Some devils, a few details and a couple of dilemmas in the search for sustain...
Tshwane University of Technology Faculty Publication Shortcourse 12-13 June 2013
1. Facilitated byFacilitated by
STEPHEN MCCOOLSTEPHEN MCCOOL
THE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANATHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA
MISSOULA, MONTANAMISSOULA, MONTANA
Building a Faculty Publication Record:Building a Faculty Publication Record:
A Course Presented byA Course Presented by
Tshwane University of TechnologyTshwane University of Technology
and The University of Montanaand The University of Montana
2. BackgroundBackground
Life-long academicLife-long academic
Over 200 publications emphasizingOver 200 publications emphasizing
Visitor management in protected areasVisitor management in protected areas
Sustainable tourismSustainable tourism
Public engagement in planning and managementPublic engagement in planning and management
New ways of thinking about planningNew ways of thinking about planning
Served as an Associate Editor or Reviewer forServed as an Associate Editor or Reviewer for
a number of journalsa number of journals
Work collaboratively with African writersWork collaboratively with African writers
3.
4. Course GoalsCourse Goals
ImmediateImmediate
Understanding of the manuscript preparation andUnderstanding of the manuscript preparation and
submission processsubmission process
Long termLong term
Build confidence in writing and publicationBuild confidence in writing and publication
Increase publication output of TUTIncrease publication output of TUT
Enhance the contribution of TUT to national goalsEnhance the contribution of TUT to national goals
through respected research andthrough respected research and
developmentdevelopment
5. Course ProceduresCourse Procedures
Facilitated discussionFacilitated discussion
Everyone has experience or expertise to contributeEveryone has experience or expertise to contribute
Small group exercisesSmall group exercises
Provide opportunities to develop review skillsProvide opportunities to develop review skills
Large group discussionsLarge group discussions
Publication issues common across fieldsPublication issues common across fields
ExamplesExamples
Bring the abstract to reality; yours and mineBring the abstract to reality; yours and mine
AdaptabilityAdaptability
6. Course ComponentsCourse Components
Science Publications in ContemporaryScience Publications in Contemporary
AcademiaAcademia
Emphasizes theEmphasizes the WhyWhy
Constructing the ManuscriptConstructing the Manuscript
Focuses on theFocuses on the WhatWhat
Producing the PublicationProducing the Publication
Highlights theHighlights the HowHow
7. Key ReferenceKey Reference
Day, R.A., and B. Gastel. 2006. How to writeDay, R.A., and B. Gastel. 2006. How to write
and publish a scientific paper (6and publish a scientific paper (6thth
edition).edition).
Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.
8. Importance of Peer ReviewedImportance of Peer Reviewed
PublicationPublication
Knowledge has limited value if notKnowledge has limited value if not
disseminateddisseminated
Scientific knowledge must be disseminated inScientific knowledge must be disseminated in
particular waysparticular ways
Ensures credibility and quality of workEnsures credibility and quality of work
Brings prestige and status to university,Brings prestige and status to university,
attracting students and fundingattracting students and funding
Completes the research processCompletes the research process
Complements teachingComplements teaching
9. What Purposes DoesWhat Purposes Does
Publication Serve?Publication Serve?
Advances knowledgeAdvances knowledge
Makes others aware of workMakes others aware of work
Helps build community of scientific practiceHelps build community of scientific practice
Results in improved managementResults in improved management
Builds sensitivity to consequences of actionsBuilds sensitivity to consequences of actions
10. But, Publication of Scientific FindingsBut, Publication of Scientific Findings
Must Meet Certain Quality StandardsMust Meet Certain Quality Standards
Publication of findings occurs in scientificPublication of findings occurs in scientific
journals and at conferencesjournals and at conferences
These are the principal means of formalThese are the principal means of formal
communication among scientistscommunication among scientists
Such publication requires an independentSuch publication requires an independent
judgment about quality of the research andjudgment about quality of the research and
manuscriptmanuscript
Publication decisions follow a public andPublication decisions follow a public and
explicit processexplicit process
11. Writing Should Be Done With …Writing Should Be Done With …
Clarity (to communicate)Clarity (to communicate)
Explicitness (for understandability)Explicitness (for understandability)
Detail (for reproducibility)Detail (for reproducibility)
