The 7 Habits of Highly The 7 Habits of Highly Effective ResearchersEffective Researchers

Dr. Steve WallaceDr. Steve Wallace

IntroductionIntroduction

Technical writing teacher – Taiwan Technical writing teacher – Taiwan University, Chaio Tung University, University, Chaio Tung University, Tsing Hwa University Tsing Hwa University

Class and writing labClass and writing lab

Habits that produce more papers in Habits that produce more papers in high impact journals high impact journals

Understanding feelings about Understanding feelings about writingwriting

A survey of 400,000 U.S. faculty showed 26% A survey of 400,000 U.S. faculty showed 26% spent zero hours per week writing spent zero hours per week writing 27% never published a journal paper 27% never published a journal paper 43% had published nothing in the last 2 years 43% had published nothing in the last 2 years 62% never published a book 62% never published a book Only 28% produced two publications in the past Only 28% produced two publications in the past two years two years Only 25% of faculty spent more than eight hours Only 25% of faculty spent more than eight hours a week writing (Lindholm 2005) a week writing (Lindholm 2005) 15% of faculty are productive writers (Moxley and 15% of faculty are productive writers (Moxley and Taylor)Taylor)

MethodMethodData from interviews, phone, conferences Data from interviews, phone, conferences and universitiesand universities

Position as editor has allowed opportunity Position as editor has allowed opportunity

Compiled into 7 basic “habits” which Compiled into 7 basic “habits” which summarize advice and tips in 7 areassummarize advice and tips in 7 areas

To get the most honest responses researchers To get the most honest responses researchers remained anonymousremained anonymous

Overview of ResearchersOverview of ResearchersAn effective researcher was defined as a researcher who An effective researcher was defined as a researcher who published an average of five or more SCI papers a year published an average of five or more SCI papers a year every year for the last five years every year for the last five years 146 effective researchers:146 effective researchers:34 - Engineering34 - Engineering17 - Management and Business17 - Management and Business11 - Foreign Language and Literature11 - Foreign Language and Literature10 - Education10 - Education31 - Natural sciences31 - Natural sciences20 - Medicine20 - Medicine12 - Social sciences12 - Social sciences6 - Law6 - Law5 - History and Liberal Arts 5 - History and Liberal Arts

Habit #1 Habit #1 Effective researchers have a Effective researchers have a

publication supply chainpublication supply chain..

More than one stepMore than one step

More than one product More than one product

Think about the customerThink about the customer

Capturing raw material when Capturing raw material when away from the computer:away from the computer:

Collect ideas: Notebook, Post-It notesCollect ideas: Notebook, Post-It notes

Transfer to ongoing files Transfer to ongoing files

Notes can be organized and edited Notes can be organized and edited into the start of a paperinto the start of a paper

Easier to begin writing when there Easier to begin writing when there were already ideaswere already ideas

Master’s studentsMaster’s students Generate papers from your thesisGenerate papers from your thesis

You spent two years writing a thesis You spent two years writing a thesis

Generate a couple of papers from the Generate a couple of papers from the most important chapters of the most important chapters of the thesis thesis

Easier than writing a new paperEasier than writing a new paper

Work with advisor to market your Work with advisor to market your papers papers

Collect several potential journals for Collect several potential journals for each articleeach article

Do not submit two papers to the Do not submit two papers to the same journal in two months, same journal in two months, especially if the two articles are especially if the two articles are related related

Editors prefer to publish two articles Editors prefer to publish two articles by different authorsby different authors

Collecting your Journal optionsCollecting your Journal options

KeywordsKeywords

Relatedness metricsRelatedness metrics

ReferencesReferences

ScopusScopus

Aims and scopeAims and scope

Editor’s letterEditor’s letter

Reviewing the journalReviewing the journal

Pick journals like you Pick journals like you pick stockspick stocks

Submit paper to journals with rising impact Submit paper to journals with rising impact factors and higher acceptance rates factors and higher acceptance rates

Avoid declining journals with low Avoid declining journals with low acceptance and diminishing impact factor acceptance and diminishing impact factor

Low impact could cause the journal to be Low impact could cause the journal to be removed from the SCIremoved from the SCI

Identifying journals with rising impact factorsIdentifying journals with rising impact factors

Good specialty journal’s impact factors are rising Good specialty journal’s impact factors are rising General journal’s impact factor, except for a few at General journal’s impact factor, except for a few at the top, are expected to decline the top, are expected to decline In general journals, In general journals, ““Readers are confronted with a decreasing Readers are confronted with a decreasing probability of finding at least one important article probability of finding at least one important article in their field." in their field." (Holub, Tappeiner, and Eberharter, (Holub, Tappeiner, and Eberharter, 1991). 1991). In the 1970s, the top ten journals in every field In the 1970s, the top ten journals in every field were general journals were general journals In the 1990s, half of the top ten journals were In the 1990s, half of the top ten journals were specialized journals specialized journals

Practice Practice Betting your research where you have the Betting your research where you have the

highest probability for publication.highest probability for publication.

