, facebook, twitter. [without Peer Review, interpersonal, public] University cafeteria, e-mail, telephone [interpersonal, private] How do researchers communicate? From an uncontrolled environment… … to transparent and controlled channels
  19. 19. Data Sharing Data Banks Scientific paper [Peer Review, Final and Public, Specialized] Books and monographs Repositories preprints Reference books Congress [Peer Review, interpersonal, public] Web 2.0: blogs, facebook, twitter. [without Peer Review, interpersonal, public] University cafeteria, e-mail, telephone [interpersonal, private] How do researchers communicate? Data papers Proceedings papers
  20. 20. Where do they publish?
  21. 21. What do they cite?
  22. 22. How do researchers communicate? 85% 10% 5% 30% 60% 10% Experimental Sciences 50%40% 10% Journals Books Others Social Sciences Humanities Is it the same everywhere?
  23. 23. How do researchers communicate? Is it the same everywhere?
  24. 24. The role of the scientific journal A scientific journal aims to disseminate original, valid and novel scientific knowledge in order to progress on the advancement of science. Journals are a part of the scientific method as they play an essential role in the last phase of dissemination and communication of the research findings.
  25. 25. Types of publications (I) Letters Communications and short descriptions of current research findings which are considered as urgent Notes Short descriptions of current research findings which are not considered as urgent Reviews Description of previous literature written in a narrative way about the state of the art in a field
  26. 26. Types of publications (II) Research articles First acceptable, publicly-available manuscript containing sufficient information to make it the object of evaluation (peer review), to show reproducible results, and to evaluate the intellectual processes undertaken during the research study in order to justify the conclusions reached. Day, 2005
  27. 27. The IMRAD structure What question was studied? Introduction How was the problem studied? Methods What where the results? Results And What do the findings mean? Discussion
  28. 28. The peer review process Day, 2005 What question was studied? Introduction How was the problem studied? Methods What where the results? Results And What do the findings mean? Discussion Why must we follow this structure ? “Peer review is the principal mechanism for quality control in most scientific disciplines. By assessing the quality of research, peer review determines what [..] research results get published.” Bornmann, 2011 PEER REVIEW ENSURES CREDIBILITY
  29. 29. The peer review process
  30. 30. The peer review process Blind review The authors ignore who are the reviewers of their manuscript, but the reviewers do know the authors identity Double-blind review None, authors or reviewers know which the identity of the other Open peer review Both, authors and reviewers know which the identity of the other
  31. 31. How are published papers evaluated?
  32. 32. The role of citations/references 1. Support the authors’ arguments 2. Demonstrate to the reviewers that you are knowledgeable of the field of study 3. Refute, compare or validate the work of authors 4. Pay tribute and acknowledge the contributions of their peers
  33. 33. The role of citations/references
  34. 34. Scientific paper [Peer Review, Final and Public, Specialized] Why scientific papers? Scientific journal [Impact Factor, Journal Rankings, Visibility] Journal-level Metrics Article-level Metrics “The bibliographies contained in most scientific papers represent a brief history of the subjects they treat and lead to earlier related events.” CITATIONS TRACK “IMPORTANT” PAPERS http://scimaps.org/maps/map/histcite_visualizati_52/detail/ Garfield, Sher & Torpie, 1964
  35. 35. What do we mean by Scientific Impact? Campanario, González & Rodríguez, 2006
  36. 36. What do we mean by Scientific Impact? • Conversation • Citations • Quality Article • Visibility • Competition • Prestige Journal • Funding • Tenure • Success Recognition
  37. 37. Wrapping up 1. The scientific paper as the main publication type is characterized by following the scientific method and being structured following the Introduction – Methods – Results – And – Discussion structure 2. Journals are the main communication channel among the research community as they ensure credibility through the peer review process.
  38. 38. Wrapping up 3. Citations/References reflect the importance or impact research contributions have among the scientific community 4. Citations are used as a measure of visibility and impact for journals and of recognition for researchers.
  39. 39. Recommended readings Day, R.A. How to write and publish a scientific paper. Oryx Press, 1998.
  40. 40. Defining impact and impact journals
  41. 41. How do we define an Impact Journal? Science Citation Index Social Science Citation Index Arts & Humanities Citation Index
  42. 42. How do we define an Impact Journal? Ke, Börner & Viswanath, 2004
  43. 43. How do we define an Impact Journal? Boyack, Klavans & Börner, 2005
  44. 44. How do we define an Impact Journal? Leydesdorff & Rafols, 2009
  45. 45. Where can I look for citations?