12. Types of Scientific ManuscriptsTypes of Scientific Manuscripts
Data basedData based
QuantitativeQuantitative
PrimaryPrimary
SecondarySecondary
QualitativeQualitative
ReviewReview
Synthesize literatureSynthesize literature
Propose new theories, approachesPropose new theories, approaches
OthersOthers
Book reviews, opinion, responseBook reviews, opinion, response
13. What Does “peer reviewed” Mean?What Does “peer reviewed” Mean?
Peers are colleagues with similar interests andPeers are colleagues with similar interests and
expertiseexpertise
Peer review generally conductedPeer review generally conducted
independently and anonymouslyindependently and anonymously
Peers use their experience and expertise toPeers use their experience and expertise to
judge how well a manuscript meets thejudge how well a manuscript meets the
journal’s criteria and general scientific criteriajournal’s criteria and general scientific criteria
14. What is a “technically refereed”What is a “technically refereed”
Journal?Journal?
Technically refereed means another personTechnically refereed means another person
manages the review process and makes themanages the review process and makes the
publication decisionpublication decision
Selected and managed by another person,Selected and managed by another person,
usually a journal editorusually a journal editor
Decision to publish is held by editorDecision to publish is held by editor
15. Peer Review ProcessPeer Review Process
Submit unpublished manuscriptSubmit unpublished manuscript
Editor selects Associate Editor to manageEditor selects Associate Editor to manage
reviewsreviews
Peers review and evaluate manuscriptPeers review and evaluate manuscript
Associate Editor reads reviews and manuscriptAssociate Editor reads reviews and manuscript
Makes recommendation to EditorMakes recommendation to Editor
Editor makes decision and notifies author(s)Editor makes decision and notifies author(s)
16. Criteria for Evaluating ManuscriptCriteria for Evaluating Manuscript
Each journal has ownEach journal has own
But, generally:But, generally:
Problem framedProblem framed
Research is new and of interest to journal readersResearch is new and of interest to journal readers
Methods appropriately described and usedMethods appropriately described and used
Conclusions based on resultsConclusions based on results
OthersOthers
Clarity of presentationClarity of presentation
Importance of problemImportance of problem
Salience to journal goalsSalience to journal goals
17. Overview of Publication ProcessOverview of Publication Process
Prepare proposal to conduct researchPrepare proposal to conduct research
Conduct researchConduct research
Write manuscript draftWrite manuscript draft
Submit to journalSubmit to journal
Manuscript reviewedManuscript reviewed
Editor decisionEditor decision
Manuscript revisedManuscript revised
Manuscript acceptedManuscript accepted
Manuscript publishedManuscript published
18. Prepare Proposal and ConductPrepare Proposal and Conduct
ResearchResearch
Successful publication starts with the proposalSuccessful publication starts with the proposal
and continues with the researchand continues with the research
Research that is not well founded, lacks aResearch that is not well founded, lacks a
conceptual basis, executed poorly, or usesconceptual basis, executed poorly, or uses
inappropriate methodology is unlikely to beinappropriate methodology is unlikely to be
publishablepublishable
Only stage of the process that cannot beOnly stage of the process that cannot be
changedchanged
19. Proposal KeysProposal Keys
Find colleagues to review proposalFind colleagues to review proposal
Do adequate literature searchDo adequate literature search
Document relevancy and significance ofDocument relevancy and significance of
problemproblem
Link research to a conceptual foundationLink research to a conceptual foundation
20. To What Journal Do You Submit?To What Journal Do You Submit?
Decision to be made prior to writingDecision to be made prior to writing
manuscriptmanuscript
Tailor manuscript to journal audienceTailor manuscript to journal audience
Need to know format requirementsNeed to know format requirements
Journals vary in their reputation and respectJournals vary in their reputation and respect
they receive—journal impactthey receive—journal impact
Read Aims and Scope for journalRead Aims and Scope for journal
Review articles published in issues to get aReview articles published in issues to get a
sense of the topicssense of the topics
21. So, How Do You Prepare aSo, How Do You Prepare a
Manuscript?Manuscript?
