Materials science publishing (and how to maximize your success!) Vicki Cleave Journal of Polymer Science:  Polymer Physics
Outline <ul><li>Biography and what editors do  </li></ul><ul><li>Materials science at Wiley </li></ul><ul><li>Why publish?...
Biography <ul><li>Imperial College London, UK </li></ul><ul><ul><li>BSc, Physical chemistry </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Univers...
Journal of Polymer Science <ul><li>First published 1946 </li></ul><ul><li>Founded by Herman Mark whilst at Brooklyn Polyte...
Editorial models <ul><li>Many journals run with external editors, who are also faculty members </li></ul><ul><li>Some jour...
What an editor does <ul><li>Pre-screens manuscripts, manages peer review and takes decisions </li></ul><ul><li>Commissions...
JPS: Polymer Physics <ul><li>Updated scope to reflect modern polymer physics, including: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Polymer ele...
 
JPS: Polymer Physics  development <ul><li>Series of Reviews to reflect and promote new scope, including: </li></ul><ul><ul...
JPS: Polymer Physics  development <ul><li>Rapid publication times – acceptance to online in 15 days </li></ul><ul><li>A br...
Wiley Materials and Polymer Journals
Why publish at all? <ul><li>“ Fame” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Recognition by your peers </li></ul></ul><ul><li>“ Fortune” </li...
<ul><li>„ A paper is not just an archival device for storing a completed research program; it is also a  structure for pla...
Why peer review? <ul><li>To select items for publication </li></ul><ul><ul><li>True/credible? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>I...
What peer review doesn’t do  (automatically) <ul><li>Detect fabrication of results/fraud – always an element of trust invo...
Review process
Selecting the journal <ul><li>Journal Impact Factor is not everything </li></ul><ul><li>What are the implications of your ...
Writing the cover letter <ul><li>Why is this topic important? </li></ul><ul><li>Why are the results significant? </li></ul...
Writing the cover letter <ul><li>Disclose conflicts of interest </li></ul><ul><li>Provide reviewer suggestions </li></ul><...
Conflicts of interest <ul><li>Potential conflicts of interest: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Competitor that could “scoop” you </l...
What editors look for <ul><li>What all editors look for: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Scope </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Does t...
How reviewers are chosen <ul><li>Reviewer database </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Keywords, interests, history </li></ul></ul><ul><...
What reviewers look for <ul><li>Is the motivation clear? </li></ul><ul><li>Is the motivation important? </li></ul><ul><li>...
Accept, reject, or revise… <ul><li>Acceptance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Without changes (rare) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>With...
Revision <ul><li>Carefully consider reviewer comments </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not all changes have to be made… </li></ul></u...
Acceptance <ul><li>Congratulations! </li></ul><ul><li>Provide production files/figures asap </li></ul><ul><li>Return proof...
Rejection <ul><li>Direct (“in-house”, “on topic”) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Outside scope </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wrong for...
Should I appeal? <ul><li>Usually, no </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Risk of long time to publication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Goo...
The digital world <ul><li>Print on its way out </li></ul><ul><li>EarlyView, ASAPs instead of issues </li></ul><ul><li>DOI ...
The digital world <ul><li>Mobile access: iPad, iPhone, html vs. PDF </li></ul><ul><li>Read anywhere, not just print out  <...
New ways to find papers <ul><li>Papers discovered through searches and alerts, not issues </li></ul><ul><li>News sites, Ma...
Conclusions <ul><li>Unpublished work is lost </li></ul><ul><li>Science output is growing fast </li></ul><ul><li>Access is ...
With thanks to… <ul><li>Dave Flanagan </li></ul><ul><li>Martin Ottmar </li></ul><ul><li>Matteo Cavalleri </li></ul>
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Materials Science Publishing (and how to maximize your success!)

3,600 views

Published on

How scientific publishing works and how to maximize your success.

Published in: Education
1 Comment
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Dear Colleagues.
    Since January 29, I publish a video blog with graphic tutorials to
    scientific publishing, called KEEP CALM and PUBLISH PAPERS. I hope,
    you may find this interesting when writing your thesis, paper or
    making a presentation.

    Best regards
    Pawel Jerzy Wojcik, Ph.D.

    https://www.facebook.com/keepcalmandpublishpapers

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqKuaNlHwxUVDSRt8iLPeNw
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,600
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
1
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Materials Science Publishing (and how to maximize your success!)

