LESSON LEARNT :

WRITING IN INTERNATIONAL

FORESTRY RELATED JOURNALS

Maman Turjaman FORDA-MoF Bogor, 8-9 October, 2012

Contents Introduction Lesson Learnt : Title Abstract IMRAD References

How to submit ? Possible editor decisions Why manuscripts are rejected ? What gets you accepted?

Summary

This is a lesson learnt writing in internasional journals and,

Why Do You Publish?

• Make contributions to society

• To present new, original results of methods

• Be recognized professionally by peers

• Advance in the profession

• To present a review of the field or to summarize a particular topic

QUALITY and VALUE: are at the heart of scholarly communication

Do not publish:

reports of no scientific interest

out of date work

duplication of previously published work

incorrect/unacceptable conclusions

“ salami-sliced” papers: datasets too small to be meaningful

Multiple submissions • Multiple submissions save your time but

waste editors • The editorial process of your

manuscripts will be completely stopped if the duplicated submission are discovered

• Competing journals constantly exchange information on suspicious papers (even between competitors)

• You should not send your manuscripts to a second journal UNTIL you receive the final decision of the first journal.

Deadly sins- Unethical behavior “ can earn rejection and even a ban from publishing in

the journal”— Terry M Phillips, Editor, Journal of Chromatography B

What is your personal reason for publishing an international journal?

However, editors, reviewers, and the research community don’t care

about these reasons.

A journal is the gateway to a COMMUNITY of scientists

with a common interest

o International Journals are the prime carrier of scholary communication o New research relies on relevan information oJournal Editors+Reviewers+Authors+Readers

A COMMUNITY OF SCIENTISTS

YOUR PUBLICATION IS YOUR PASSPORT TO YOUR COMMUNITY

Tokyo University

(Japan)

Hokkaido University

(Japan)

Leicester University

(UK)

Yamagata University (Japan)

Yamaguchi University (Japan)

LIPI (INA)

IPB (INA)

Borneo University

(INA)

Tanjungpura University

(INA)

TERI (india)

BIC-BPPT (INA)

Kobatin Ltd. (INA)

Adaro Indonesia Ltd. (INA)

GMU (INA)

JST- JICA

(Japan)

FORDA-MoF (INA)

INRA (FRANCE)

What is the Impact Factor (IF) ?

Impact Factor

[the average annual number of citations per article published]

For example, the 2010 impact factor for a journal is calculated as follows : Journal X = 700 citations = 2,3 150 + 150 articles

• 2010 impact factor Journal X = A/B • A = the number “citable items” (usually article, review, notes or proceedings) • B = the number of times articles published in 2008 and 2009 were cited in indexed journals during 2010

Journal Title Short Name Impact (2004) Factor

Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment Agr Ecosyst Environ 1.207

Ambio Ambio 1.403

American Naturalist Am Nat 3.944

Animal Behavior Anim Behav 2.092

Applied and Environmental Microbiology Appl Environ Microb 3.389

Biodiversity and Coservation Biodivers Conserv 1.197

Biological Conservation Biol Conserv 2.166

Biological Journal of the Linean Society Biol J Linn Soc 2.261

Bird Study Bird Study 0.729

Conservation Biology Conserv Biol 3.672

Ecological Applications Ecol Appl 3.287

Ecological Economics Ecol Econ 1.266

Ecology Ecology 3.650

Environmental Conservation Environ Conserv 1.841

LIST OF SOME FORESTRY JOURNALS

Journal Title Short Name Impact Factor

Environmental pollution Environ Polutt 2.205

Functional ecology Funct Ecol 2.718

Journal of Animal Ecology J Appl Ecol 3.342

Journal of Arid Environments J Arid Environ 0.722

Journal of Avian Biology J Avian Biol 1.658

Journal of Biogeography J Biogeogr 2.329

Journal of Chemical Ecology J Chem Ecol 1.607

Journal of Ecology J Ecol 3.397

Journal of Environmental Management J Environ Manage 0.780

Journal of Environmental Zoology J Envriron Zool 1.854

Journal of Insect Physiology J Insect Physiol 1.468

Journal of Tropical Ecology J Trop Ecol 1.196

Journal of Vegetation Science J Veg Sci 1.589

Journal of Wildlife Management J Widlife Manage 1.436

LIST OF SOME FORESTRY JOURNALS (Cont’d)