Journals have biases and preferencesJournals have biases and preferencesEmpirical vs TheoreticalEmpirical vs TheoreticalCountry or university of origin Country or university of origin Check past issues of the journalCheck past issues of the journalHow many Chinese names can you How many Chinese names can you find? find? Preferences are known; biases are Preferences are known; biases are difficult to detect. difficult to detect.

Keep a record of your Keep a record of your publicationspublications

Some researchers use a “research Some researchers use a “research log”log”1) Know when to send a reminder to 1) Know when to send a reminder to the editor the editor 2) Prevent resubmission of a rejected 2) Prevent resubmission of a rejected paper to the same journalpaper to the same journal3) Avoid multiple submission to the 3) Avoid multiple submission to the same journal within a short period of same journal within a short period of time time

Approach different types of journalsApproach different types of journals

Quantity and quality importantQuantity and quality importantSending all papers to top journals is Sending all papers to top journals is risky risky Sending all papers to low-quality Sending all papers to low-quality journals is unsatisfactory journals is unsatisfactory Having three papers in different Having three papers in different journals is better than three in one journals is better than three in one journal, if the relative quality of the journal, if the relative quality of the journals is the samejournals is the same

Maintain papers under review constantlyMaintain papers under review constantly

If the acceptance rate of the top-ranking If the acceptance rate of the top-ranking journals is 15%, you need about 7 papers journals is 15%, you need about 7 papers under review to have one paper accepted under review to have one paper accepted per yearper yearThis does not mean that you should write This does not mean that you should write 7 new papers each year7 new papers each year

PracticePracticeDon't put two good ideas in one paperDon't put two good ideas in one paper

Separate them into two papers. Separate them into two papers. As the paper's length increases beyond 15 As the paper's length increases beyond 15 pages, the chance of acceptance drops pages, the chance of acceptance drops When split into two papers, the probability When split into two papers, the probability of getting one of them accepted doubles of getting one of them accepted doubles – Editors like short papers Editors like short papers – The chance that a referee will detect a The chance that a referee will detect a

mathematical error declines mathematical error declines – Referees will return the report faster Referees will return the report faster – The chance that a referee will The chance that a referee will

misunderstand the paper also decreases misunderstand the paper also decreases

Develop template sentencesDevelop template sentences

Parts of the introduction, methods Parts of the introduction, methods and discussion of one paper can and discussion of one paper can often be recycled to make a new often be recycled to make a new paperpaper

Keep a database of words and Keep a database of words and phrases to use in different parts of phrases to use in different parts of your paperyour paper

Consider different subtopicsConsider different subtopicsAverage wait for an acceptance Average wait for an acceptance decision = 3 years decision = 3 years Average wait for a rejection = 6 to 8 Average wait for a rejection = 6 to 8 months months If you publish in one area, then focus If you publish in one area, then focus your effort in that fieldyour effort in that fieldContinuing to write papers in the Continuing to write papers in the same narrow area without evidence same narrow area without evidence of success is risky of success is risky

Use English editingUse English editing

Use professional editorial assistanceUse professional editorial assistance

Editors will not publish papers with Editors will not publish papers with many grammatical errors many grammatical errors

Referees often recommend rejection Referees often recommend rejection for excessive grammatical errorsfor excessive grammatical errors

4%

9%

7%

8%

13%

2%

16%

7%7%

English Errors 27%

Faulty methodology

Inadequate references

Poor quality supporting figures

Outside the scope of journal

Not enough contribution to field

Authors did not follow manuscript instructions

Poor writing style and use of English

Title not representative of study

Subject of little novel interest or not generally applicable

Poorly written discussion

Reasons for major revision or rejection of Chinese journal papers

Revision (Continued) Revision (Continued) ““If you don't proofread your own introdIf you don't proofread your own introduction, why expect the referees to spot auction, why expect the referees to spot and correct all the errors?” nd correct all the errors?” - Chinese History Professor - Chinese History Professor - # 2 - # 2