  46. 46. Where can I look for citations?
  47. 47. Where can I look for citations?
  48. 48. Where can I look for citations?
  49. 49. How do we define Impact? The Impact Factor The Impact Factor is a bibliometric indicator which measures the relevance, importance or visibility in terms of citations of scientific journals The Impact Factor is updated every year and it is officially published in the Journal Citation Reports from Thomson Reuters
  50. 50. How do we define Impact? The Impact Factor Lozano, Larivière & Gingras, 2012 arXiv:1205.4328v1
  51. 51. Due to low citation rates, journals in Humanities do not have an Impact Factor. In this field we consider as impact journals all indexed in the Arts & Humanities Citation Index
  52. 52. How do we calculate the Impac Factor IMPACT FACTOR 2006 = CITATIONS 2004-2005 PUBS 2004-2005
  53. 53. How do we calculate the Impac Factor 0 5 10 15 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 ImpactFactor Rank INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE LINGUISTICS PSYCHOLOGY
  54. 54. JCRAllergyin2009.RankingIF–21journals 1º Q 2º Q 3º Q 4º Q
  55. 55. What does the Impact Factor measure? Seglen, 1999
  56. 56. What does the Impact Factor measure? Article’s Impact ≠ Journal’s Impact
  57. 57. What does the Impact Factor measure? Limitations of the Impact Factor  It does not represent the actual number of citations of the paper  It varies among disciplines  It is dependent on the number of papers and of document types the journal publishes  There is a problem with self-citations  Sometimes two years are not enough
  58. 58. What does the Impact Factor measure? There are no Impact Factors in the HUMANITIES Here we consider as impact journals those included in the Arts & Humanities Citation Index
  59. 59. PREMISES  All researchers want to publish their research in impact journals  These are international journals where authors all over the world try to publish They receive lots of manuscripts and, hence, they reject most of them  The peer review process is tough as it is done by the best experts in each field What does the Impact Factor really measure?
  60. 60. THE IMPACT FACTOR IS AN INDICATOR OF COMPETITIVENESS As journals receive more manuscripts they have more where to choose and therefore, more possibilities of publishing better papers. These papers will get cited will be well received by the community, improving their Journal Impact Factor. What does the Impact Factor really measure?
  61. 61. Selecting journals in our specialty
  62. 62. Most of the research policy guidelines and research evaluation exercises consider them as key factor You will develop a successful research career Why publish in a Impact Journals? You will gain a wider audience of readers and hence, your contribution will get more visibility
  63. 63. Why publish in a Impact Journals? Evaluation agencies
  64. 64. You will improve your university’s status Why publish in a Impact Journals?
  65. 65. You will improve your university’s status Why publish in a Impact Journals?
  66. 66. You will increase your budget Why publish in a Impact Journals?
  67. 67. Become active in the international community Zuccala, 2005 Why publish in a Impact Journals?
  68. 68. Excuses for not publishing in impact journals My research line and my articles are of national interest International reviewers are uncapable of understanding the wide scope of my research papers I do not publish in English, we must defend our language!! International journals usually take a long time to publish my papers In my research area books and book chapters are more important There are no international journals covering my research interests
  69. 69. Excuses for not publishing in impact journals http://wokinfo.com/media/pdf/globalwos-essay.pdf
  70. 70. Excuses for not publishing in impact journals My research line and my articles are of national interest International reviewers are uncapable of understanding the wide scope of my research papers I do not publish in English, we must defend our language!! International journals usually take a long time to publish my papers In my research area books and book chapters are more important There are no international journals covering my research interests
  71. 71. Excuses for not publishing in impact journals My research line and my articles are of national interest International reviewers are uncapable of understanding the wide scope of my research papers I do not publish in English, we must defend our language!! International journals usually take a long time to publish my papers In my research area books and book chapters are more important There are no international journals covering my research interests
  72. 72. Excuses for not publishing in impact journals My research line and my articles are of national interest International reviewers are uncapable of understanding the wide scope of my research papers I do not publish in English, we must defend our language!! International journals usually take a long time to publish my papers In my research area books and book chapters are more important There are no international journals covering my research interests
  73. 73. Excuses for not publishing in impact journals Bornmann & Daniel, 2010CHEMISTRY
  74. 74. Excuses for not publishing in impact journals My research line and my articles are of national interest International reviewers are uncapable of understanding the wide scope of my research papers I do not publish in English, we must defend our language!! International journals usually take a long time to publish my papers In my research area books and book chapters are more important There are no international journals covering my research interests
  75. 75. Excuses for not publishing in impact journals Torres-Salinas et al., 2014
  76. 76. Excuses for not publishing in impact journals My research line and my articles are of national interest International reviewers are uncapable of understanding the wide scope of my research papers I do not publish in English, we must defend our language!! International journals usually take a long time to publish my papers In my research area books and book chapters are more important There are no international journals covering my research interests
  77. 77. • CHANGE THE PERSPECTIVE Adapt to international standards • CHANGE THE STRATEGY Less papers but better • CHANGE THE TOPICS Search for relevant research questions in your area I may have to change some things
  78. 78. Where to publish? Identify the audience to which you are targeting Professional Academic
  79. 79. Always publish in peer-reviewed journals That is, your papers will be anonimously evaluated by two or more experts Where to publish?