Journal Title Short Name Impact Factor

Microbial Ecology Microbial Ecol 2.703

Molecular Biology and Evolution Mol Biol Evol 5.298

Molecular Ecology Mol Ecol 4.375

Natural History Nat Hist 0.081

Nature Nature 32.182

Oecologia Oecologia 2.8999

Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Philos T Roy Soc B 3.516 Society London Series B-Biological

Plant Ecology (was: Vegetatio) Plant Ecol 1.275

Proceedings of the National Academy of P Natl Acad Sci USA 10.452 Sciences of the USA

Plant pathology Plant Pathol 2.152 (2008)

Plant disease Plant disease 1.874 (2008)

Phypathology Phytopathol 2.192 (2008)

Phytoparasitica Phytoparasit 0.554 (2008)

Physiological and Molecular plant pathology Physiol Mol Plant Pathol 1.409 (2008)

LIST OF SOME FORESTRY JOURNALS (Cont’d)

Journal Title Short Name Impact Factor

New Forests New Forest 1.184 (2011)

Mycorrhizas Mycorrhiza 2.63 (2011)

Forest Ecology and Management For Ecol Manage 2.487 (2011)

Journal of Tropical Forest Science J. Trop For Sci 0.467 (2011)

Wetlands Ecology and Management Wetlands Ecol Manage 1.43 (2011)

HortScience HortScience 0.778 (2011)

Silvae Genetica Silvae Genet 0.778 (2011)

Mycotaxon Mycotaxon 0.549 (2008)

Annual review of phytopathology Ann rev phytopathol 10.237 (2008)

Mycologia Mycologia 2.359 (2008)

New Phytologist New Phytol 6.645 (2011)

LIST OF SOME FORESTRY JOURNALS (Cont’d)

“Not all articles originally rejected by a journal

prove to be valueless” quote Eugene Wigner

Krebs 1953:Physiology/ medicine

Rejected by Nature published in Enzymologia

Michel 1988: Chemistry Rejected by Nature published by Journal of Molecular Biology

Mullis 1993: Chemistry Rejected by Nature + Science published in Methods in Enzymology

Cohen 1986:Physiology/Medicine

Rejected by first journal, published finally by Journal of Investigative Dermatology

Wigner 1963: Physics Rejected by physics journal, published finally by Annals of Mathematics

Table . List of manuscripts published in some international journal

1st Author Year 1st submission Status 2nd Submission Status Journal

Tawaraya 2003 R : 11-12-2002 minor rev - FEM et al. Rv: 19-01-2003 Ac: 04-02-2003 Accepted -

Barry 2004 R : 01-09-2003 minor rev. - FEM et al. Ac: 13-10-2003 Accepted -

Turjaman 2005 R : 10-08-2003 Rejected R : 4-02-2004 New et al. (FEM) Ac:21-07-2004 Accepted Forests

Turjaman 2006 R: 25-08-2005 major rev. - et al. Ac: 03-02-2006 Accepted - JTFS

Turjaman 2006 R: 21-09-2005 major rev. - et al. Ac:26-04-2006 Accepted - Mycorrhizas

Tawaraya 2007 R: 24-02-2006 minor rev. et al. Ac:30-09-2006 Accepted HortScience

Turjaman 2008 R: 29-09-2006 major rev. New Et al. Ac:24-09-2007 Accepted Forests

Turjaman 2011 R: 09-11-2010 minor rev. et al. Ac:11-05-2011 Accepted WEM

Graham 2012 R: 02-02-2012 Rejected R: 08-08-2012 in progress WEM et al. (FEM)

Forest Ecology and Management (FEM)

YEAR Impact Factor (IF)

Total Articles

Total Cites

2008 2.11 697 14451

2009 1.95 600 15088

2010 1.992 466 17252

2011 2.487 475 19493

Editor-in-Chief: P. Attiwill

http://www.journals.elsevier.com/forest-ecology-and-management/

The scope of the journal includes all forest ecosystems of the world.

