1 / 9

Getting published

Learn about the process of getting published in top journals, including submission rates, acceptance rates, and the editorial/review process. Discover what editors and referees look for in a paper, and get tips on how to respond to the refereeing process and increase your chances of publication.

angelajmiller
Télécharger la présentation

Getting published

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Getting published Chris Warhurst

  2. The (rough, general) stats • Possibly 300-400+ submissions per year for top journals. • Typically half rejected at submission. • Typically half rejected after review. • Acceptance rates of 20-30%; can be less – 10%. • Initial review takes weeks, revisions can take months. From submission to publication with top journals can take 2-3 years.

  3. The editorial/review process Reject Accept Accept Accept Back to Authors …V4… Stylistic Adherence Editors Referees Editors Accept Reject Reject

  4. What editors do at the start • Check that appropriate subject for the journal. • Check that has an argument or storyline: what is the paper about? • Apply the ‘so what?’ question: does the paper add something new to understanding. • Check if already published – or something similar (particularly by you!). • Assess the paper’s basics and second guess referees’ reaction about general standard.

  5. What do referees look for? • Focus on the context and content; argument and evidence; contribution. • Then: • aims and objectives • storyline/argument • literature review • methodology and methods • evidence base • contribution • writing style

  6. Responding to the refereeing process • Take stock; take a step back. Carefully read the editor’s and referees’ comments. • Check if the editor gives a steer to any response. • If it’s a revision: • Identify and list what needs to be done • Revise the paper to the suggestions • Write a user-friendly response to comments • Don’t be afraid of balance – positive and negative responses • If it’s a reject, identify the reasons and learn from them.

  7. The editorial/review process Reject Accept Accept Accept Back to Authors …V4… Stylistic Adherence Editors Referees Editors Accept Reject Reject

  8. Tips • Check the journal, editorial policy and review process. • Make sure that you have a clear, coherent and consistent storyline/argument that adds to understanding in the field. • Useful to indicate the 3Cs in the introduction: content, context and contribution. • Useful to shape the introducton around the 3Ps – position, problem, proposal. 3. In structure and content, a good article is like a mini thesis. 4. Don’t take rejection or review comments personally; be professional and helpful to editors. 5.Getting it right is a learning process; like the PhD apprenticeship.

  9. For more information Email www.warwick.ac.uk/ier

More Related