  80. 80. Where are those journals? BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASES International National
  81. 81. It belongs to Elsevier, the biggest scientific publisher in the world It includes around 16500 journals from all research fields. They have their own ‘impact indicator’ called SJR.
  82. 82. Developed by the European Science Foundation It includes 6459 journals in Humanities published in any European language. Journals are classified according to their impact (International1, International2 and National) and 15 thematic categories.
  83. 83.  It is a subject index for books and articles published on modern languages, literatures, folklore, and linguistics. It dates back to 1925 and includes records from more than 4000 journals and 1000 books. It includes the JSTOR Language and Literature Collection.
  84. 84. Hands-on exercises Web of Science 1. Access to the database 2. Citation indexes 3. Types of search 4. Boleean operators -> AND – OR – NOT 5. Search fields 6. Filtering and analyzing the results page
  85. 85. Hands-on exercises Journal Citation Reports 1. Access to the database 2. Search options 3. Journal information -> Citation frame – Self-citations – Citing and cited journals 4. Other bibliometric indicators
  86. 86. Hands-on exercises Scopus 1. Access to the database 2. Citation indexes 3. Types of search 4. Boleean operators -> AND – OR – NOT 5. Search fields 6. Filtering and analyzing the results page
  87. 87. Getting published: The How-to guide
  88. 88. • It is better to articulate a good research question and look out for the necessary tools in order to answer it than to pose a research question according to the tools you already have. • You must try to be original. A curious thing I’ve found out from papers authored by Spanish-speaking people is that, the more evidences they find in the literature supporting their results, the more assertive they feel over the importance of the contribution they are making. • We must address the difficult issues. Unfortunately, that is the interesting one and the one which will be getting published in Nature or any other of our journals. That is the main difference between famous researchers and the rest of us. First comes first…
  89. 89. • Focus on innovative aspects • Be clear in your mind about the structure of the paper • Make it comprehensible and interesting • Select carefully which is the best place to get it published • Be honest and upstanding • Focus on quality rather than quantity • Be patient when writing the article Things you must take in mind
  90. 90. Look out for partners when publishing Effects of no collaboration, national collaboration and international collaboration Katz & Hicks, 1997
  91. 91. Look out for partners when publishing Collaboration is not so common in the Humanities Larivière, Gingras & Archambault, 2006
  92. 92. Look out for partners when publishing WHY IS IT A GOOD A IDEA TO COLLABORATE?  Teamwork allows researchers to confront and fulfill large research projects: Little science -> Big science  The more people involved on the writing of a paper the more polished the final version it will be theoretically  Collaborating involves strengthening social networks and fostering creativity  Collaboration allows developing interdisciplinary research i.e., Digital Humanities
  93. 93. Be honest with authorship
  94. 94. Be honest with authorship  Authorship is a recurrent source of controversy among collaborators  The position in authorship reflects the contribution of each author  It is advisable to agree on authorship position before conducting the research  Restrain from including too many authors
  95. 95. Be honest with authorship BEWARE: The authors’ position reflect their contribution to the paper AUTHOR 1; AUTHOR 2; AUTHOR 3 Authorship: Criteria and Policy Authorship implies accountability. Listed authors must have contributed directly to the intellectual content of the paper... Authors should meet all of the following criteria: • Conceived and planned the work that led to the article or played an important role in interpreting the results, or both. • Wrote the paper and/or made substantive suggestions for revision. • Approved the final version
  96. 96. Be honest with authorship Contributing to a paper is not the same as authoring a paper
  97. 97. Be honest with authorship Who should author a paper? AN AUTHOR SHOULD HAVE… AN AUTHOR IS NOT SOMEONE WHO HAS… … Contributed substantially on the o Design o Conception o Data retrieval o Analysis o Interpretation …. Written or critically revised the manuscript … Approved the final version of the manuscript … Helped with technical assistance … Revised the style of the writing … Supervisors and directors of research teams or departments who have not contributed … Assure the funding
  98. 98. Be honest with authorship Allen et al., 2014
  99. 99. Be honest with authorship BEWARE: The authors’ position reflect their contribution to the paper
  100. 100. Be honest with authorship Who are the main authors? FIRST AUTHOR LAST AUTHOR Has conceived the paper. Has played a leading role on its conception, design and development. Has revised and analyzed the paper critically and has consented and given the final approval before submitting the final version of the manuscript to a journal
  101. 101. Make a good literature review Be honest when citing, do not omit competitors Cite the most recent literature Cite international papers, use scientific databases Make sure to cite all papers on the topic published in the journal to which you are submitting your manuscript
  102. 102. Make a good literature review DON’T BE CHEEKY!