What is the goal?What is the goal?
What story do you want to tell?What story do you want to tell?
Who will be the audience?Who will be the audience?
What are the journal requirements ?What are the journal requirements ?
Length, organization, etc.Length, organization, etc.
Who are the authors?Who are the authors?
What time do you have for writing?What time do you have for writing?
What kind of manuscript?What kind of manuscript?
22. Manuscript PreparationManuscript Preparation
Two prerequisites to successful publicationTwo prerequisites to successful publication
Good research designGood research design
Only part of process that cannot be changedOnly part of process that cannot be changed
Framing of the question or subject of the researchFraming of the question or subject of the research
Necessary but not sufficientNecessary but not sufficient
23. Other ConditionsOther Conditions
Facilitative administrative climateFacilitative administrative climate
Time to writeTime to write
Don’t drop ms. for long periods of timeDon’t drop ms. for long periods of time
Find a time of day to think and writeFind a time of day to think and write
Good command of languageGood command of language
Get editor if notGet editor if not
Grasp of the relevant literatureGrasp of the relevant literature
Open to critiqueOpen to critique
Tough at times, reviewers constructiveTough at times, reviewers constructive
PersistencePersistence
24. Some Ethical ConsiderationsSome Ethical Considerations
Authorship (more on this later)Authorship (more on this later)
Acknowledgements of prior researchAcknowledgements of prior research
AuthenticityAuthenticity
OriginalityOriginality
Always credit othersAlways credit others
25. Who Are the Authors?Who Are the Authors?
Single or multiple authorshipSingle or multiple authorship
Authorship order is a BIG dealAuthorship order is a BIG deal
Role of each authorRole of each author
How do you decide?How do you decide?
Generally speaking, first author did most ofGenerally speaking, first author did most of
the work or developed ideathe work or developed idea
Special case of graduate studentsSpecial case of graduate students
26. Elements of the ManuscriptElements of the Manuscript
Conceptual organizationConceptual organization
Practical organizationPractical organization
27. Conceptual OrganizationConceptual Organization
The questionThe question
What is the paper about?What is the paper about?
MethodsMethods
How was the research collected?How was the research collected?
ResultsResults
What were the outcomes of the research?What were the outcomes of the research?
DiscussionDiscussion
What does it all mean?What does it all mean?
28. Practical OrganizationPractical Organization
Varies somewhat by journalVaries somewhat by journal
But most likely:But most likely:
AbstractAbstract
IntroductionIntroduction
Conceptual Framework/Literature ReviewConceptual Framework/Literature Review
MethodsMethods
ResultsResults
DiscussionDiscussion
ConclusionConclusion
But seeBut see Instructions to AuthorsInstructions to Authors
30. Small Group ExerciseSmall Group Exercise
Review assigned manuscriptReview assigned manuscript
How well has the author(s) described theHow well has the author(s) described the
problem and the conceptual foundation for theproblem and the conceptual foundation for the
manuscript?manuscript?
Purpose of the manuscriptPurpose of the manuscript
Review of the conceptual foundationReview of the conceptual foundation
Recommendations for improvementRecommendations for improvement
31. Introduction SectionIntroduction Section
PurposePurpose
Describe scope, context and importance ofDescribe scope, context and importance of
research questionresearch question
IssuesIssues
Lack of statement ofLack of statement of
Research questionResearch question
ObjectivesObjectives
Organization of paperOrganization of paper
32. The Introduction:The Introduction:
What it DoesWhat it Does
Describes/frames the questionDescribes/frames the question
its context andits context and
why it is importantwhy it is important
33. The Introduction:The Introduction:
Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation
Generally, relatively short (500-750 words orGenerally, relatively short (500-750 words or
so)so)
Cites a bit of literatureCites a bit of literature
Finishes with the goals of the paperFinishes with the goals of the paper
Goes from the broad to the narrowGoes from the broad to the narrow
Funnel approachFunnel approach
Describes context and place of research in thatDescribes context and place of research in that
contextcontext
34. Introduction SectionIntroduction Section
Write in one sentence to yourself the purpose ofWrite in one sentence to yourself the purpose of
the paperthe paper
““This paper addresses the relationship betweenThis paper addresses the relationship between
vulnerable populations and access to health care.”vulnerable populations and access to health care.”
