slide1 l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
投稿國際期刊的經驗談 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
投稿國際期刊的經驗談

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 18

投稿國際期刊的經驗談 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 267 Views
  • Uploaded on

投稿國際期刊的經驗談 王德育 (T.Y. Wang) Illinois State University 政大政治系客座教授 tywang@ilstu.edu My discussion is based on my experiences As an Author As a Reviewer As a Co-Editor, Asia, Journal of Asian and African Studies The Meaning of Referee Review

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about '投稿國際期刊的經驗談' - jana


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

投稿國際期刊的經驗談

王德育

(T.Y. Wang)

Illinois State University

政大政治系客座教授

tywang@ilstu.edu

slide2
My discussion is based on my experiences
    • As an Author
    • As a Reviewer
    • As a Co-Editor, Asia, Journal of Asian and African Studies
slide3
The Meaning of Referee Review
    • Institutionalized Skepticism (制度性的懷疑) = Quality Control
    • Institutionalized skepticism aims to avoid the type 1 error: publishing a paper that should not have been published
slide4
High standards of scholarly works is a collective responsibility
  • It is also called Peer Review
  • Usually an anonymous process
slide5
Assessment by peers as a basis for judgment of their publishability
    • is this research important?
    • is the methodology sound?
    • is the analysis correct and logically coherent?
slide6
The fate of the manuscript is determined by the reviewers
  • The editor acts as a middle man and exercises some discretion
slide7
Some General Guidelines:
    • Identify intended audience and appropriate journals
    • Begin submission to the top journals
slide8
Manuscripts should be prepared in details even though much will not appear in the final printed product
  • Have thoughtful/complete citations
slide9
Try to make reviewer’s job easier (e.g., proofreading, eloquent writing, clear research questions)
  • Follow the journal guidelines (esp. page length)
  • Prepare an abstract
slide10
Manuscript preparations:
    • Clear research questions
      • in question format
      • in paragraph(s)
      • Help reviewers identify theoretical/policy significance
slide11
Literature Review
    • plays an important role in reviewer’s decision
    • studies should be grouped and assessed collectively (見林不見樹)
    • Note trends and themes, as well as gaps
slide12
If you have a quantitative paper
    • the data analysis should be an essay
    • keep the statistics in tables
    • minimize the use of numbers in the main text
slide13
Conclusions
    • link findings to your research questions
    • policy/theoretical implications
slide14
When you receive a rejection
    • Don’t be frustrated
    • Consider reviewers’ criticisms for revisions
    • Submit to the next journal
slide15
What to do if you receive a R&R (revise and re-submit)
    • explain revisions in a cover letter
    • don’t be afraid to contact the editor if there is confusion or conflict of opinions
slide17
The language problem:
    • proofread by a professional
    • co-authorship
slide18
Patterson, Samuel. 1994. “The Itch to Publish in Political Science.” Rita J. Simon and James J. Fyfe. Editors as Gatekeepers (Lanham, Marland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers): 3-19
  • Caputo, Richard K. 2004. “Advice for those Wanting to Publish Quantitative Research.” Family in Society, v.85, no.3: 401-404