The journal aims to encourage communication between scientists in disparate fields who share a common interest in

ecology and forest management, and to bridge the gap between research workers and forest managers in the field

to the benefit of both.

Some key features of papers with strong interest include: 1. Clear connections between the ecology and management of forests; 2. Novel ideas or approaches to important challenges in forest ecology and management; 3. Studies that address a population of interest beyond the scale of single research sites (see the editorial, Three key points in the design of forest experiments, Forest Ecology and Management 255 (2008) 2022-2023); 4. Review Articles on timely, important topics. Authors are encouraged to contact one of the editors to discuss the potential suitability of a review manuscript.

AIMS AND SCOPE

New Forests International Journal on the Biology, Biotechnology, and Management of Afforestation and Reforestation

Editor-in-Chief: Douglass F. Jacobs ISSN: 0169-4286 (print version) ISSN: 1573-5095 (electronic version)

YEAR Impact Factor (IF)

Total Articles

Total Cites

2008 0.845 45 706

2009 0.728 49 690

2010 0.915 54 840

2011 1.184 53 939

Journal articles concern : the reproduction of trees and forests originating from seed, planted seedlings or coppice for the purposes of resource protection, timber production and agro-forestry Natural and artificial methods of regeneration & all stand structures from even-aged to uneven-aged are considered. Topics include : general silviculture Genetics Ecology Protection management of all stages in the process of afforestation and reforestation

AIMS AND SCOPE

New Forests publishes original papers on the fundamental and applied aspects of afforestation and reforestation for a broad

international audience of scientists and practitioners.

Plant physiology Biotechnology Economics

Wetlands and Ecology Management (WEM)

Impact Factor 2011 : 1.430 Impact Factor 2010: Impact Factor 2009: Impact Factor 2008: 1.2

http://www.springer.com/life+sciences/ecology/journal/11273

Main editors: E. Wolanski; C.S. Hopkinson; J.F. Gottgens ISSN: 0923-4861 (print version) ISSN: 1572-9834 (electronic version)

The Journal serves as a multi-disciplinary forum covering key issues in wetlands science, management, policy and economics. As such, Wetlands Ecology and Management aims to encourage the exchange of information between environmental managers,

pure and applied scientists, and national and international authorities on wetlands policy and ecological economics.

Wetlands Ecology and Management is an international journal that publishes authoritative and original articles on topics relevant

to freshwater, brackish and marine coastal wetland ecosystems.

AIMS AND SCOPE

YEAR Impact Factor (IF)

Total Articles

Total Cites

2008 0.476 37 204

2009 0.323 42 196

2010 0.519 50 254

2011 0.467 58 336

Journal of Tropical Forest Science (JTFS)

E-ISSN: 0128-1283 Print ISSN: 0128-1283 Publisher: Forest Research Institute Malaysia Publication frequency: 4 time(s) per year Alternate site: http://www.frim.gov.my/?page_id=1826

Editor-in-Chief Sarifah KA (sarifah@frim.gov.my)

The Journal of Tropical Forest Science (JTFS) is an international reviewed journal concerning the science, technology and

development of tropical forests and forest products.

The journal welcomes articles reporting original fundamental or applied research on tropical forest biology, ecology, chemistry, management,

silviculture, conservation, utilization and product development. English is the official language of the journal. Only manuscripts with substantial

scientific merit will be reviewed for originality, significance, relevance and quality.