Provide sense of importance:Provide sense of importance:
““low income families are at a higher risk of disease;low income families are at a higher risk of disease;
reducing such risk requires access to healthcare”reducing such risk requires access to healthcare”
Provide salience:Provide salience:
““Health care costs can be reduced by providingHealth care costs can be reduced by providing
efficient, equitable access to vulnerable populations”efficient, equitable access to vulnerable populations”
35. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/Conceptual
Framework SectionFramework Section
PurposePurpose
Refine the problem statement, identify keyRefine the problem statement, identify key
variables, develop hypothesesvariables, develop hypotheses
IssuesIssues
AdequacyAdequacy
RelevancyRelevancy
FoundationFoundation
36. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/Conceptual
Framework:Framework:
What it DoesWhat it Does
Refines the problem statementRefines the problem statement
Develop a conceptual background needed forDevelop a conceptual background needed for
the methodologythe methodology
Identify and provide foundation for researchIdentify and provide foundation for research
hypotheseshypotheses
Provide reader with understanding of gaps inProvide reader with understanding of gaps in
knowledge or priority needsknowledge or priority needs
37. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/Conceptual
Framework:Framework:
Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation
Often requires considerable “library” timeOften requires considerable “library” time
Much of this can be conducted in researchMuch of this can be conducted in research
proposal stageproposal stage
Literature is searched for papers working onLiterature is searched for papers working on
similar questions and/or conceptssimilar questions and/or concepts
Written in present tense primarilyWritten in present tense primarily
38. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/Conceptual
Framework SectionFramework Section
AdequacyAdequacy
What are the principal references dealing with theWhat are the principal references dealing with the
research question?research question?
How do those references help you and the readerHow do those references help you and the reader
understand the problem?understand the problem?
What key findings exist that help you frame theWhat key findings exist that help you frame the
question?question?
39. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/Conceptual
Framework SectionFramework Section
RelevancyRelevancy
Do the references help identify key variables orDo the references help identify key variables or
establish hypotheses?establish hypotheses?
Literature provides foundation for methods andLiterature provides foundation for methods and
helps interpret resultshelps interpret results
What literature helps develop a framework for theWhat literature helps develop a framework for the
question?question?
40. Literature Review/ConceptualLiterature Review/Conceptual
Framework SectionFramework Section
Introduce concepts to lay a foundation forIntroduce concepts to lay a foundation for
later uselater use
Use a segue to introduce conceptsUse a segue to introduce concepts
““Smith and others (1990) found thatSmith and others (1990) found that
vulnerability to disease was a function ofvulnerability to disease was a function of
several variables, including location ofseveral variables, including location of
residency and income. The “V” index is anresidency and income. The “V” index is an
overall measure of such vulnerability .”overall measure of such vulnerability .”
Rather than in the methods “the V-index wasRather than in the methods “the V-index was
calculated by …” without a previous mentioncalculated by …” without a previous mention
41.
42.
43.
