Contenu connexe

Présentations pour vous(20)

Plus de Bessem Aamira(20)

Elsevier Author workshop - CNUDST Tunisia

  1. How to get published? Presented by Geneviève Musasa Customer Consultant Africa December 2015 Your Account Manager Ahmed Shams
  2. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 2 2| Get your paper certificate signed right after the session
  3. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 3 3| Follow Elsevier Africa Latest News on Facebook & on the blog
  5. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 5 5| | 5 Further reading at Get Published – top tips on writing, reviewing and grant writing etc. Publishing Ethics brochure – top reasons to publish ethically Get Noticed – new ways to promote your article and research Understanding the Publishing Process with Elsevier – complete guide Open access – definitions and options Career Planning Guide – download in 12 languages
  6. AGENDA I. Introduction to scholarly publishing II. How to get published? Practical Advices III. Structuring your article IV. The reviewing process V. How not to Publish VI. Get noticed
  7. Let’s start off with a film…
  8. I. Introduction to scholarly publishing
  9. 9 Registration The timestamp to officially note who submitted scientific results first Certification Perform peer-review to ensure the validity and integrity of submissions Dissemination Provide a medium for discoveries and findings to be shared Preservation Preserving the minutes and record of science for posterity Role of Scientific Publications Publishers are investing in innovation and technology to fulfil these roles Use Promoting and facilitating the “Use” of scholarly information
  10. | 10 Academic publishing The publishing cycle Solicit & manage submissions 30-60% rejected by > 13,000 editors Manage Peer Review 557,000+ reviewers Edit & prepare 365,000 articles accepted Production 12.6 million articles available Publish & Disseminate >700 million downloads by >11 million researchers in >120 countries!
  11. | 11  Peer review consists of the evaluation of articles by experts in the field  It was first used in 1665, by the Royal Society in London  Peer review places the reviewer, with the author, at the heart of scientific publishing  Reviewers make the editorial process work by examining and commenting on manuscripts  Without peer review there is no control in scientific communication  Reviewers are the backbone of the whole process Academic publishing What is peer review?
  12. | 12 Source: Ulrichsweb Global Serials Directory Academic publishing Peer-reviewed journal growth 1990-2013
  13. | 13 What is open access? Gold Open Access Green Open Access Access  Free public access to the final published article  Access is immediate and permanent  Free public access to a version of your article  Time delay may apply (embargo period) Fee  Open access fee is paid by the author, or on their behalf (for example by a funding body)  No fee is payable by the author, as costs are covered by library subscriptions Options  Publish in an open access journal  Publish in a journal that supports open access (also known as a hybrid journal)  Link to your article.  Selected journals feature open archives  Self-archive a version of your article Free and permanent access to scholarly research combined with clear guidelines (user licenses) for users to re-use the content. For more Open Access information:
  14. | 14 What is the uptake of open access? There were in 2013, estimated worldwide 2,041,106 published subscription and 297,596 published open access articles 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 (est.) No.ofarticles(Thousands) Year Open access Hybrid Subscription Subscription content:  Continues to grow year on year at approx. 3-4%  Amounts to a total article share of approx. 87.3% in 2013  In 2013, Elsevier published over 330,000 articles which included an increase of 20,000 extra subscription articles Open access content:  Currently growing at approx. 20% in 2013  Amounts to a total article share (hybrid + ‘’pure’’ Gold) of approx.8.2% in 2013  The total article share of all immediately accessible OA articles is 12.7% including subsidized open access  In 2013, Elsevier published over 6,000 gold open access articles
  15. II. How to get published? Practical Advices
  16. …your published papers, are a permanent record of your research, are your passport to your community… Always keep in mind that…
  17. However, editors, reviewers, and the research community don’t consider these reasons when assessing your work. Your personal reasons for publishing?
  18. | 18 Planning your article Are you ready to publish? Not ready Work has no scientific interest Ready Work advances the field
  19. | 19  Clear and useful message  A logical manner  Readers grasp the research Planning Your Article What makes a strong manuscript? Editors, reviewers and readers all want to receive well presented manuscripts that fit within the aims and scope of their journal.
  20. | 20 Full articles • Substantial, complete and comprehensive pieces of research Is my message sufficient for a full article? Letters or short communications • Quick and early communications Are my results so thrilling that they should be shown as soon as possible? Review papers • Summaries of recent developments on a specific top • Often submitted by invitation Planning your article Types of manuscripts Your supervisor or colleagues are also good sources for advice on manuscript types.