AIMS AND SCOPE

Managing editors: V. Gianinazzi-Pearson; R. Molina ISSN: 0940-6360 (print version) ISSN: 1432-1890 (electronic version)

YEAR Impact Factor (IF)

Total Articles

Total Cites

2008 2.205 49 1551

2009 2.65 56 2077

2010 2.571 44 2308

2011 2.63 68 2400

MYCORRHIZA is an international journal devoted to research into mycorrhizas - the widest symbioses in nature, involving plants and a range of soil fungi world-wide.

The scope of MYCORRHIZA covers all aspects of research into mycorrhizas, including molecular biology of the plants & fungi, fungal systematics, development & structure of mycorrhizas, & effects on plant physiology, productivity, reproduction & disease resistance

The scope also includes interactions between mycorrhizal fungi & other soil organisms and effects of mycorrhizas on plant biodiversity and ecosystem structure

AIMS AND SCOPE

YEAR Impact Factor (IF)

Total Articles

Total Cites

2008 0.914 338 5999

2009 0.696 292 4892

2010 0.886 306 5955

2011 0.778 270 5848

Editorial Board David Bryla Jianjun Chen Penelope Perkins-Veazie Clinton Shock M. LeRon Robbins, Chair (ex officio) Editor in Chief: M. LeRon Robbins

HortScience

Manuscript submissiom Permissions Online submission Title page Text Additional remark Text References Table Artwork and illustrations Guidlines Electronic supplementary Material Does Springer provide English language support ? After acceptance

INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS

READ GUIDE FOR AUTHORS ! AGAIN AND AGAIN !

Section Purpose

Title Clearly describes contents

Authors Ensures recognition for the writer(s)

Abstract Describes what was done 200-300 words

Key Words (some

journals)

Ensures the article is correctly identified in

abstracting and indexing services

Introduction Explains the problem

Methods Explains how the data were collected

Results Describes what was discovered

Discussion Discusses the implications of the findings

Acknowledgements Ensures those who helped in the research are

recognised

References Ensures previously published work is

recognised

Appendices (some

journals)

Provides supplemental data for the expert

reader

Components of a manuscript

• To describe the nature and content

of research concisely and accurately.

• Concise to describe the content of

study with the fewest words – 20

words.

• Clear and informative.

• Capture the importance of the study

and the attention of the reader.

• Describe actual findings that can be

supported in the manuscript.

– what the paper is broadly about

• A good title contains the fewest possible words that adequately describe the contents of the paper.

• Effective titles

– Identify the main issue of the paper – Begin with the subject of the paper – Are accurate, clear, specific, and complete – Do not contain infrequently-used abbreviations – Can attract readers

The main issue

Specific

The main issue

Specific

Received : 1 September 2003 Accepted : 13 October 2003

The main issue

Received : 4 February 2004 Accepted :21 July 2004

The main issue

Specific

Received : 29 September 2006 Accepted :24 September 2007

The main issue

Specific

Received : 21 September 2005 Accepted :26 April 2006

The main issue

Specific

The main issue

Specific

The main issue Specific

Shorea balangeran and Dyera polyphylla as tropical peat swamp forest restoration transplant species: effects of mycorrhizae and level of disturbance

This manuscript was submitted on August 8, 2012

Laura L.B. Graham*, Maman Turjaman, Susan E. Page

*University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, UK.

First submission was to Forest Ecology and Management (FEM)

OR

2nd Submission was to Wetlands Ecology and Management (WEM)

The First was

?

Abstract (200-300 words) what has been done and what are the main findings

• There are three main types of abstract.

– Indicative (descriptive) abstract outlines the topics covered in a piece of writing so the reader can decide whether to read the entire document. Often used in review articles or conference reports.

– Informative abstract summarize the article based on the IMRAD structure, but without these words explicitly presented.

– Structured abstract follows headings required by the journal. Often used in Medical journals.

• Check carefully which type fits the journal of your choice.

42

The abstract is the advertisement of your article. A clear abstract will strongly

influence the editor’s decision on whether your work will be further considered.

• Precise and honest • Stand-alone

• No uncommon technical jargons, or citations.