44. Methods SectionMethods Section
PurposePurpose
Explain/describe methods used in just enoughExplain/describe methods used in just enough
detail so that the research can be replicateddetail so that the research can be replicated
Population and how sampledPopulation and how sampled
Independent and dependent variables and howIndependent and dependent variables and how
measuredmeasured
Analysis approach and techniquesAnalysis approach and techniques
45. Methods:Methods:
What it DoesWhat it Does
Experimental designExperimental design
TreatmentsTreatments
Population and how sampledPopulation and how sampled
Materials usedMaterials used
Principal dependent and independent variablesPrincipal dependent and independent variables
(e.g., what was measured and how)(e.g., what was measured and how)
Why these methods were chosenWhy these methods were chosen
46. Methods SectionMethods Section
Behind every measure is a conceptBehind every measure is a concept
Was it discussed in the literature review?Was it discussed in the literature review?
Behind every analysis is a hypothesisBehind every analysis is a hypothesis
Were potential relationships mentioned in theWere potential relationships mentioned in the
literature review?literature review?
47. Methods SectionMethods Section
IssuesIssues
Principally, lack of detailPrincipally, lack of detail
Limitations not recognizedLimitations not recognized
Discussion of results included in sectionDiscussion of results included in section
48. Methods SectionMethods Section
““The population for this study consisted of adults (agedThe population for this study consisted of adults (aged
18 and over) living in the Caprivi region of Namibia.”18 and over) living in the Caprivi region of Namibia.”
““This population was sampled through a hierarchalThis population was sampled through a hierarchal
methodology: First, clinics were randomly sampled formethodology: First, clinics were randomly sampled for
the study, then residents visiting those clinics werethe study, then residents visiting those clinics were
selected as they entered the clinic on randomly selectedselected as they entered the clinic on randomly selected
days during the three summer months of 2010.”days during the three summer months of 2010.”
““This sampling methodology is designed to beThis sampling methodology is designed to be
representative only of those with illness and withrepresentative only of those with illness and with
access to the clinic. Thus, the results may notaccess to the clinic. Thus, the results may not
adequately represent those ill patients without means ofadequately represent those ill patients without means of
access.”access.”
49.
50. Methods:Methods:
Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation
Written in past tenseWritten in past tense
Summarize research design from proposal orSummarize research design from proposal or
study planstudy plan
Do not need all the detail, just enough forDo not need all the detail, just enough for
someone else to replicate the studysomeone else to replicate the study
51. Small Group Exercise 2Small Group Exercise 2
What methodologies were used and do thoseWhat methodologies were used and do those
methodologies seem appropriate for themethodologies seem appropriate for the
question?question?
Research design, population, independentResearch design, population, independent
variables, dependent variablesvariables, dependent variables
How variables measuredHow variables measured
Recommendations to strengthenRecommendations to strengthen
methodologies, particularly analysismethodologies, particularly analysis
52. Results:Results:
What it DoesWhat it Does
Describes the outcome of the researchDescribes the outcome of the research
identified in the introduction and conceptualidentified in the introduction and conceptual
framework sectionframework section
Involves a simple reporting of outcomesInvolves a simple reporting of outcomes
53. Results:Results:
Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation
May involve two components:May involve two components:
1. description of principal variables1. description of principal variables
2. testing of hypotheses with inferential statistics2. testing of hypotheses with inferential statistics
Focused on the hypotheses or questionsFocused on the hypotheses or questions
Use tables or figures only when neededUse tables or figures only when needed
Do not repeat data or statistics shown in tablesDo not repeat data or statistics shown in tables
or figuresor figures
Use past tenseUse past tense
54. Implications/Discussion:Implications/Discussion:
What it DoesWhat it Does
Interpret results within the context of theInterpret results within the context of the
literature review/conceptual frameworkliterature review/conceptual framework
Discusses relationships between variablesDiscusses relationships between variables
Challenge existing results or theoriesChallenge existing results or theories
Suggest future researchSuggest future research
Describe implications for practiceDescribe implications for practice
55. Implications/Discussion:Implications/Discussion:
Hints for PreparationHints for Preparation
Nature of this section varies from journal toNature of this section varies from journal to
journaljournal
Refer back to literature and introductionRefer back to literature and introduction
Point out particularly significant results, suchPoint out particularly significant results, such
as surprises or inconsistenciesas surprises or inconsistencies
Do not repeat resultsDo not repeat results
Mixture of past and present tenseMixture of past and present tense
56. Conclusion:Conclusion:
What it DoesWhat it Does
Provides final summary of research andProvides final summary of research and
implicationsimplications
May suggest new research lines resulting fromMay suggest new research lines resulting from
Discussion sectionDiscussion section
Describes overall results and implications forDescribes overall results and implications for
broader contextbroader context
May suggest a few lines of future researchMay suggest a few lines of future research
58. Literature CitedLiterature Cited
Ideas, facts, concepts not your own must beIdeas, facts, concepts not your own must be
citedcited
Generally, citation is of scientific/technicalGenerally, citation is of scientific/technical
articlesarticles
Gray literature versus white literatureGray literature versus white literature
Citation style – see journal guidelinesCitation style – see journal guidelines
Gather literature before writingGather literature before writing
Use citation softwareUse citation software
59. Abstract:Abstract:
What it DoesWhat it Does
Single paragraph summarizing researchSingle paragraph summarizing research
reportedreported
150-300 words150-300 words
Last component of the paper writtenLast component of the paper written
Note: conferences sometimes differentNote: conferences sometimes different
No cited literature, tables or figuresNo cited literature, tables or figures
60. Tables and FiguresTables and Figures
Basic purpose is to display information that isBasic purpose is to display information that is
difficult for a narrativedifficult for a narrative
Information may be:Information may be:
Quantitative statisticsQuantitative statistics
Trends or relationships graphedTrends or relationships graphed
Qualitative data such as quotesQualitative data such as quotes
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67. Tables and FiguresTables and Figures
Keep simpleKeep simple
Independent variables columns (or X axis)Independent variables columns (or X axis)
Dependent variables rows (or Y axis)Dependent variables rows (or Y axis)
Tables explicitly labeled, should stand byTables explicitly labeled, should stand by
themselvesthemselves
Consider page size of journalConsider page size of journal
68. Writing and EditingWriting and Editing
Which authors will do whatWhich authors will do what
Clarify rolesClarify roles
Lead author writes initial draftLead author writes initial draft
Authors write various sectionsAuthors write various sections
Create a statement of purpose firstCreate a statement of purpose first
Develop outlineDevelop outline
Use complete sentencesUse complete sentences
Write from outlineWrite from outline
69. Writing and EditingWriting and Editing
Circulate drafts of everythingCirculate drafts of everything
Find non-involved colleague(s) for review orFind non-involved colleague(s) for review or
talking throughtalking through
Be familiar with journal requirements (e.g.,Be familiar with journal requirements (e.g.,
manuscript length, organization, citation style,manuscript length, organization, citation style,
etc.)etc.)
May need to get an editor to help withMay need to get an editor to help with
language and organizationlanguage and organization
70. Submitting the ManuscriptSubmitting the Manuscript
Invited submissionsInvited submissions
Normal submissionsNormal submissions
Both will go through a review processBoth will go through a review process
Most journals now have online submissionMost journals now have online submission
Manuscript should be written cognizant ofManuscript should be written cognizant of
journal audiencejournal audience
71. Submitting the ManuscriptSubmitting the Manuscript
Prior to submission,Prior to submission,
Understand manuscript requirements, e.g., format,Understand manuscript requirements, e.g., format,
tables and figures, literature citation method,tables and figures, literature citation method,
lengthlength
Carefully review submission process, e.g.,Carefully review submission process, e.g.,
cover letter, where and how the file iscover letter, where and how the file is
uploaded, need for separate files for tables anduploaded, need for separate files for tables and
figuresfigures
72. Small Group Exercise 3Small Group Exercise 3
Are the conclusions consistent with the dataAre the conclusions consistent with the data
presented?presented?
How did you make your decision?How did you make your decision?
What changes in the conclusion would youWhat changes in the conclusion would you
recommend?recommend?
73. The Review ProcessThe Review Process
Can send shudders through your whole body!Can send shudders through your whole body!
