Download to read offline
![Introduction
Introduce topic to readers in an accessible way
Should be short and focused
Aim for 3 paragraphs only.
PARA1: Question or issue, context, relevance [What is known]
PARA2: Importance of problem/unclear issues [What is unknown]
PARA3: Rationale, hypothesis, main objective [Why study was done]
Can be written at any point, but good to revisit at
the end.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/2013-03-25-masdar-130327025411-phpapp01/75/Writing-manuscripts-for-peer-reviewed-engineering-journals-26-2048.jpg)
Uploaded byChris Leonard
Writing manuscripts for peer reviewed engineering journals
The document outlines the process of getting published in a peer-reviewed journal, including the structure of articles, types of articles, and best practices for writing manuscripts. It discusses ethical issues, the importance of title and abstract, and provides guidance on the introduction, materials and methods, results, and discussion sections. Additionally, it emphasizes the role of authorship, the significance of references, and strategies for promoting published work.
Writing manuscripts for peer reviewed engineering journals
- 1. Good morning! And thanksfor inviting us to MASDAR.
- 2. Getting published ina peer-reviewed journal Christopher Leonard Editorial Director - QScience.com
- 4. What was ajournal? Journal des sçavans & Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society both started in 1665 Late 1800’s see the emergence of ‘theory- experiment-discussion’ structure of articles 1980’s see IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion) adopted widely as a reflection of the process of scientific discovery Print only, limited readership, limited number of titles
- 5. What is ajournal? Electronic-only, or e-leading, peer-reviewed selection of articles judged to be of a certain quality within a certain, narrow, field. Many papers publicly available via open access or PubMed/arXiv >20,000 active journal titles >5,500 papers per day published (2m/year)
- 6.
- 7. Editorials Written by Editoror invited guest Short, select and narrowly focused
- 8. Commentaries Commentaries may benarrative reviews, but somewhat more opinionated. Little research methodology, biased synthesis of a collection of articles. Usually there to provoke controversy or academic debate.
- 9. Review articles A comprehensivenarrative synthesis of previously published information, often summarising each key article. Bibliographic research methodology frequently a part of narrative reviews (although is not strictly required). Reputable sources only. Will provide in-depth snapshot of a field, convey a clear message and draw conclusions supported by data analysis.
- 10. Preparing to writea research manuscript
- 11. Target journal Think aboutthis before you start to write. Best journal for your article may not necessarily be best in the field. Has similar work been published in that journal? Check the I4As Tyranny of the Impact Factor.
- 12. CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE VOL.48NO.2 2008 PP.3-4
- 13. Authorship Sort this out before writing the manuscript*. Consult with coauthors, gather their ORCIDs. Otherwise, preferred name listing and affiliation. Usually listed in decreasing order of their contribution (although this can vary) Determine who is the corresponding author * READ THIS: Liz Wager’s excellent guide “Recognition, reward and repsonsibility: why the authorship of scientific papers matters” Maturitas 2009; 62:109-12
- 14. Ethical issues Fabrication of data Duplicate publication Plagiarism Misuse of statistics Manipulation of images Inadequate or false citations READ THIS: HTTP://PUBLICATIONETHICS.ORG/ MAINLY FOR EDITORS AND PUBLISHERS, BUT GIVES A GREAT INSIGHT INTO PROBLEMS SOME PAPERS FACE
- 15.
- 16. Title Title is THEmost important part of the paper. Decide on best title after writing the manuscript. Should be descriptive, not cute, and match the abstract. Not too general, not too much jargon.
- 17. Examples GOOD TITLE Astudy of thrombocytopenia in hospitalized vivax malaria patients BAD TITLES Physics of waves Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity Read more about this at http://physics.nyu.edu/sokal/
- 19. Abstract In Web ofScience/Scopus/Google Scholar. Think of it as a ‘teaser’ or ‘trailer’ for your paper. DON’T make it too long. Shorter is ALWAYS better DON’T introduce and define lots of acronyms DON’T include references to citations DO pitch it to non-specialists in your broader field DO write (or rewrite) it at THE END.
- 20. Background information Bibliographic researchto set research question in context. Make sure it is up-to-date (consider revising if first draft is more than 3 months old) - reviewers get very suspicious about missing citations. Papers over 10 years old, use with caution.
