The document discusses etiquette and ethics in research and scientific publishing. It provides 3 key points: 1) Ethics involve doing what is right, such as not fabricating or falsifying data. Etiquette involves doing what is polite, such as not submitting the same paper to multiple journals at once. 2) Proper citation of sources is important etiquette. This includes citing one's own work when relevant and not citing works one has not read. 3) Reviewers should write reviews to help authors improve, not belittle them, and treat manuscripts confidentially. Conflicts of interest should be disclosed.

1. Etiquette in research and scientific
publishing
‫والنشرالعلمى‬ ‫البحث‬ ‫إتيكتيت‬
‫الع‬ ‫بكلية‬ ‫اآللي‬ ‫الحاسب‬ ‫علوم‬ ‫قسم‬ ‫مع‬ ‫بالتعاون‬‫لوم‬-
‫بالجبيل‬ ‫اإلنسانية‬ ‫والدراسات‬–‫عبد‬ ‫االمام‬ ‫جامعة‬
‫فيصل‬ ‫بن‬ ‫الرحمن‬–‫السعودية‬ ‫العربية‬ ‫المملكة‬
‫حسني‬ ‫عطيفى‬ ‫ابوالعال‬ ‫الدكتور‬ ‫االستاذ‬‫ن‬
‫المصرية‬ ‫البحثية‬ ‫العلمية‬ ‫المدرسة‬ ‫ورئيس‬ ‫مؤسس‬
–‫المعلومات‬ ‫وتكنولوجيا‬ ‫االتصاالت‬ ‫مجلس‬ ‫مقرر‬–
‫العلمى‬ ‫البحث‬ ‫أكاديمية‬-‫بكلية‬ ‫واألستاذ‬‫الحاسبا‬‫ت‬
‫اإلصطناعى‬ ‫والذكاء‬–‫القاهرة‬ ‫جامعة‬-‫على‬ ‫الحاصل‬
‫العلمى‬ ‫للبحث‬ ‫العالمية‬ ‫سكوبس‬ ‫جائزة‬2019‫وجائزة‬
‫والثقافة‬ ‫للعلوم‬ ‫االسالمية‬ ‫الدول‬ ‫منظمة‬(‫اإليسيسك‬‫و‬)
‫أرجوك‬ ‫البيت‬ ‫فى‬ ‫خليك‬
‫أرجوك‬‫البيت‬‫فى‬‫خليك‬
‫السبت‬‫الموافق‬18‫ابريل‬2020‫مساء‬ ‫الثامنة‬ ‫الساعة‬

2. OBJECTIVES
Doing research
discoveries - inventions
Innovation
Humanity
Share discoveries and knowledge • Gain
prestige and recognition • Required for
program/degree • Assessment in some
careers based on publications

3. Article life cycle

4. A scientist’s value equation
1
• Benefits to Others
•‫اآلخرين‬ ‫حياة‬ ‫تحسين‬
2
• Quality/reproducibility
•‫ا‬‫ال‬‫قاب‬ ‫كان‬ ‫إذا‬ ‫فقط‬ ‫قيمة‬ ‫ذا‬ ‫بحثك‬ ‫يكون‬
‫للتكرار‬
3
• Efficiency
•‫بذكاء‬ ‫العمل‬ ‫إلى‬ ‫العلماء‬ ‫يحتاج‬
The value of a person’s work = benefits
to others x quality x efficiency

5. Happy – ALL become
Happy
Author Editor Associated Editor Reviewers Reader s
Happiness

6. Habits That Will Make You
Happy
1. Be grateful
2. Choose your research team wisely
3. Keep learning.
4. Become a problem solver.
5. Do research in what you love.
6. Practice forgiveness.
7. Say thanks often.
8. Create deeper connections
9. Keep your agreement.
10. Focus on what you’re doing.
11. Be optimistic
12. Love unconditionally
•‫ممتنا‬ ‫كن‬-‫شاكرا‬–‫عمل‬ ‫من‬ ‫بة‬ ‫تقوم‬ ‫ما‬ ‫على‬ ‫راضيا‬
•‫بحكمة‬ ‫البحث‬ ‫فريق‬ ‫اختر‬
•‫التعلم‬ ‫في‬ ‫استمر‬
•‫دائما‬ ‫حلول‬ ‫تقديم‬
•‫تحب‬ ‫ما‬ ‫في‬ ‫بالبحث‬ ‫قم‬
•‫الصفح‬ ‫مارس‬
•‫البحثى‬ ‫فريق‬ ‫فى‬ ‫معك‬ ‫يعمل‬ ‫من‬ ‫ا‬‫ا‬‫كثير‬ ‫أشكر‬
•‫عميقة‬ ‫اتصاالت‬ ‫إنشاء‬
•‫اتفاقك‬ ‫على‬ ‫حافظ‬
•‫تفعله‬ ‫ما‬ ‫على‬ ‫ركز‬
•‫متفائل‬ ‫كن‬
•‫شروط‬ ‫بدون‬ ‫الحب‬
SRGE Reveals Habits That Will Make You
Happy, Successful, Guaranteed!