Purpose of the review is to ensure the researchPurpose of the review is to ensure the research
portrayed has been conductedportrayed has been conducted
AppropriatelyAppropriately
EthicallyEthically
With high standards of professional conductWith high standards of professional conduct
And is originalAnd is original
74. The Review ProcessThe Review Process
Editor assigns Associate EditorEditor assigns Associate Editor
Associate Editor requests two peers,Associate Editor requests two peers,
sometimes three, to review manuscriptsometimes three, to review manuscript
Peers read and comment on the paper; theyPeers read and comment on the paper; they
may be asked to recommend:may be asked to recommend:
Accept with no revisionsAccept with no revisions
Accept with minor revisionsAccept with minor revisions
Accept with major revisionsAccept with major revisions
RejectionRejection
75. The Review ProcessThe Review Process
Peer or refereedPeer or refereed
Peer – scientists with similar research expertisePeer – scientists with similar research expertise
Refereed – a decision to publish is made byRefereed – a decision to publish is made by
someone other than the authorsomeone other than the author
So, most journal articles are technically refereedSo, most journal articles are technically refereed
and peer reviewedand peer reviewed
76. Small Group Exercise 4Small Group Exercise 4
How well does the manuscript meet theHow well does the manuscript meet the
criteria used for evaluation by the Journal?criteria used for evaluation by the Journal?
What criteria were used?What criteria were used?
How did the ms. meet each of the criteria?How did the ms. meet each of the criteria?
What would be your decision for publicationWhat would be your decision for publication
and why?and why?
77. Open, Blind or Double BlindOpen, Blind or Double Blind
Review ProcessReview Process
Open review – reviewers and authors namesOpen review – reviewers and authors names
are known to each otherare known to each other
Blind – reviewers know who authored theBlind – reviewers know who authored the
manuscript they are reviewing, but the authorsmanuscript they are reviewing, but the authors
do not know who the reviewers aredo not know who the reviewers are
Double Blind – The names of reviewers andDouble Blind – The names of reviewers and
authors are kept confidential; only theauthors are kept confidential; only the
associate editor and editor knowassociate editor and editor know
78. Purpose of Blind ReviewsPurpose of Blind Reviews
Objectivity and candidnessObjectivity and candidness
Removes any potential bias resulting fromRemoves any potential bias resulting from
interpersonal relationshipsinterpersonal relationships
NegativesNegatives
Sometimes reviews are very, and unnecessarily.Sometimes reviews are very, and unnecessarily.
criticalcritical
Most journals use double-blind reviewsMost journals use double-blind reviews
Some journals have an option of a reviewerSome journals have an option of a reviewer
letting the author know his or her nameletting the author know his or her name
79. The Review ProcessThe Review Process
Recommendations are based on the journal’sRecommendations are based on the journal’s
review criteria and the reviewers’review criteria and the reviewers’
understanding of the scienceunderstanding of the science
Associate Editor reads reviews and manuscriptAssociate Editor reads reviews and manuscript
and makes recommendation to editorand makes recommendation to editor
Editor makes decision and notifies authorEditor makes decision and notifies author
Editor lists needed revisionsEditor lists needed revisions
80. The Review ProcessThe Review Process
In many journals, the rejection rate is betweenIn many journals, the rejection rate is between
60 and 80%60 and 80%
Most manuscripts that are accepted areMost manuscripts that are accepted are
returned with either a “minor revision” or areturned with either a “minor revision” or a
“major revision” recommendation“major revision” recommendation
81. Author’s Response to ReviewsAuthor’s Response to Reviews
For rejected manuscripts:For rejected manuscripts:
Forget itForget it
But better, take into account comments, revise andBut better, take into account comments, revise and
submit someplace elsesubmit someplace else
For manuscripts with a revisionFor manuscripts with a revision
recommendationrecommendation
Take into account comments and reviseTake into account comments and revise
Resubmit with reconciliation document toResubmit with reconciliation document to
show how the comments were addressedshow how the comments were addressed
82. Critique of Peer Review ProcessCritique of Peer Review Process
Slow – may take months, even more than aSlow – may take months, even more than a
yearyear
Reviewers may not hold expertiseReviewers may not hold expertise
Non constructive, negative, competitiveNon constructive, negative, competitive
commentscomments
Dissenting theories suppressedDissenting theories suppressed
83. Critique of Peer Review ProcessCritique of Peer Review Process
Drummond Rennie, deputy editor ofDrummond Rennie, deputy editor of Journal of the AmericanJournal of the American
Medical AssociationMedical Association is an organizer of the Internationalis an organizer of the International
Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, whichCongress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, which
has been held every four years since 1986.has been held every four years since 1986.[23][23]
He remarksHe remarks,,
There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial,There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial,
no literature too biased or too egotistical, no design too warped, nono literature too biased or too egotistical, no design too warped, no
methodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, toomethodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, too
obscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self-serving, noobscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self-serving, no
argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified,argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified,
and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print.and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print.