  103. 103. When writing the manuscript 1. Many papers are rejected or loose their value because they are not well written, presented or structured. 2. If we do not pay attention to the details, probably the main message and good ideas expressed in our paper will be missed out and go unnoticed. 3. Just taking care of a series of basic details our paper may improve substantially. 4. Work out which are the main conclusions of your work and write and present the paper always keeping them on mind. 5. Give some thought to the introduction, in it we must present what has been previously done and what will we contribute with.
  104. 104. “[…]However, the paper does its utmost best to present itself as a contribution to just Spanish national matters. Then, non- Spanish readers may not be very interested, and that includes most of Research Evaluation readers. Thus, unfortunately, the paper as it stands now is only of marginal interest to RE and is much more suitable for a Spanish national journal. Now, the paper could certainly be improved: focus on what is interesting for an international public, present the study as dealing with a general issue[…]”. Because if you don’t, this will be the answer you will receive Approach the topic from an international perspective FINAL PUBLICATION: Cabezas-Clavijo A, Robinson-Garcia N, Escabias M & Jimenez-Contreras E (2013). Reviewers' ratings and bibliometric indicators: Hand in hand when assessing over research proposals? PLOS One. 8(6): e68258
  105. 105. “[…]Considering target audience of the article, present the methodology in terms of spectral decomposition makes no sense. This was introduced by Gabriel in the journal Biometrika that is aimed to mathematicians. If one observes the article of Odoroff and Gabriel (1990), which was aimed at doctors, presentation omitted any algebraic development. Should be limited to providing clear rules of interpretation and limit the method to his original quote (properly cited, of course)[…]”. Because if you don’t, this will be the answer you will receive Address your research topic according to the audience to which you address
  106. 106. Respect authors’ guidelines Pay a special attention to the journals’ instructions for authors • Abstract, keywords • Structure, tables and figures • Length • Referencing IF WE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS WE WILL AVOID HAVING THE EDITOR AND REVIEWERS CALLING OUR ATTENTION. THESE ERRORS MAY BE CRUCIAL ON THE FATE OF OUR PAPER Check some papers previously published by the journal
  107. 107. Look out for your English http://www.ease.org.uk/guidelines/index.shtml • Journals hate badly written manuscripts • Check the terminology you use • If you are hiring a translator • Choose someone specialized in your field of endeavour • If you have written the text • Have a native English-speaker to check it • Beware the type of English you use • American or British
  108. 108. Aspects that must be taken into account Some aspects journals take into account when reviewing manuscripts Revista Española de Documentación Científica
  109. 109. Look out for tables and figures Sometimes tables and figures are the most important part of our work or even the only one our readers will pay attention to. Include only the neccessary ones, only those that reinforce our results. Do not transform your paper into a list of tables, try to comprise results in just a few tables always preserving their quality. More tables and figures do not neccessarily mean more results! Avoid redundancy. Avoid overlapping tables and figures. Use explicative titles avoiding acronyms if possible. Make sure the tables and figures can be interpreted without reading the text. Make attractive figures, take your time, they summarize part of the message you are sending
  110. 110. Look out for tables and figures FIGURES AND TABLES ARE PRETTY…
  111. 111. Look out for tables and figures … AND INFORMATIVE
  112. 112. Select the right journal Audience • Academic • Professional Scope • Readership • Research community Visibility • Impact journals • Publishers Publish • Continue the conversation
  113. 113. BEWARE: Read the journal’s scope carefully Select the right journal
  114. 114. You can even point out the target audience in the paper Select the right journal
  115. 115. “Dear Mr Daniel Torres-Salinas, Thank you for your submission for Journal of Informetrics entitled "State of the Library and Information Science blogosphere after social networks boom: a metric approach". The editorial office has, however, decided that this paper is outside the scope of this journal. Yours sincerely” If you get it wrong, this will be the answer you will receive Select the right journal
  116. 116. Double check which type of papers they publish Select the right journal
  117. 117. Select the right journal Phil.Science-in2009.Ranking–35journals 1º Q 2º Q 3º Q Alwayscontemplateseveraljournalsinwhich yourpapercouldbepublished
  118. 118. Select the right journal
  119. 119. Select the right journal
  120. 120. Writing a research paper Writing a research paperBefore submitting a manuscript You may as well send it to some colleagues to check some aspects. Don’t forget to thank them!