““You should always check spelling befoYou should always check spelling before submission. But there are no substitutre submission. But there are no substitutes for reading the papers personally. Spes for reading the papers personally. Spelling checkers do not check word meanelling checkers do not check word meanings.” ings.” – Electrical Engineering Post Doctoral Researcher # 102 – Electrical Engineering Post Doctoral Researcher # 102

Habit #2 Habit #2

Sacrifice other interestsSacrifice other interests Researchers gave up hobbies, gameResearchers gave up hobbies, games and time with friends to become hs and time with friends to become high impact researchers. igh impact researchers. When you play, play hard; when you work, don't play at all. Theodore RooseveltTheodore Roosevelt

Habit #3Habit #3

Practice research like golfPractice research like golf

Researchers watch and improve the weaknessResearchers watch and improve the weaknesses in their publishing game like an athlete perfes in their publishing game like an athlete perfecting his sport ecting his sport

PracticePracticeQuote on specific skillsQuote on specific skills

““Traditionally my introduction is a bit Traditionally my introduction is a bit weak; I have a challenge selling the weak; I have a challenge selling the problem to reviewers. I’ve got to be problem to reviewers. I’ve got to be able to present the problem better if able to present the problem better if I want people to be interested in my I want people to be interested in my solution. I’m getting better but I’m solution. I’m getting better but I’m constantly aware that this is a constantly aware that this is a weakness, and I need to practice to weakness, and I need to practice to improve.” improve.” – Mechanical Engineering Professor # 31– Mechanical Engineering Professor # 31

PracticePracticeImitate skillful writersImitate skillful writers

Read how successful writers Read how successful writers introduce their topic and cite introduce their topic and cite literatureliterature

Imitate their words and phrases, and Imitate their words and phrases, and modify them to suit your topicmodify them to suit your topic

Create a file of template sentencesCreate a file of template sentences

Habit #4 Habit #4

Dramatize process by creatinDramatize process by creating mental modelsg mental models

Researchers see their writing and researResearchers see their writing and researchingching dramatically dramatically

UUse strong metaphors to create exciting se strong metaphors to create exciting mental pictures to encourage themselvemental pictures to encourage themselves s ““The great struggleThe great struggle”” Model of building a house Model of building a house Killing a monsterKilling a monster

Habit #5 Habit #5 Writers use the competitive, political and Writers use the competitive, political and supportive energy of other researcherssupportive energy of other researchers

Supportive energySupportive energy: Support groups : Support groups Competitive energyCompetitive energy: Researchers compare themselv: Researchers compare themselves with other researchers es with other researchers PoliticalPolitical energy energy: The negative side : The negative side of publishing of publishing is is that half of peer reviewed articles in top rated journals that half of peer reviewed articles in top rated journals are never referenced by anyone, including the author. are never referenced by anyone, including the author. This shows that low impact papers are often publisheThis shows that low impact papers are often published in the best journals because the articles are reviewed in the best journals because the articles are reviewed by friends of the author. (Holub, Tappeiner, and Ebed by friends of the author. (Holub, Tappeiner, and Eberharter, SEJ 1991). rharter, SEJ 1991).

PracticePracticeDon’t Criticize ReferencesDon’t Criticize References

I think that the author knows his subject betteI think that the author knows his subject better than I do. I usually use his references to find a r than I do. I usually use his references to find a suitable reviewer suitable reviewer Associate Editor, Journal of RetailingAssociate Editor, Journal of Retailing

Don’t emphasize the importance of your papDon’t emphasize the importance of your paper by er by strongly criticizing strongly criticizing other papersother papers Your references are probably your reviewers aYour references are probably your reviewers and are sensitivend are sensitive

Examples of offensive citation:Examples of offensive citation:

"The deficiency of Smith's approach is..." "The deficiency of Smith's approach is..." "The problems with Smith’s paper are…" "The problems with Smith’s paper are…" ““A serious weakness with Smith’s argument,A serious weakness with Smith’s argument, however, is that ......” however, is that ......”““The key problem with Smith’s explanation The key problem with Smith’s explanation is that ......”is that ......”““It seems that Smith’s understanding of the It seems that Smith’s understanding of the X framework is questionable.”X framework is questionable.”