84. Critique of Peer Review ProcessCritique of Peer Review Process
Richard Horton, editor of the British medical journalRichard Horton, editor of the British medical journal TheThe
LancetLancet, has said that, has said that
The mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was anyThe mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was any
more than a crude means of discovering the acceptability — not themore than a crude means of discovering the acceptability — not the
validity — of a new finding. Editors and scientists alike insist on thevalidity — of a new finding. Editors and scientists alike insist on the
pivotal importance of peer review. We portray peer review to the publicpivotal importance of peer review. We portray peer review to the public
as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objectiveas a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective
truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased,truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased,
unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usuallyunjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually
ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrongignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong
85. Re-SubmissionRe-Submission
Following revision, the ms is again submittedFollowing revision, the ms is again submitted
Editor makes a preliminary decision aboutEditor makes a preliminary decision about
what should be done with the ms.what should be done with the ms.
86. Editor’s DecisionEditor’s Decision
Sometimes revision referred back to AssociateSometimes revision referred back to Associate
EditorEditor
Sometimes additional reviews are conductedSometimes additional reviews are conducted
Generally, though if the author has made goodGenerally, though if the author has made good
faith effort to revise, the ms. is accepted, butfaith effort to revise, the ms. is accepted, but
still may need more revisionstill may need more revision
87. Publication ProcessPublication Process
Following the decision to accept, the ms. isFollowing the decision to accept, the ms. is
queued for publicationqueued for publication
This may take several monthsThis may take several months
Once it has been assigned to an issue, a galleyOnce it has been assigned to an issue, a galley
proof is madeproof is made
The proof is the mockup of the actual printThe proof is the mockup of the actual print
Author is responsible for quality controlAuthor is responsible for quality control
In some cases, a copy editor will makeIn some cases, a copy editor will make
queries to the authorqueries to the author
88. The Publication ProcessThe Publication Process
Such queries mostly deal with grammar,Such queries mostly deal with grammar,
citations and figurescitations and figures
Few other changes are permitted at this pointFew other changes are permitted at this point
Following revision of any changes, the authorFollowing revision of any changes, the author
approves the galley proofapproves the galley proof
The journal often provides author with orderThe journal often provides author with order
form for reprintsform for reprints
Following receipt of galleys, journal putsFollowing receipt of galleys, journal puts
ms. in printing queuems. in printing queue
89. PublicationPublication
The ms. appears in the printed publicationThe ms. appears in the printed publication
Author usually receives a few free copies of theAuthor usually receives a few free copies of the
journaljournal
Many traditional journals now have earlyMany traditional journals now have early
publication on the Web, prior to a physicalpublication on the Web, prior to a physical
printprint
90. ConclusionConclusion
That is the A to Z of publicationThat is the A to Z of publication
LessonsLessons
Ms. never perfectMs. never perfect
Think ahead about what story you want to tellThink ahead about what story you want to tell
Tend to methodology early, and in the proposalTend to methodology early, and in the proposal
When reviewing, be constructiveWhen reviewing, be constructive
Now, start writingNow, start writing