• Brief and specific

Abstract

• Common Mistakes

Too much background or methods information

Figures or images

References to other literature

Abbreviations or acronyms

ABSTRACT

Background : 18%

The objective : 18%

Methods : 32%

Results : 23%

Discussion : 9%

Keywords : Shorea balangeran, Ectomycorrhiza, Peat-Swamp Forest, Nursery, Field

I

M

R

D

A

Background :24%

The objective : 13%

Methods : 21%

Results : 28%

Discussion: 14%

ABSTRACT

M

R

D

A

I

I =20%

M =13%

R =53%

D =14%

ABSTRACT

A

• Provide the readers with sufficient background information to evaluate the results of the research

• No more than 2 typed pages usually

• Focus on the main subject

• Brief and well integrated review of pertinent work

• Cite key and current literature

INTRODUCTION

• Extensive review of the literature is not needed

• Explain the importance of your research

– What new or important scientific information is needed to advance knowledge in the subject area?

– State clearly why the research is needed and worth doing

• State the objectives of your

work

• Broad information on topic – Previous research

• Narrower background information – Need for study

• Focus of paper – Hypothesis

• Summary of problem (selling point)

• Common Mistakes Too much or not enough

information

Unclear purpose

Lists

Confusing structure

First-Person anecdotes

is not review article or history lesson

Importance of dipterocarps in SE-ASIA TPSF Conditions

1 2

State of the art : mycorrhizal of dipterocarps in SE-A

Focus : mycorrhizal researchs in outplanting

3

4

TYPE OF ECM INOCULUM

5

6 Objective

2 Degradation of tropical forests & NTFP tree species conditions NTFPs & their utilization 1

AM fungi increased the growth of some tropical trees.

Limited information: AM fungi to Apocynaceae & Thymelaeaceae Including the objective

4 3

• Provide sufficient analytical information so that work can be repeated.

• Use appropriate experimental design to answer the research question.

• Cite and use the accepted and current methodology.

• If a published method is modified, such modifications must be described in detail.

• Describe new methods in detail.

• Describe statistical analysis of data if appropriate.

• Use subheadings as needed for clarity.

• Provides instruction on exactly how to repeat experiment – Subjects

– Sample preparation techniques

– Sample origins

– Field site description

– Data collection protocol

– Data analysis techniques

– Any computer programs used

– Description of equipment and its use

• Common Mistakes

–Too little information

– Information from Introduction

–Verbosity*

–Results/ sources of error reported

*bertele-tele

1

2

1

2

3

1

2

3 4

5

1

2 3

4 5

6 7

• Present research data concisely and interpret the data scientifically.

• Short and sweet with no excess verbiage.

• Work consistent with the objectives stated in the Introduction.

• Reproducibility and sensitivity of analytical methods

• Report representative data rather than endless repetitive data

• Numerical data with the correct number of significant digits

• Present results concisely using tables and figures as needed.

• Table and figure legends should be accompanied with sufficient information to make the main point so that minimal text is needed.

• Do not present the same information in both tables, figures, and the text.

• All tables and figures must be numbered in the order in which they are mentioned in the text.

• Objective presentation of experiment results – Summary of data

• NOT a Discussion!

• Common mistakes – Raw data

– Redundancy

– Discussion and interpretation of data

– No figures or tables

– Methods/materials reported

Figures and Tables

• Tables – Presents lists of numbers/ text in columns

• Figures

– Visual representation of results or illustration of concepts/methods (graphs, images, diagrams, etc.)

• Captions

– Must be stand-alone

Figures and Tables

• Guidelines for Figures and Tables – High resolution

– Neat, legible labels

– Simple

– Clearly formatted

– Indicate error

– Detailed captions

Tables

Tables

Figures

A figure is worth a thousand words

A figure is worth a thousand words

… it is useful to begin by summarizing briefly

the main findings, then explore possible

mechanisms or explanations for the

findings

… compare and contrast the results with

other relevant studies, state the limitations

of the study, and explore the implications

of the findings for future research and for

clinical practice

Look for:

1. generalizations derived from the results

2. limitations, exceptions and any lack of correlation

3. elaboration on the unsettled points

4. relationship of the new information with the previous

“published” works

5. applicability of the results (theoretical and practical

implications of the results; relate present findings that were

argued in the introduction)

6. conclusion/s with brief summary of the evidences (should

clearly answer the research questions!)