  21. | 21 Citations per Article Type
  22. Your paper is worthless if no one reads, uses, or cites it A research study is meaningful only if...  It’s clearly described, so  Someone else can use it in his/her studies  It arouses other scientists’ interest, and  Allows others to reproduce the results By submitting a manuscript you are basically trying to sell your work to your community
  23. Practical Advice • Evaluate your research area   Journals, authors, citations, publications per year (Scopus) • Evaluate which journal is right for your article  Impact Factor  Alternative metrics (H-index, SNIP, SCImago)  Journal Analyzer (Scopus) • Find out more about the journals  Who are the editors?  Guide for authors • Getting your paper noticed  Cite Alert  Article Usage Alert IF
  24. | 24 Choosing the right journal Journal Finder Tool Visit e.g. to find: • Aims & Scope • Accepted types of articles • Readership • Current hot topics • Ask for help from your supervisor or colleagues • DO NOT submit manuscripts to more than one journal at a time
  25. | 25 Choosing the right journal Best practices  Aim to reach the intended audience for your work  Choose only one journal, as simultaneous submissions are prohibited  Supervisor and colleagues can provide good suggestions  Shortlist a handful of candidate journals, and investigate them: • Aims • Scope • Accepted types of articles • Readership • Current hot topics Articles in your reference list will usually lead you directly to the right journals.
  26. | 26 Preparing your manuscript Read the Guide for Authors  Find it on the journal homepage of the publisher, e.g.  Keep to the Guide for Authors in your manuscript  It will save your time
  27. Evaluate your research area – free tools
  28. ScienceDirect  is a full-text online database offering scientific, technical and medical (STM) journal articles and book chapters  Is a multidisciplinary database covering 24 subject areas  is Elsevier’s Peer-reviewed full-text content database  contains nearly 13 million pieces of content: peer reviewed articles in more than 2,500 journals and more than 26,000 books  contains more than 1,600 journals in Open Access  When using ScienceDirect, you get access to nearly ¼ of the peer- reviewed scientific, technical and medical content published worldwide
  29. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 29 29| Scopus: an eye on global research The largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed research literature from around the world 55 million records | 21,915 titles | 5,000 publishers Journals | Books | Conference proceedings | Patents All content is vigorously vetted by an independent, 15-person, international board of experts called the Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB)
  30. 1) What’s the best journal for my research? 2) What related interdisciplinary, global research is being produced? 3) Who is citing my work? Where is my work being cited? 4) What’s the trend – is this a growing or declining field? 5) Who else is working on this in my country or elsewhere in the world? Designed to support literature research process
  31. “Save as Alert”: Remind yourself about the new findings. Evaluate your research area – in Scopus
  32. Find out what is being cited and from where View a citation overview of the selected documents View documents citing the selected documents
  33. Review the development of your research area
  34. Choose the right journal Do not just “descend the stairs” Top journals Nature, Science, Lancet, NEJM Field-specific top journals Other field-specific journals National journals DO NOT gamble by submitting your manuscript to more than one journal at a time. International ethics standards prohibit multiple/simultaneous submissions, and editors DO find out!
  35. Article Transfer Service • Editors may transfer sound submissions to another Elsevier journal 35 • Provided the submission is of high-quality and rejected because it doesn’t fit the Aims & Scope of the journal
  36. Choose a target journal  Use your own references  Check databases to find in what journals most articles on your topic were published
  37. Some bibliometric indicators Key indicators of journal citation impact
  38. | 38 Bibliometric indicators Impact Factor Eigenfactor SJR SNIP H-Index
  39. | 39  It indicates how many times the more recent papers in a journal are cited on average in a given year  It is influenced by editorial policies of journals and turnover of research Choosing the right journal The Impact Factor The impact factor can give you a general guidance, but it should NOT be the sole reason to choose a journal.
  40. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 40 40| Journal Impact Factor 2012* Pain 6.125 Nature Genetics 38.597 Annals of Mathematics 3.027 Computers & Operations Research 2.374 Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 17.778 Addiction Biology 5.914 Remote Sensing of Environment 6.144 *Journal Citation Reports 2013 Answer: All of them are the best journals in their subject areas. With IF journals from different subject fields CANNOT be compared. Which Journal is the Best Journal?