7. Eight Habits of a Highly Productive
Researcher
(1) Start Early (2) Plan Ahead
(3) Start with the Task You Do Not Want to Do
(4) Finish What You Start
(5) Set Goals and Reward Yourself
(6) Break Bad Habits (Staying in your seat all day,
Accepting every meeting, multitasking (2% …..
(7) Limit Distractions (smart phone, email …..
(8) Take Care of Yourself
(8) Many junior researchers
fall into the trap of working
harder and longer hours at
the cost of their personal
well-being.
(7) Distractions are everywhere:
your smart phone, email
notifications or even the chatter of
loud coworkers. Productive
researchers know to eliminate these
distractions.
(5) Working towards a goal
can keep you motivated and
productive.
(3) Start with the most
difficult tasks instead of
putting them off until the
end of the day
(1) Getting in the habit
of starting right away
may help you tackle
tasks more efficiently.
(2) Making a to-do list
on a regular basis is
one of the most
effective ways to
increase your
productivity in the lab.
Take a few minutes at
the end of each week to
plan for the following
week, and identify the
highest priority tasks.

8. ‫مصر‬ ‫فى‬ ‫البحثى‬ ‫المجال‬ ‫على‬ ‫الفردية‬ ‫النزعة‬
•‫الفرديــة‬ ‫النزعــة‬ ‫ســيطرة‬
‫وعــد‬ ،‫البحثــي‬ ‫المجــال‬ ‫علــى‬‫م‬
‫مؤسســات‬ ‫معظــم‬ ‫اهتمــام‬
‫ال‬ ‫بفكــرة‬ ‫العــالي‬ ‫التعلــيم‬‫بحــث‬
‫فيــ‬ ‫يشــارك‬ ‫الــذي‬ ‫الجمــاعي‬‫ه‬
‫البـاحثي‬ ‫مـن‬ ‫متكامـل‬ ‫فريــق‬،‫ن‬
‫أعضـاء‬ ‫مسـتوى‬ ‫علـى‬ ‫سـواء‬
‫علـى‬ ‫أو‬ ،‫التـدريس‬ ‫هيئـة‬
‫المراحل‬ ‫في‬ ‫الطالب‬ ‫مستوى‬
‫المختلفة‬ ‫التعليمية‬.
‫البحثية‬ ‫المدارس‬ ‫غياب‬

9. How did you feel
when your first
research paper was
published?
What happens after
your manuscript is
accepted for
publication?
Feeling happy

10. Science is matter of trust
– Trust obligations towards colleagues
– Trust obligations towards society
– Trust obligations towards yourself
• Failing to honor trust obligations
may have a significant negative
impact on Science, Society,
Colleagues, your own career

11. Ethics and Etiquette
in Scientific Publication
• Ethics: doing what’s right
• Etiquette: doing what’s polite
– Perhaps put another way:
• Ethics: Don’t be a crook (‫!)محتال‬
• Etiquette: Don’t be a jerk (‫!)احمق‬
Crook :.Fabricating findings • Falsifying data • Plagiarizing
Jerk:. Submitting a paper to multiple journals
at the same time
Disregarding instructions to authors
Returning page proofs late
Scientific Publication

12. Ethics
• Lie (Fabrications)
• Cheat (Falsifications)
• Steal (Plagiarism (results…))
DO NOT DO

13. Etiquette in the Scientific Community
Dealing with Problems
Get your advisor's advice. ● If you have a problem with your
advisor, discuss it with him or her before seeking outside
opinions. ● If necessary, speak confidentially with some other
senior scientist whose opinions you respect.
The university has a formal policy for handling misconduct allegations.

14. Etiquette in the Scientific Community
Email Etiquette

15. It is not acceptable to submit the
same manuscript for review in
multiple journals at the same time
Duplicate Submissions Etiquette
you can send pre-
submission inquiries to
several journals at the
same time. You can
write to the editor of
each journal giving a
brief summary of your
study, and ask them if
they would be
interested in it. You can
then submit to any one
journal depending on
how positive the reply
of the editor is.