Avoid:

1. Repetition of the statements results

2. Too verbose, theoretical texts that are irrelevant to

the research problem*

3. Inadequate discussions on the significant results

4. Failure to justify negative results

5. Failure to end with a brief “climax”

• Show the relationships among observed facts.

• Point out any exceptions or lack of correlations, and define any unsettled points.

• Discuss the discrepancies between new results and previously reported results in similar studies.

• Discuss the research limitations and identify future research.

• Discuss the theoretical implications and possible practical applications of your research.

• Interpret results – Did the study confirm/deny the hypothesis?

– If not, did the results provide an alternative hypothesis? What interpretation can be made?

– Do results agree with other research? Sources of error/anomalous data?

– Implications of study for field

– Suggestions for improvement and future research?

• Relate to previous research

• Common Mistakes – Combined with Results

– New results discussed

– Broad statements

– Incorrectly discussing inconclusive results

– Ambiguous data sources

– Missing information

• Identify key findings and application to science and technology

• Conclusion should not be a summary of the work done or a virtual duplication of the abstract.

• Conclusions should be justified by the experimental design, methods, and results.

References

• Check specific referencing style of journal

• Should reference: – Peer-reviewed journal articles,

abstracts, books

• Should not reference: – Non-peer-reviewed works,

textbooks, personal communications

References

• Common Mistakes

– Format, Format, Format

• (Figures & Tables, Equations, and References)

– Redundant Information

• Text, Figures, Tables, and Captions

– Type of Reference

Avoid citing the following if possible:

personal communications, unpublished observations, manuscripts submitted but not yet

accepted for publication

articles published only in the local language, which are difficult for international readers to

find

REFERENCES

1. Vancouver system: references are numbered in the list according to the sequences they appeared in the main text.

2. Harvard system: references are listed alphabetically according to the author name.

Mycorrhiza

WEM

JTFS

FEM

References

DO NOT PUT ALL CITATIONS AT THE END OF SENTENCES !

“Worldwide research on pegmatites has involved the study of their petrogenesis, classification, texture and structure, rare element geochemistry, mineralogy, and experimental petrology; (Solodov, 1962; Zou and Xu, 1975; Zou et al., 1986; Kuzminko, 1976; Makagon, 1977; Makagon and Shmakin, 1988; Luan, 1979; Wang, 1982; Shmakin, 1983; London, 1981, 1986, 1998; Cerny, 1982a, 1982b, 1991; Cerny et al., 1986; Cerny and Lenton, 1995; Roedder, 1984; Walker et al., 1986; Wang et al.,1987; Chu and Wang, 1987; Wang et al.,1987; Zhang et al., 1987; Zhao et al., 1993; Li et al.,1983; Li ,1987; Li et al.,1994, 1998, 1999a, 1999b, 2000; Bai, 1995; Zeng and Jin, 1995; Wu et al., 1995; Lu and Wang,1997; Feng, 1998).

36 references in one sentence!

• Read the instructions for authors carefully

• Format manuscript in line with the journal style

• Send the manuscript to the journal editor and await for the acknowledgement

• Wait for reviewers comments

• Address all the comments of the reviewers

• Keep to deadline for submission of revised manuscript

How to submit a journal article ?

• Return the revised manuscript to the editor with a point-by-point response to the reviewers’ comments

• Read the proof sent by the editor and ensure that everything is okay

• Return the proof back to the editor before the deadline

• Complete and return copyright form to the editor (some journals need this before publication)

• Wait to see the article in print or online

• If the manuscript is rejected at the peer review level, revise it using the reviewers comments and send to another journal

90

Submit a

paper

Basic requirements met?