  121. 121. Writing a research paper • Include a “Cover Letter” underlining the paper’s originality and novelty, also pointing out its potential interest to the journal’s readers • List the main results of your research and emphasize its importance How are you contributing to the field? • Sometimes it may be interesting to suggest some possible reviewers, especially if the paper is of great novelty Writing a research paperSending the manuscript
  122. 122. Authors should include a cover letter detailing the key findings of their manuscript. The cover letter should highlight the novel aspects of their data and briefly describe how the authors feel their results will generate progress in their field. ….Furthermore, if the authors feel their work merits publication as a breakthrough paper, they should indicate this in the cover letter... Writing a research paper Not all journals ask for a “cover letter” but it is advisable to always send it Example extracted from the “authors guidelines” of: Sending the manuscript
  123. 123. Writing a research paperThe peer review process
  124. 124. Writing a research paper ACCEPTED √ MINOR CHANGES √ MAJOR REVISIONS ¿? REJECTED X The peer review process
  125. 125. Writing a research paper 1) Answer to all the commentaries, even if you don’t agree or are minor issues. 2) Be well-mannered when answering and use solid scientific arguments when you disagree with the reviewer. 3) If necessary, get ready, you may have to retrieve more data, undertake more observations or perform new experiments. 4) If the changes suggested do not require an excessive effort and do not alter the paper excessively, make them, don’t waste your time arguing with the reviewer. This may be one of the hardest moments, we must study the reviewers comments and respond to them in a letter. The peer review process
  126. 126. “Reviewer: I do not think that computer science is the appropriate field for the method to be tested. In computer science there is heavy reliance on proceedings… It would be good to test the method on additional fields as well” Coments implying retrieving new data, processing it and redoing the paper “You say that CS is well represented in JCR. I strongly disagree with this” Comments which do not imply changing the paper but responding to the reviewer “TOPCIT - you should provide a more detailed definition” Comments which involve minor changes “Page 8, first line "proving" I suggest to replace this by "indicating" Comments which imply modifying the text without further discussion What can we have in a review? The peer review process
  127. 127. TITLE Example of a structured response to a review The peer review process
  128. 128. The peer review process Be prepared for the unexpected
  129. 129. The peer review process Always be polite but firm… … and present proofs that justify your answer
  130. 130. Writing a research paper • NEVER take it as something personal • Be honest and try to understand why the paper was rejected • Make the most of reviewers’ comments to improve your work • Rewrite a new paper but don’t send it to another journal without correcting the facts why it was rejected on the first place Accept rejected papers with good nature The peer review process
  131. 131. “Undeniably, the most common way to communicate a given finding, theory or discovery is through its publication in articles submitted to learned journals. It may happen that the editors and referees who read articles reporting a novel discovery are not able to assess the value of innovative work” Campanario, JM. Rejecting and resisting Nobel class discoveries... Scientometrics, 2009 Maybe your paper was not that bad after all! The peer review process
  132. 132. • Good and well-focused research lines • Good knowledge of research methodologies in our specialty • Ambition for publishing internationally • Patience with the research, writing and reviewing • Neatness, clarity and conciseness when presenting results • Persistence against failure Final tips
  133. 133. Publication in scientific journals IMPACT FACTORS Questions? Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras evaristo@ugr.es http://www.ugr.es/~evaristo This is an adapted version of: - Torres-Salinas, D. Cómo publicar en revistas de impacto. Unidad de Bibliometría, Universidad de Granada. Nicolás Robinson-García elrobin@ugr.es http://www.ugr.es/~elrobin

×