  1. 1. Materials science publishing (and how to maximize your success!) Vicki Cleave Journal of Polymer Science: Polymer Physics
  2. 2. Outline <ul><li>Biography and what editors do </li></ul><ul><li>Materials science at Wiley </li></ul><ul><li>Why publish? </li></ul><ul><li>The peer review process </li></ul><ul><li>Maximizing your chance of success </li></ul><ul><li>Accept, reject, or revise: how decisions are made and how to respond </li></ul><ul><li>Publishing trends and the future </li></ul>
  3. 3. Biography <ul><li>Imperial College London, UK </li></ul><ul><ul><li>BSc, Physical chemistry </li></ul></ul><ul><li>University of Cambridge, UK </li></ul><ul><ul><li>PhD, Physics with Richard Friend </li></ul></ul><ul><li>2002–2005: Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Deputy Editor, Advanced (Functional) Materials </li></ul></ul><ul><li>2005–2010: Nature Publishing Group, London </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Senior Editor, Nature Materials </li></ul></ul><ul><li>2010–: John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Editor, JPS: Polymer Physics </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. Journal of Polymer Science <ul><li>First published 1946 </li></ul><ul><li>Founded by Herman Mark whilst at Brooklyn Polytechnic </li></ul><ul><li>Split into parts in 1963 </li></ul><ul><li>Part A: Chemistry and Part B: Physics format from 1986 </li></ul><ul><li>Part B moved to in-house editors in 2010 </li></ul>
  5. 5. Editorial models <ul><li>Many journals run with external editors, who are also faculty members </li></ul><ul><li>Some journals ( Advanced Materials , Angewandte Chemie , Nature family, RSC) run with in-house, professional editors </li></ul>
  6. 6. What an editor does <ul><li>Pre-screens manuscripts, manages peer review and takes decisions </li></ul><ul><li>Commissions articles </li></ul><ul><li>Attends conferences to keep up-to-date </li></ul><ul><li>Writes content: editorials, news, PRs </li></ul><ul><li>Edits some content: News and Views, developmental editing </li></ul><ul><li>Develops journal’s direction and philosophy </li></ul>
  7. 7. JPS: Polymer Physics <ul><li>Updated scope to reflect modern polymer physics, including: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Polymer electronics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Polymers for energy applications </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Characterization, modeling and theory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Biopolymers and the physics of biological systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Charge carrier and ion transport; optical properties </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Block copolymers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Polymeric nanomaterials, nanostructured polymers and nanocomposites </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Polyelectrolytes and ionomers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Hydrogels and adhesives </li></ul></ul>
  8. 9. JPS: Polymer Physics development <ul><li>Series of Reviews to reflect and promote new scope, including: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Yang Yang, UCLA, on polymer solar cells </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Yasuhiro Koike, Keio, on polymer optical fibres </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Russell Stewart, Utah, on underwater adhesives </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mario Leclerc, Laval, on thermoelectric polymers </li></ul></ul>
  9. 10. JPS: Polymer Physics development <ul><li>Rapid publication times – acceptance to online in 15 days </li></ul><ul><li>A brand new look: </li></ul>
  10. 11. Wiley Materials and Polymer Journals
  11. 12. Why publish at all? <ul><li>“ Fame” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Recognition by your peers </li></ul></ul><ul><li>“ Fortune” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Promotions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Grant applications </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Responsibility </li></ul><ul><ul><li>To society </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Taxpayer-funded research </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Making your research public </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Papers provide the shoulders that others can stand on </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Results should be reproducible </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ The scientific record’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Speed progress </li></ul></ul>
  12. 13. <ul><li>„ A paper is not just an archival device for storing a completed research program; it is also a structure for planning your research in progress.“ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>George Whitesides, „Writing a Paper“, 2004. </li></ul></ul>Freely available as PDF at http://ow.ly/o3jW <ul><ul><li>„ If your research does not generate papers, it might just as well not have been done.“ </li></ul></ul>Papers as research drivers
  13. 14. Why peer review? <ul><li>To select items for publication </li></ul><ul><ul><li>True/credible? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Important? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Relevant? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Communicated effectively? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Quality? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>To improve the item for publication </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Interpretation of results </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Presentation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Critical feedback </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>New ideas </li></ul></ul>Competitive and cooperative
  14. 15. What peer review doesn’t do (automatically) <ul><li>Detect fabrication of results/fraud – always an element of trust involved </li></ul><ul><li>Prevent duplicate publication </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure the paper is right for the journal </li></ul><ul><li>Pick the most interesting papers </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure quality </li></ul>
  15. 16. Review process
  16. 17. Selecting the journal <ul><li>Journal Impact Factor is not everything </li></ul><ul><li>What are the implications of your research? </li></ul><ul><li>How important will others find your research? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>In your field? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In related fields? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Where do you read papers related to your research? Which do you like the most? </li></ul><ul><li>What is the scope of your candidate journal? </li></ul><ul><li>How important is rapid publication of your results? </li></ul><ul><li>What is the format of your candidate journal? </li></ul>
  17. 18. Writing the cover letter <ul><li>Why is this topic important? </li></ul><ul><li>Why are the results significant? </li></ul><ul><li>What is the key result? </li></ul><ul><li>Why is it an advance on previous work? </li></ul><ul><li>Why are you submitting to this journal? </li></ul><ul><li>Why will this journal’s readers read it? </li></ul>
  18. 19. Writing the cover letter <ul><li>Disclose conflicts of interest </li></ul><ul><li>Provide reviewer suggestions </li></ul><ul><li>List related papers in press or under consideration and be prepared to provide copies </li></ul><ul><li>Other tips: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Get the editor’s name right! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Moved, etc. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Get the journal’s name right! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Especially if not your first-choice journal… </li></ul></ul></ul>
