1 / 6

5 things we wished we had known about getting published ( from a standing start!)

5 things we wished we had known about getting published ( from a standing start!). Dr Ruth Gaffney-Rhys Joanna Jones. Target the Journal 1 st !!!!. If you target a specific journal before writing you can then:

leigh
Download Presentation

5 things we wished we had known about getting published ( from a standing start!)

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. 5 things we wished we had known about getting published ( from a standing start!) Dr Ruth Gaffney-Rhys Joanna Jones

  2. Target the Journal 1st!!!! • If you target a specific journal before writing you can then: • Review the articles that are usually published e.g. including primary research, quantitative vs. qualitative • Reference in correct style • Keep to word limit • Cite previous works from the journal and / or editorial board • See if too similar a subject matter has already been published • When targeting the journal also good to consider: • The ranking ( in relation to your research output to date) • Who you know • The jurisdiction • The time the journal has been publishing • Information about rejection / acceptance ratios

  3. 2. The need to understand the submission process and dealing with Editor / EA • If an electronic submission, check all the requirements before hand e.g. blind copies, abstract, keywords, bios etc • It is fine to chase the editor for a response after a reasonable time has lapsed • If you have not received any acknowledgement, then it is a good idea to check that the article was received / uploaded • Don’t read too much into administration correspondence (often standardised)

  4. 3. Criticism / rejection is a natural part of the publication proposal! • You cannot keep honing your work – there reaches a point that you have to send it into the world! Your 1st article could be the “hardest you have ever tried” • Give yourself time to reflect upon reviewers’ comments carefully before making any response. • If you are a new researcher then reviews can be invaluable (though traumatic); if you have a good publishing track record, they can be harder to take – but it is just a game • Even if the article is still rejected having addressed reviewers’ comments – it is probably greatly improved and is more likely to be accepted in a different journal

  5. 4. It is possible to change a reviewer’s mind! • Take your lead from the editor’s decision correspondence – outright rejection; minor amendments; major amendments • Seek advice from colleagues with more research experience that you (remembering that everyone will have received critical reviews) • Clearly identify what changes have been made and if you have not actioned a point, clearly explain why you have not • Even if the reviewer’s point is clearly wrong – if it is easy to change and does not impact upon your argument – change it

  6. 5. Once you get your 1st journal article published, you cannot stop • Either because you are hooked and / or because the university will then expect it of you! • There may be times when you can publish more output than others – consider keeping potential output up your sleeve for the next year

More Related