1 / 16

Getting Published in Journals – Ten Things You Wanted to Know but Never Dared Ask!

Getting Published in Journals – Ten Things You Wanted to Know but Never Dared Ask!. Cathy Urquhart ( c.urquhart@mmu.ac.uk ). Outline. My experience in journals Why publish in journals? 10 Things You Never Dared Ask. My experience of journals.

kieran-witt
Download Presentation

Getting Published in Journals – Ten Things You Wanted to Know but Never Dared Ask!

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 in Journals – Ten Things You Wanted to Know but Never Dared Ask! Cathy Urquhart (c.urquhart@mmu.ac.uk)

  2. Outline • My experience in journals • Why publish in journals? • 10 Things You Never Dared Ask

  3. My experience of journals • Senior editor for MIS Quarterly. MISQ has an impact factor of 4.83, the highest of all business journals • Been involved with MISQ since 1998 as reviewer, Associate Editor and then Senior Editor • Most Developmental Associate Editor award with MISQ in 2007 • Associate Editor for Information Technology for Development, and International Journal of E-Politics • Co-editor of special issues for Information Technology and People, the Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics, and Social Business

  4. Why publish in journals? • Better than a conference in terms of quality of output – increasingly, conferences don’t ‘count’ • Satisfaction in knowing that your work is read by colleagues around the world • Knowing that your research has an audience – research is only finished when it is published! • Your publication list is pretty much the only institution independent element on your cv • Also a way to find collaborators – people may approach you because of something you have published • REF2020 – 60% outputs (25% impact, 15% environment)

  5. Question #1 – How do I build a publication pipeline ? • First piece of advice – be nice  • Collaborate, collaborate, collaborate! • Have a publication plan, with dates • Key is to have papers at different stages • Collaborate with senior colleagues – it’s a win win for them, as they are time starved, but can give valuable feedback and shape the paper for publication • Collaborate with peers and junior colleagues • Collaborate with research students

  6. Question #2 – Where should I target my paper? • Another piece of advice – be brave! Most people target too low rather than too high (but be realistic) • The better the quality journal, the better the feedback. • Pay attention to the ABS list – 2* or above • Submit a cover letter explaining what the paper does and suggesting reviewers • Do you know the editors? • Are you familiar with the type of paper they publish?

  7. Question # 3 – How do I avoid basic mistakes? • DO make sure your grammar, spelling, English etc is perfect. If necessary employ a proof reader. Sometimes reviewers don’t have the time or patience to look past bad presentation • DON’T reference yourself – it’s seen as vanity, and also not very scholarly if the only source is yourself!

  8. Question #4 – What does the editorial process involve? • Fourth piece of advice – be patient, but not too patient! • Typical structure in a journal is Editor in Chief, Senior Editors, Associate Editors and Reviewers • Single blind or double blind reviewing • All done by a community of scholars on a voluntary basis, don’t hesitate to follow up if you don’t hear from the journal

  9. Question #5 – How do I deal with a revision • Another piece of advice – be polite to your critics  • Make sure you prepare a detailed memo showing how you have addressed all the key points the reviewers have made • This memo should address all the points made by reviewers, even the irrelevant ones.. • Be polite and constructive, even if you have not addressed the more ridiculous points • Be guided by the Associate Editor as to which points are more important to address • Include a covering letter outlining the main revisions

  10. Question # 6 – How do I deal with negative reviews? • Another piece of advice – leave your ego at the door  • Reviewers are subjective. Some may have had a bad day/evening when reviewing your paper. Some are routinely nasty. • If it’s an outright rejection, take what you can from the reviews, and send the paper out again to another journal with some revisions.

  11. Question # 7 – How can I deal with a rejection? Calmly consider which category the rejection falls into • Seriously flawed research • Flaws in the presentation (poor language quality, poor organization, problems with analysis or conclusion) • Submission to an inappropriate journal • More subjective reasons (tastes of an individual editor, recently published articles on what was felt to be too similar a subject, over subscribed special issue etc).

  12. Question # 8 – How can I maximise my chances of success? • Another piece of advice – be optimistic! • Special issues often have a higher rate of acceptance, and sometimes a lower standard, because they are exploring new areas (but sometimes can be oversubscribed) • Be prompt about submitting revisions – a revision is a gateway to an accept! • Eg only about 20% of MISQ manuscripts are actually reviewed –to get a revise often means you will get published – may take 1-2 years and 3 revisions

  13. Question # 9- How can I even the playing field? • The peer review process is subject to bias – in the same way that, when we interview someone for a job, we are likely to appoint someone like us.. • Team up with someone who is not subject to the same prejudice – they may already be part of the network • Contact a researcher who has overcome the same bias as you – they will probably be willing to help • Choose journals who have published papers by researchers subject to the same bias as you

  14. Question # 10 How do I achieve a healthy volume of papers to be published? • It’s simple – just do the maths • If you aim to have 2 papers published a year, and you think you have a 1 in 2 chance of getting accepted, then you need 4 papers under review. • As the acceptance rate goes down for higher journals eg for a 20% acceptance rate, and 4 papers a year published, you would need 20.. • In practice people diversify – need a combination of higher and lower ranking journals to keep a healthy output going.

  15. In Conclusion • Publishing is an activity like any other academic activity – the more you do, the easier it gets • Important to understand that it’s a subjective, peer reviewed process, and to work with critiques rather than taking it personally • Open access is a new challenge – open access increases citations, but the quality of some open access journals is in doubt – use the institutional repository to lodge your author copy

  16. Acknowledgements • http://edr.sagepub.com/content/34/8/14.full.pdf+html

More Related