  19. 20. Conflicts of interest <ul><li>Potential conflicts of interest: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Competitor that could “scoop” you </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Current or former collaborators, grant co-applicants </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Members of your institution </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Current or former thesis or postdoc advisor </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Anyone you believe could not give an impartial report </li></ul><ul><ul><li>within reason … </li></ul></ul>
  20. 21. What editors look for <ul><li>What all editors look for: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Scope </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Does the topic fit the journal? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Format </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Communication, full paper, review… </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>What some journals require (to varying degrees): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Novelty </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>How different is it from previous work? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Importance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>In those in specific/related field </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interest </li></ul></ul>
  21. 22. How reviewers are chosen <ul><li>Reviewer database </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Keywords, interests, history </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Suggestions from authors </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Helpful! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not just the big names please </li></ul></ul><ul><li>From related papers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cited in manuscript </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Literature searches </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Editor’s knowledge and experience </li></ul>
  22. 23. What reviewers look for <ul><li>Is the motivation clear? </li></ul><ul><li>Is the motivation important? </li></ul><ul><li>Is the work novel and original? </li></ul><ul><li>Are the conclusions supported by the data? </li></ul><ul><li>Are the results important? </li></ul><ul><li>Are the results interesting? </li></ul><ul><li>Are there ethical questions? </li></ul><ul><li>Is the presentation clear? </li></ul>Think like a referee: http://bit.ly/for_ref ( Advanced Materials Reviewer Guidelines)
  23. 24. Accept, reject, or revise… <ul><li>Acceptance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Without changes (rare) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>With changes </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Rejection </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Without external referee reports (editor) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Based on reports </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Revision </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reconsideration and resubmission possible after major revisions </li></ul></ul>
  24. 25. Revision <ul><li>Carefully consider reviewer comments </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not all changes have to be made… </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… but need convincing arguments for changes not made </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Prepare revision </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Revise manuscript </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Highlight changes in manuscript </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Point-by-point response to all reviewer issues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Response may go back to reviewers! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Need to convince editor and reviewers </li></ul></ul></ul>
  25. 26. Acceptance <ul><li>Congratulations! </li></ul><ul><li>Provide production files/figures asap </li></ul><ul><li>Return proof corrections quickly </li></ul><ul><li>Consider alerting colleagues who might be interested in the work </li></ul><ul><li>Press release (via journal or institution), institution news site or homepage </li></ul>
  26. 27. Rejection <ul><li>Direct (“in-house”, “on topic”) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Outside scope </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wrong format </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Novelty unclear </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Impact/importance unclear </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interest unclear </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul><ul><li>On reports </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Technical/scientific issues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Motivation unclear/unimportant </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Less novel, less original </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conclusions do not support the data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Results less important </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Results less interesting </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ethical questions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Unclear presentation </li></ul></ul>
  27. 28. Should I appeal? <ul><li>Usually, no </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Risk of long time to publication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Good papers are cited </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Editors and referees know journal </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Criticisms may be valid! </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Occasionally, yes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Importance / impact / novelty missed by editor/referees </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Need for a good cover letter! </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Factual errors in referee reports that led to rejection </li></ul></ul>Be calm and give scientific justification for reassessment
  28. 29. The digital world <ul><li>Print on its way out </li></ul><ul><li>EarlyView, ASAPs instead of issues </li></ul><ul><li>DOI becoming more important than page </li></ul><ul><li>numbers </li></ul>
  29. 30. The digital world <ul><li>Mobile access: iPad, iPhone, html vs. PDF </li></ul><ul><li>Read anywhere, not just print out </li></ul><ul><li>Enriched content, functional chemistry, supplementary/ToC videos… </li></ul>Image courtesy of Glenn Fleishman
  30. 31. New ways to find papers <ul><li>Papers discovered through searches and alerts, not issues </li></ul><ul><li>News sites, MaterialsViews.com… </li></ul><ul><li>Discussion sites, Nature Network, etc </li></ul><ul><li>Paper commenting: PLoS One… </li></ul><ul><li>Conference talks on your work vital </li></ul>
  31. 32. Conclusions <ul><li>Unpublished work is lost </li></ul><ul><li>Science output is growing fast </li></ul><ul><li>Access is huge and has never been greater </li></ul><ul><li>Peer review isn‘t perfect but it is the best we have </li></ul><ul><li>Competition is hard, so make your work stand out </li></ul><ul><li>How we access research is changing… </li></ul>
  32. 33. With thanks to… <ul><li>Dave Flanagan </li></ul><ul><li>Martin Ottmar </li></ul><ul><li>Matteo Cavalleri </li></ul>

×