As scholars, we attempt to do top-notch research that will advance technology. We show up in what we believe are unique hypotheses, base our work with robust information and make use of an appropriate research methodology. Once we jot down our findings, we make an effort to offer theoretical insight, and share theoretical and practical implications about our work. Then we distribute our manuscript for book in a journal that is peer-reviewed.
For all, this is actually the part that is hardest of research.
Within my seven several years of research and training, We have seen several shortcomings in the manuscript planning and submission procedure that usually lead to research being rejected for book. Being conscious of these shortcomings will raise your odds of getting your manuscript posted and additionally raise your research profile and profession development.
In this specific article, meant for doctoral pupils along with other young scholars, We identify typical pitfalls and supply helpful solutions to organize more papers that are impactful. While there are lots of kinds of research articles, such as for example quick communications, review documents and so on, these guidelines consider planning a complete article (including a literature review), whether predicated on qualitative or quantitative methodology, through the perspective associated with administration, education, information sciences and social sciences procedures.
Composing for scholastic journals is a very competitive task, plus it’s important to know that there may be a few reasons for a rejection. Additionally, the log peer-review procedure is an element that is essential of because no journalist could recognize and deal with all prospective difficulties with a manuscript.
usually do not hurry publishing your article for publication.
In my own very first article for Elsevier Connect – “Five secrets to surviving (and thriving in) a PhD program” – We emphasized that scholars should begin composing through the initial phases of the research or study career that is doctoral. This key doesn’t involve submitting your manuscript for book the brief minute you’ve got crafted its summary. Writers often depend on the undeniable fact that they’re going to usually have a chance to deal with their work’s shortcomings following the feedback received through the log editor and reviewers has identified them.
A proactive approach and mindset wil dramatically reduce the possibility of rejection and frustration. A logical flow of activities dominates every research activity and should be followed for preparing a manuscript as well in my opinion. Such tasks consist of carefully re-reading your manuscript at different occuring times and maybe at various places. Re-reading is essential within the research industry helping determine probably the most typical issues and shortcomings when you look at the manuscript, which could otherwise be ignored. 2nd, we believe it is very useful to share with you my manuscripts with my peers along with other researchers in my own community and also to request their feedback. In performing this, click site We highlight any sections associated with manuscript that i’d like reviewers to be positively clear on.
choose a publication outlet that is appropriate.
Elsevier Publishing Campus
The Elsevier Publishing Campus is a free online platform providing you with lectures, interactive training and expert advice on an array of subjects, through the basics of publishing to wider problems like sex in research and science that is open. Scientists can register for classes, study on leaders in publishing and research, and be a part of topical debates. For almost any module or seminar finished, scientists are notable for their efforts by having an awarded certificate.
In addition ask peers concerning the many journal that is appropriate submit my manuscript to; choosing the best log for the article can considerably increase the odds of acceptance and guarantee it reaches your customers.
Elsevier has a revolutionary journal finder search center on its web site. Writers enter this article name, a short abstract plus the industry of research to obtain a listing of probably the most journals that are appropriate their article. For a complete discussion of just how to choose a journal that is appropriate Knight and Steinbach (2008).
Less experienced scholars often elect to submit their research work to several journals during the time that is same. Analysis ethics and policies of all of the scholarly journals recommend that writers should submit a manuscript to just one log at any given time. Doing otherwise can cause embarrassment and lead to copyright dilemmas for the writer, the college company and also the journals involved.
browse the aims and scope and writer tips of one’s target log very carefully.
Once you’ve read and re-read your manuscript very carefully many times, received feedback from your own peers, and identified a target log, the second step that is important to read through the aims and scope of this journals in your target research area. Doing this will increase the likelihood of getting your manuscript accepted for publishing. Another step that is important to install and absorb the writer instructions and make sure your manuscript conforms to them. Some writers report any particular one paper in five will not stick to the style and structure needs associated with the target log, which can specify demands for numbers, tables and recommendations.
Rejection may come at different occuring times plus in various platforms. As an example, in the event the research goal isn’t in line because of the aims and range for the target log, or if perhaps your manuscript is certainly not organized and formatted in accordance with the target log design, or if perhaps your manuscript doesn’t have a reasonable possibility of to be able to match the target journal’s publishing objectives, the manuscript can be given a desk rejection through the editor without having to be sent out for peer review. Desk rejections could be disheartening for authors, making them feel they will have squandered time that is valuable might even make them lose enthusiasm for his or her research subject. Sun and Linton (2014), Hierons (2016) and Craig (2010) provide helpful discussions about the subject of “desk rejections.”