Review and
Journal Publishing
There are several
things to keep in mind when you want to submit your articles. You want to click
send, but wait! Make one last edit for grammar and spelling. Check the
formatting requirements, and the accompanying drawings. Some journals ask for
tables and figures in separate documents, while others are fine with the bodies
they are in the main document.
If given the
choice, write a cover letter to the editor. It helps them understand who you
are and how they can give you the best reviewer for the paper. Feel free to
suggest reviewers if the question is posed by the journal in the submission
form. Obviously, do not suggest reviewers who can identify your job, or who
have read the paper. A graduate student advisers recommend them as an observer
is clearly a no-no. However, in my experience, editors grateful when you save
them time to suggest potential reviewers in the field of topics that are
sometimes mysterious.
evaluate Review
The cornerstone
of academic publishing is a process of peer review. Usually the "double-blind"
- both reviewers and the authors do not know who the other party. Although
there are many things you like and dislike about the refereed, here i will
discuss the pragmatics receive and respond to feedback. It may come in a day or
six months. Prepare yourself to criticism, and do not get frustrated if the
review expressed directly. Feel free to opt out of emails to read when you're
in a good mood and have time to think about their feedback.
There are four
types of reviews that you may receive:
Desk refuse:
editor might just say a journal article is not suitable for them. Hopefully
this does not happen if you've done your homework in choosing a journal, but
sometimes still occur. Being polite and friendly, and then move on to the next
journal that seems to be acceptable in your article.
Thanks: reception
directly without revision is very rare. Within ten years of the issuance of
more than fifteen articles I've never received one. When reviewing the paper
that I have given, as far as I remember, two reception directly. Simply put,
there are always some things that need to be addressed to get the paper to the
death.
Decline: in this
case the paper is submit for peer review, and reviewers considered not suitable
for publication. This does not mean that this is a wasted effort, because you
can read the comments to reviewers. What point is there are enough problems
with the manuscript that the reviewers were unable to identify a clear pathway
to revision. However, they must correct a problem they see, which can be useful
feedback for publication. Be sure to thank the editors and reviewers for their
time, even if you do not agree with their decision.
Revisions and
resubmit: many delivery will receive the "R & R." This means that
reviewers have suggested changes that they believe will bring the paper to a
level where it would be suitable for publication. Often R & R will be two
reviewers who suggested revisions. However, you can also get one enthusiastic
reviewer and one recommending rejection. In this case, the editor may request a
third reviewer to make a decision, which can make your life a bit more
difficult! Since R & R is the majority of the responses, I will discuss how
to deal with it in the section below.
How To Handle R
& R
Not all R & D
together! Some ask for a very small edits can be completed within one or two
hours. It is essentially a reception with some adjustments. Others may ask you
to perform a task that seemed impossible, such as collecting new data or
re-write your journal using a theory that is not known. Before you panic, read
the note from the editor carefully. Do they signal changes in what they expect
you to do? A good editor will give some guidance on the way to the reception.
It may be difficult to read the comments that are not varnished on articles
that you have entered so much time. Sometimes it's difficult to not receive
feedback in person, but remember that reviewers will evaluate your work based
on the factors which might not consider. They may misunderstand your main
argument, or never evaluate an article using the methodology of your choice.
After you read
the review, developed with the understanding that the reviewers are trying to
fix the article. If you decide to revise the manuscript, make a list of their
requests and check one by one. When you answer the demand for them, make notes
about what you are doing and highlight changes in the updated manuscript. When
you submit a review, be sure to include your response (still anonymous) to the
reviewers, show that you pay attention to their feedback and respond to each
comment them. If there is a suggestion that you did not do, explain why you do
not follow their advice. Keep your response relative professional. Reviewer probably will not force you take any of their suggestions, but they want to
know why you did not.
When there is no
clear agreement on whether an article to be published, you may be surprised by
the three reviewers. Additional observers are usually invited to resolve the
dispute. Although this helps the editor makes a decision, it can make your life
more difficult, because you are in a position to make changes to please three
people, at least one of them probably do not like your job, and you do not know
if they will be assigned to review the paper the next round. Do not be afraid
to pull the paper you from consideration if the change is too difficult to
resolve. Remember, it will be your name on this article at the end of the day!
Editors will not be offended if you pull the paper - it happens all the time.
However, do not write a letter explaining your decision, and addressed some
reviewers comments before submit back to another journal. However, you may get
one of the reviewers were together again, and the last thing they want is
articles they have given feedback!
Finalization and Journal Publication
As you move
through the review process you will eventually get to the point of reviewers
indicating they are fine with the concept. In rare cases, they may recommend
rejection after several rounds of revisions. Once received, the editor may have
some final advice. At this point your article will move into the editing phase,
when a different editor makes changes to grammar and spelling to help you shine
article. Then you will review "evidence" - PDF exactly what your article
will be. You probably already bored with this article now, but read carefully!
Editor lines may have made changes that transform the arguments you make. It
was never intentional, and they will turn back if you request it.
There are still
two last step after you submit a PDF proof which marked the end of it. First,
celebrate! You have passed a milestone. Do not just add another line to the C /
V you - do something good for yourself. Go out to dinner with your partner,
bought himself a bottle of your favorite drink, or watch a movie. The academics
are very bad at appreciating yourself for hard work. We are much better at
appreciating the job with more work! But this is not a healthy way of life.
Secondly, once the version of "pre-printed" out online - this is a
digital copy that is identical to the print version - if you allow her journal,
published in social media and upload it to your web site. If your university
has a staff to publish the work,
I hope this
article has helped you think about the process of delivery of journal articles!
Please share if you find it helpful.