  41. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 41 41| “There is no single ‘best’ indicator that could accommodate all facets of the new reality of bibliometrics.” - Wolfgang Glänzel, Head of bibliometrics group Professor at KU Leuven, Belgium Bibliometrics – A discipline that uses statistical methods to analyze content and measure research performance
  42. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 42 42| SJR measures the prestige or influence of a scientific journal SJR considers not only the raw number of citations received by a journal… but also the importance or influence of the source of those citations SJR is a combination of the quantity & quality of the citations received SCImago Journal Rank
  43. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 43 43| | 43 It is based on Scopus data The SCimago Journal Rank  Freely available at; on Scopus  Similar to Impact Factor, but considers 3 years  Self-citations limited  Citations weighted by the SJR of the citing journal Year 3 Year 2 Year 1 Citing Year
  44. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 44 44| Source Normalized Impact per Paper SNIP measures the contextual citation impact of a journal by normalizing citation values SNIP takes a research field’s citation frequency and the database field’s coverage into account It avoids delimitation and counters subject differences to balance the scales SNIP shows differences due to journal quality and not citation behavior
  45. | 45 Devised at the University of Leiden, currently the most sophisticated journal performance indicator Source Normalized Impact per Paper  Freely available online via Scopus  Similar to Impact Factor, but considers 3 years  Measures contextual citation impact  Citations weighted by the likelihood of citation in the subject field of source Year 3 Year 2 Year 1 Citing Year
  46. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 46 46| Journal analyzer: SJR, SNIP and more
  47. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 47 47| SJR and SNIP: two journal metrics in Scopus Compare up to 10 journals SJR is a prestige metric and weights citations according to the status the citing journal
  48. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 48 48| SNIP normalized impact per paper between subject field. SJR and SNIP: two journal metrics in Scopus
  49. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 49 49| Journal Analyzer: More analysis using Scopus
  50. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 50 50| “Using the Impact Factor alone to judge a journal is like using weight alone to judge a person’s health.” Source: The Joint Committee on Quantitative Assessment of Research: “Citation Statistics”, a report from the International Mathematical Union
  51. TITLE OF PRESENTATION | 51 51| The h-index: Hirsch index or Hirsch number In other words: An author has an index of 18 if he has published at least 18 papers; each of which has been cited at least 18 times (Published by Jorge E. Hirsch in August 2005) 1. h-index : Measures the productivity and impact of a scientist’s published work
  52. Assessment often highly based on publications and citations 52 “not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted” Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
  53. | 53 Recap Before writing your paper Determine if you are ready to publish your work Decide on the best type of manuscript Choose the target journal Check the Guide for Authors
  54. III. Structuring your article 2015
  55. | 55 General structure of a research article  Title  Abstract  Keywords  Introduction  Methods  Results and Discussion  Conclusion  Acknowledgements  References  Supporting Materials Read the Guide for Authors for the specific criteria of your target journal.
  56. | 56  Attract reader’s attention  Contain fewest possible words  Adequately describe content  Are informative but concise  Identify main issue  Do not use technical jargon and rarely-used abbreviations Effective manuscript titles Editors and reviewers do not like titles that make no sense or fail to represent the subject matter adequately. Additionally, if the title is not accurate, the appropriate audience may not read your paper.
  57. | 57 Keywords Article title Keywords “An experimental study on evacuated tube solar collector using supercritical CO2” Solar collector; supercritical CO2; solar energy; solar thermal utilization  Are the labels of the manuscript  Are used by indexing and abstracting services  Should be specific  Should use only established abbreviations (e.g. DNA) Check the Guide for Authors for specifics on which keywords should be used.
  58. | 58  Summarize the problem, methods, results, and conclusions in a single paragraph  Make it interesting and understandable  Make it accurate and specific  A clear abstract will strongly influence whether or not your work is considered  Keep it as brief as possible Abstract Take the time to write the abstract very carefully. Many authors write the abstract last so that it accurately reflects the content of the paper.
  59. | 59 The process of writing – building the article Title, Abstract, and Keywords Figures/Tables (your data) Conclusion Introduction Methods Results Discussion
  60. | 60 Provide a brief context to the readers Address the problem Identify the solutions and limitations Identify what the work is trying to achieve Provide a perspective consistent with the nature of the journal Introduction Write a unique introduction for every article. DO NOT reuse introductions.