16. Preparing Your Manuscript
Etiquette
Instructions for
Authors

17. Reuse of Published Materials
Etiquette
Diagrams/figures from
an existing paper
! Redrawn with
modifications => should
cite and indicated
“adapted from” or
“based on”

18. Citation Etiquette
Citing The Source of an Idea
• Adding “eye of newt” to the
mixture produced a higher
reaction rate and, ultimately, a
far more potent product1.
____________________
• 1We are grateful to Mr. A. E.
Newman, a high school
student who was visiting our
lab for the day, for suggesting
this important step.
Citing work did not read
• Some robots use inertial
guidance for maintaining
heading information in
unfamiliar environments. There
is evidence for a similar
mechanism in the
parietal/retrosplenial cortex of
rats (Smith, 2005, citing Chen,
1989)
Cite your own papers when they are relevant,
not to increase your own citation counts

19. Make no changes and
submit to another
journal
• While this option is very easy, it’s not a good
idea. By refusing to acknowledge any of the
changes that the first set of reviewers suggested,
you are basically negating all the effort
expended in that first round of review.
• Chances are that some of the suggestions would
improve your manuscript, even if some were
mistaken.
• New reviewers are likely to pick up on several
of the same issues; you now have a chance to
address them ahead of time. And on a more
practical note, your manuscript may actually be
reviewed by some of the same people at a new
journal. If you haven’t made any efforts to
change the paper, be assured that their
recommendation will not change!

20. Text recycling
“Self-plagiarism in scientific writing”
• Dr. TOTO has decided to report on the results of a
recent research study in which he discovered a novel
application in nanotechnology. Previously, Dr. TOTO has
co-authored several papers on same methodology, so
he plans to incorporate a few paragraphs from the
discussion section from one of his previously published
works part of the current paper’s introduction because
the required information is quite similar. He wrote the
original text for the first paper; thus, Dr. TOTO does not
see any problem using his own words in a different
context for a new publication.
In this scenario, Dr. TOTO should
• A) Keep his text verbatim in this new paper
without referencing the original publication
– because he is simply reusing his own work
in a different context
• B) Paraphrase his original text in this new paper
without mentioning his previous publications
– because he is rephrasing her own ideas
• C) Change the wording and sentence structure of
his original text in this new paper, but reference
his previous
• D)Use his original text, but explicitly quote the
original paragraphs and reference the previous
paper.
Case scenario
Text recycling, a form of plagiarism, and not an ethical
publication practice. [COPE]
Text recycling, also referred to as self-plagiarism, is the reproduction of an author’s own text from a previous
publication in a new publication. Opinions on the acceptability of this practice vary, with some viewing it as
acceptable and efficient, and others as misleading and unacceptable.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6451734/

21. Salami science or
cucumber science
Not republishing the same findings
(except under special
circumstances, with the original
source cited)
Not dividing one modest-sized
research project into many little
papers (“salami science” or
“cucumber science”

22. Reviewer Etiquette Matters
Peer reviewers should carefully consider the
language they use in their reviews and the
impact of their words on authors. We are
asking reviewers to be thoughtful with their
word choice, writing reviews in a way that
will enable authors to improve the quality of
their manuscripts without feeling belittled
harsh comment
I don’t understand why this work was
conducted. This manuscript was a complete
waste of time.

23. Reviewer Etiquette Matters
Treat manuscripts as confidential
Don't turn the manuscript you just reviewed
into a course handout, even if it's
wonderfully relevant. – Wait until it's
published.

24. Reviewer Etiquette Matters
Conflict of Interest
Either decline to review the manuscript, or
fully disclose the conflict to the editor.
In some cases, it may be appropriate to
submit a signed review, to prevent any
accusation of bias.

25. Reviewer Etiquette Matters
Contacting An Author
Either decline to review the manuscript, or
fully disclose the conflict to the editor.
In some cases, it may be appropriate to
submit a signed review, to prevent any
accusation of bias.

26. Acknowledge People Who
• Provide pointers to papers for the
bibliography
• Help with debugging some tricky code
• Help with typesetting or illustrations
• Provide significant resources, e.g., loan
of equipment, tissue samples, etc.

27. • Be a good academic citizen
• Know what you’re doing
• Keep track of what you’ve done
• Back everything up
• Don’t Lie (fabrications)
• Don’t Cheat (falsifications)
• Don’t Steal (plagiarism)
• Publish your discoveries
Finally…
Most basic rule of all:
“Don't do anything that would embarrass you
if people found out about it.”