REJECT

Assign

reviewers

Collect reviewers’

recommendations

Make a

decisionRevise the

paper

[Reject]

[Revision required]

[Accept]

[Yes]

[No]Review and give

recommendation

START

ACCEPT

Author Editor Reviewer

Who moved your manuscript?

Michael Derntl. Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing.

http://www.pri.univie.ac.at/~derntl/papers/meth-se.pdf

Overview of Peer Review Process

Paper Submitted

Initial Decision by Editor

Confirmation of Receipt

Rejection Decide to Review

Assign Reviewers

Reviewers Accept Invite

Reviews Completed

Reject Accept

Notification to Author

Revise

Paper sent to Publisher

Accept Revise

Revision Received

Revision Checked

Timetable from submission to initial feedback to authors

• The Editor(s) do an initial read to determine if the subject matter and research approach is appropriate for the journal (approx. 1 week)

• The Editor(s) identify and contact two reviewers (approx. 1 week)

• Reviewers usually have 6-8 weeks to complete their reviews

• The Editor(s) assess the reviewers' comments and recommendations and make a decision (approx. 2 weeks)

• Expected time from submission to review feedback: 3-3.5 months

Revision after submissiom Carefully study the comments and prepare

a detailed letter of response.

How to revise your paper

Consult with colleagues or co-authors & tend to the points as requested Meet the revision deadline Attach a covering letter which indentifies, point-by point, how revision requests have been met (or if not, why not) For example “The change will not improve the article because...”

Acknowledge the editor & set a revision deadline If you disagree, explain why to the editor Clarify understanding, if in doubt-’This is what I understand the comments to mean...’

Cover Letter

Basic information should be included as follows:

Editor name(s)

Originality of submission

No competing financial interests

Desired reviewers

Corresponding author

Example

You will be advised of one of three possible decisions:

Accept

Reject

Revise

Possible editor decisions

Why Was My Manuscript Rejected ?

General Scientific Presentation-Style

Issue not important unclear hypotheses poorly organized

Not original poor or weak design badly written

Not appropriate sample biased or careless errors for journal too small

Data old & now statistics inappropriate terrible tables Irrelevant or misapplied

Practical difficulties conclusions needless figures (doubtful results) unjustified

Conflict of interest references outdated or impro- & Ethical issues outdated perly cited references

WHY MANUSCRIPTS ARE REJECTED ?

• The subject matter is of insufficient interest to the readership to a specific journal

• Lack of new information

• The results are trivial, predictable, or duplicative of others

• Insufficient international importance or interest

• Scientific quality is substandard due to poor experimental design and methodology

• Improper conclusion

• Suspected misconduct - fabrication and plagiarism

Immediate Rejection Criteria

• Not following instructions – author

guidelines • Lack of fit (‘why was it sent to this

journal’?) • Problem with quality (inappropriate

methodology, not reasonably rigorous, excessively long)

• Insufficient contribution (does not advance the field, a minor extension of existing work, there is no ‘gap in our understanding’)

• Did you understand the “journal conversation”?

Reasons for rejection

• Don’t give up! Everybody has been rejected at least once

• Ask why, and listen carefully! Most editors will give detailed comments about a rejected paper. Take a deep breath, and listen to what is being said

• Try again! Try to improve the paper, and re-submit elsewhere. Do your homework and target your paper as closely as possible

• Keep trying!

What if your paper is rejected ?

Positive outcomes of rejection

• Incentive to improve your work

• Valuable feedback

• Good experience of how the system works

What gets you accepted?

• Attention to details

• Check and double check your work

• Consider the reviews

• 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

Summary check the originallity of your idea at the very beginning of your research before submit to an international journal track the latest results regularly in your field. New and relevant articles get published all the time Decide the type of your manuscript Topic of local or national relevance are sometimes not interesting for an international audience Choose the right journal Don’t resubmit a rejected manuscript to another journal without significant revision! It won’t work Read the Guide of Authors! Again and Again!

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.“

- Albert Einstein

GOOD LUCK !

Thank you

FORDA-MOF