  61. | 61 Describe how the problem was studied Include detailed information Do not describe previously published procedures Identify the equipment and materials used Methods
  62. | 62 Include only data of primary importance Use sub-headings to keep results of the same type together Be clear and easy to understand Highlight the main findings Feature unexpected findings Provide statistical analysis Include illustrations and figures Results
  63. | 63 Interpretation of results Most important section Make the discussion correspond to the results and complement them Compare published results with your own Discussion Be careful not to use the following: - Statements that go beyond what the results can support - Non-specific expressions - New terms not already defined or mentioned in your paper - Speculations on possible interpretations based on imagination
  64. | 64 Conclusion  Be clear  Provide justification for the work  Explain how your work advances the present state of knowledge  Suggest future experiments
  65. | 65 Acknowledgments  Advisors  Financial supporters and funders  Proof readers and typists  Suppliers who may have donated materials
  66. | 66 References  Do not use too many references  Always ensure you have fully absorbed the material you are referencing  Avoid excessive self citations  Avoid excessive citations of publications from the same region or institute  Conform strictly to the style given in the Guide for Authors
  67. Using proper scientific language 2015
  68. | 68 Do publishers correct language? No! It is the author’s responsibility... ...but resources are available
  69. 69 Editing and Translation services
  70. | 70 Manuscript language: Overview  Clear  Objective  Accurate  Concise Always read the journal’s Guide for Authors to check for any additional language specifications.
  71. | 71 Manuscript language: Sentences  Write direct, short, and factual sentences  Convey one piece of information per sentence  Avoid multiple statements in one sentence The average length of sentences in scientific writing is only about 12-17 words.
  72. | 72 Manuscript language: Tenses Present tense: Use for known facts and hypotheses Past tense: Use for experiments conducted and results
  73. | 73  Use active voice to shorten sentences  Avoid contractions and abbreviations  Minimize use of adverbs  Eliminate redundant phrases  Double-check unfamiliar words or phrases Manuscript language: Grammar
  74. | 74  Proper English is important so editors and reviewers can understand the work  Use short, concise sentences, correct tenses, and correct grammar  Refer to the journal’s Guide for Authors for specifications  Have a native English speaker check your manuscript or use a language editing service Recap Are you using proper manuscript language?
  75. IV. The reviewing process
  76. A well understood concept, based on impartiality, transparency and confidentiality Without it there is no control in scientific communication Improving, validating, registering, and preserving research in a fair and unbiased way Principles of Peer Review 76
  77. Purpose of Peer Review Ensures best quality papers are selected Improves quality of the published paper Ensures previous work is acknowledged Detects plagiarism and fraud Plays a central role in academic career development 77
  78. So how does it work? Michael Derntl. Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing.
  79. Role of Reviewer and tasks The peer review process is based on trust The scientific publishing enterprise depends largely on the quality and integrity of the reviewers Reviewer should write reports in a collegial and constructive manner Treat manuscripts in the same manner as if they were your own 79
  80. Issues to review as Reviewers Importance and Clarity of Research Hypothesis Originality of work Strengths & weaknesses of methodology, approach & interpretation Writing style and figure/table presentation Ethics concerns (animal/human) 80
  81. Rejection without external review The Editor-in-chief evaluates submissions and determines whether they enter into the external review process or are rejected English language is inadequate Prior publication of the data Multiple simultaneous submissions of same data 81
  82. | 82 Articles are initially reviewed by at least two reviewers When invited, the reviewer receives the abstract of the manuscript The Editor generally requests that the article be reviewed within 2-4 weeks Articles are revised until the reviewers agree, or until the Editor decides that the reviewer concerns have been adequately addressed The reviewers’ reports help the Editors to reach a decision on a submitted paper Review process (I)
  83. | 83 Review process (II) If report has not been received after 4 weeks, the editorial office contacts the reviewer If there is a notable disagreement between the reports of the reviewers, a third reviewer may be consulted The anonymity of the reviewers is maintained, unless a reviewer asks the Editor to have their identity made known
  84. | 84 Review process (III) Reviewers must not communicate directly with authors All manuscripts and materials must be treated confidentially by Editors and reviewers The aim is to have a first decision to the authors by 4-6 weeks (depending on the field) after submission Meeting the schedule objectives requires a significant effort by all involved Reviewers should treat authors as they themselves would like to be treated