- 22. Abstract Context Question or purpose Methodology/Results Interpretation Conclusions ALL IN 250 WORDS OR LESS
- 23. Passage from theWikipedia article on "The English Language" The following paragraph has a Gunning Fog Index of 24.4. As a result of the military, economic, scientific, political, and cultural influence of the United Kingdom from the 18th century, and of the United States since the mid 20th century, it has become the lingua franca in many parts of the world, and the most prominent language in international business and science. It is used extensively as a second language and as an official language in the European Union and many Commonwealth countries, as well as many international organisations. Analysis ■There are 79 words in two sentences. ■The 17 italic words are considered complex. ■0.4 ((79/2) + 100(17/79)) ■0.4 x ( 39.5 + 12.79) ■Fog index = 24.4
- 24. The same passagesimplified The following paragraph has a Gunning Fog Index of 7.07. English has become the standard language around the world. This was the result of many factors. In the 1700s, the British affected English with the army, economy, science, politics and culture. In the mid-1900s, the United States caused change. It is the most used language in world business and science. It is a famous second language and an official language in most of Europe and in Commonwealth countries. It is also the case in groups around the world. Analysis ■There are 79 words in seven sentences. ■The 5 italic words are considered complex. ■0.4 ((79/7) + 100(5/79)) ■0.4 x ( 11.28 + 2.5) ■Fog index = 7.07
- 26. Introduction Introduce topic toreaders in an accessible way Should be short and focused Aim for 3 paragraphs only. PARA1: Question or issue, context, relevance [What is known] PARA2: Importance of problem/unclear issues [What is unknown] PARA3: Rationale, hypothesis, main objective [Why study was done] Can be written at any point, but good to revisit at the end.
- 27. Materials and methods Detailsrequired to replicate the study Should include; study design, data collection details, analysis principles and rationale. Describe sample selection and exclusion criteria Ethical considerations and a description of the randomization or group assignment.
- 28. Results Organised presentation ofthe collected data. Should be a distant semantic description with no interpretation or opinions. Include negative results and reasons for non- collection of information on important non- measured variables OConnor, T. R., & Holmquist, G. P. (2009). Algorithm for writing a scientific manuscript. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 37(6), 344-348. doi:10.1002/bmb.20329
- 29. Discussion Explain the meaningof the results, structured as a natural flow of ideas. Key findings should be linked to study objectives, along with an acknowledgement of the strengths and weaknesses of the study Describe logically, links between results and mechanistic interpretations of cause and effect. Are results consistent with other studies? If not, why not?
- 30. Discussion Don’t repeat yourself. Don’tpresent results not documented in Results Don’t overstate importance of results Do feel free to criticise study limitations Don’t repeat yourself.
- 31. Conclusion It’s not anotherAbstract or Introduction. Keep it short ‘Take home’ message Do not write: ‘further study is needed’ or any variation thereof.
- 32. Acknowledgements etc. Contributors whodo not qualify for author status Conflicts of interest Financial support for the research Group name if appropriate Author contributions
- 33. References Keep a goodreference library (Mendeley/Zotero) Make sure references adhere to journal style Avoid abstracts and ‘personal communications’ Exclude articles ‘in submission’ Authors responsibility to make sure they do not refer to retracted articles.
- 34. A word onfigures Please, please use your own figures They are easy to generate with sufficient data points and standard desktop software. Develop your own style/colour scheme. Difficult and expensive to get rights to figures published by other publishers (>$150/figure) Scans and photos should be highest possible resolution. Don’t just embed in Word - we need source files.
- 35.
- 36. Reviews & revisions Viewpeer reviewers as collaborators rather than enemies They often make constructive remarks which should improve the quality of the paper Good editors will shield you from performing more experiments (unless it’s Nature or Science) For each point the reviewer makes, provide a brief note explaining how you have incorporated their remark, or a rebuttal.
- 37.
- 38. Promotion You are themarketer of your own work (usually) Link to your article from your facebook/twitter/ linkedin/orcid page Departmental website, institution PR department? Mendeley, scribd, list-servs, other discussion boards and lists
- 41. A brief noteon open access
- 43. WHAT ABOUT IMPACTFACTORS/PROMOTION/TENURE/ WHAT MY FACULTY/COAUTHORS EXPECT? READ: HTTP://WWW.MICHAELEISEN.ORG/BLOG/?P=911
- 44. Thanks. And goodluck.
- 45.
- 46. cjamesleonard@qf.org.qa www.qscience.com www.twitter.com/qscience