  85. | 85 What can you get back from peer review? • Accepted without change (very rare!) • Accepted after minor revision (means you will have to change a few things) • Accepted after consideration (means you will have to rewrite a few things, possibly sections, figures, provide more data, etc) • Reconsider after major revision (means you will have to address some fundamental shortcomings – possibly doing additional research and certainly rewriting big sections) • Rejection (means the manuscript is not deemed suitable for publication in that journal)
  86. | 86 What leads to acceptance ? • Attention to details • Check and double check your work • Consider the reviewers’ comments • English must be as good as possible • Presentation is important • Take your time with revision • Acknowledge those who have helped you • New, original and previously unpublished • Critically evaluate your own manuscript • Ethical rules must be obeyed – Nigel John Cook Editor-in-Chief, Ore Geology Reviews
  87. V. How to not publish
  88. | 88 What is plagiarism? “Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit, including those obtained through confidential review of others’ research proposals and manuscripts.” Federal Office of Science and Technology Policy, 1999 “Presenting the data or interpretations of others without crediting them, and thereby gaining for yourself the rewards earned by others, is theft, and it eliminates the motivation of working scientists to generate new data and interpretations.” Professor Bruce Railsback, Department of Geology, University of Georgia
  89. | 89 What may be plagiarised? Work that can be plagiarised includes…  Words (language)  Ideas  Findings  Writings  Graphic representations  Computer programs  Diagrams  Graphs  Illustrations  Information  Lectures  Printed material  Electronic material  Any other original work Higher Education Academy, UK
  90. | 90 Correct citation is key  To place your own work in context  To acknowledge the findings of others on which you have built your research  To maintain the credibility and accuracy of the scientific literature Crediting the work of others (including your advisor’s or your own previous work) by citation is important for at least three reasons:
  91. | 91 Plagiarism high amongst ethics issues Sample of cases reported to Elsevier Journals publishing staff in 2012
  92. | 92 How big is the problem of plagiarism?  Huge database of 30+ million articles, from 50,000+ journals, from 400+ publishers  Software alerts Editors to any similarities between the article and this huge database of published articles  Many Elsevier journals now check every submitted article using CrossCheck
  93. | 93 Plagiarism is serious but easily avoidable  Plagiarism is easily avoided  You can use ideas, phrases and arguments from sources already published, just acknowledge the source and the original author
  94. | 94 Paraphrasing It is unacceptable:  Using exact phrases from the original source without enclosing them in quotation marks  Emulating sentence structure even when using different words  Emulating paragraph organization even when using different wording or sentence structure Paraphrasing is restating someone else's ideas while not copying their actual words verbatim. – Statement on Plagiarism Department of Biology, Davidson College.
  95. | 95 Recap When in doubt, cite! Never cut & paste (even to save time in drafts) If you suspect: REPORT Responsibility
  96. VI. Get noticed Promoting your researcher for maximum impact
  97. | 97 You want to make sure your research gets the attention it deserves 7 hrs/week average time spent on literature 1970 2013 0 40M  The volume of research articles is growing at an accelerated pace  For most researchers, it’s a real challenge to keep up with the literature  Your job: make sure your research doesn’t fall through the cracks!
  98. | 98 1. Preparing your article 2. Promoting your published article 3. Monitoring your article
  99. Getting your paper noticed 99 • Usage Alerts Quarterly e-mail to authors, with a link towards a customized web page per article • Cite Alerts Weekly notification to authors once their article is referenced in a newly published article.
  100. Make your paper stand out from the crowd… Share your knowledge
  101. Create your professional research profilePromoting your article
  102. What is Mendeley? Mendeley is a reference manager allowing you to manage, read, share, annotate and cite your research papers... … forming a crowdsourced database ...and an academic collaboration network with 3 Million users to connect like- minded researchers & discover research trends and statistics.
  103. | 103 Monitoring your article My Research Dashboard:  Early feedback on downloads, shares and citations  Data about the geographic locations and research disciplines of your readers  Search terms used in ScienceDirect to find your publications  A comparison of the performance of your article with other people’s articles
  104. | 104 Monitoring your article Altmetrics:
  105. | 105 Getting noticed  Sharing research, accomplishments and ambitions makes you more visible  With greater visibility, you get cited more, promote your research, and career
  106. | 106
  107. | 107 Further reading at Get Published – top tips on writing, reviewing and grant writing etc. Publishing Ethics brochure – top reasons to publish ethically Get Noticed – new ways to promote your article and research Understanding the Publishing Process with Elsevier – complete guide Open access – definitions and options Career Planning Guide – download in 12 languages
  108. We collect your contact details during the training : to automatically register your attendance and to keep you informed by registering you in our database
  109. Get your paper certificate signed right after the session
  110. Visit Elsevier Publishing Campus For more information on publishing ethics: For writing/submission tips and author services: : Thank you