A better citation would be:A better citation would be:

““Smith’s model was effective in X proSmith’s model was effective in X problem, however in Y…”blem, however in Y…”““The X benefit of Smith’s approach arThe X benefit of Smith’s approach are not applicable to Y…”e not applicable to Y…”

PracticePracticePay attention to reviewers’ commentsPay attention to reviewers’ comments

““I don’t think you treated Smith fairly I don’t think you treated Smith fairly in your literature review, his insights in your literature review, his insights deserve more respect.”deserve more respect.”

““You forgot to include Smith as a You forgot to include Smith as a reference in your paper. His work is reference in your paper. His work is fundamental to understanding your fundamental to understanding your research.” research.”

Complement potential reviewersComplement potential reviewers

The editor usually chooses reviewers from thoThe editor usually chooses reviewers from those mentioned in the introduction and referencse mentioned in the introduction and references.es.Be generous to all authors, explain why their rBe generous to all authors, explain why their research is esearch is important important for your analysis for your analysis This uses less than 1% of the space, but signifiThis uses less than 1% of the space, but significantly affects the probability of acceptancecantly affects the probability of acceptance

Practice Practice Cite researchers who like youCite researchers who like you

Include references to authors who like yInclude references to authors who like your papers. They might become referees our papers. They might become referees Include references you met at conferencInclude references you met at conferences es Referees have to make an effort to be faiReferees have to make an effort to be fair to unknown authorsr to unknown authors

Meet 100 active researchersMeet 100 active researchers

There are There are less than less than hundred people in your fihundred people in your field who are likely to be referees eld who are likely to be referees Prepare a list of one hundred active people in Prepare a list of one hundred active people in your research area your research area Try to meet them within a five-year period Try to meet them within a five-year period Present papers at, or attend, two professional Present papers at, or attend, two professional meetings a year meetings a year This is your best opportunity for networkingThis is your best opportunity for networking

Scan journal for related articles Scan journal for related articles FFind related articles in the journal to whiind related articles in the journal to which you wish to submit your paperch you wish to submit your paperAuthors who published a paper on Authors who published a paper on your your subject are likely to be referees subject are likely to be referees The editor remembers them and has a cThe editor remembers them and has a connection to them onnection to them CC ite their papersite their papers even if slightly even if slightly relatedrelatedExplain how your work is relatedExplain how your work is related

Habit #6 Habit #6 Get rejectedGet rejected

When rejected, try againWhen rejected, try againEven Nobel Laureates get rejection letters. Even Nobel Laureates get rejection letters. Submit the paper to another journal within onSubmit the paper to another journal within one month e month You do not have to revise a paper every time it You do not have to revise a paper every time it is rejected is rejected IIf a paper is rejected 4 times, there is a serious f a paper is rejected 4 times, there is a serious flaw in the paper. Find and fix the problem.flaw in the paper. Find and fix the problem.00 Why? The same referee might get it again. Why? The same referee might get it again.

Emotions on rejected paperEmotions on rejected paper

1) Depression1) Depression

2) Anger at editor2) Anger at editor

3) Anger at system3) Anger at system

4) Consider changing job4) Consider changing job

5) Reviewing manuscripts and 5) Reviewing manuscripts and deciding the reviewers had pointsdeciding the reviewers had points

Eliminate any trace of prior Eliminate any trace of prior rejectionsrejections

Do not show when the paper was first Do not show when the paper was first written written Do not show how many times the papeDo not show how many times the paper has been revised r has been revised Document property check Document property check Add current referencesAdd current references

Everyone gets rejectedEveryone gets rejected

Your options:Your options:

Abandon the article.Abandon the article.

Send the article with no changes to Send the article with no changes to another journal.another journal.

Revise the article and send it to Revise the article and send it to another journal.another journal.

Protest the decision and try to Protest the decision and try to resubmit the article to the journalresubmit the article to the journal

Waiting for the Journal’s Waiting for the Journal’s decisiondecision

Causes of quick rejection:Causes of quick rejection:

Back-logBack-log

Previous paper on subjectPrevious paper on subject

Editor doesn’t like topic or styleEditor doesn’t like topic or style

When should you start contacting When should you start contacting the editor about your paper?the editor about your paper?

After three months once a monthAfter three months once a month

Four months twice a monthFour months twice a month

Six months every daySix months every day

The longer the review takes, the less The longer the review takes, the less chance to publishchance to publish

Reviewers may be negativeReviewers may be negative

May have internal issues at the journalMay have internal issues at the journal

You may want to consider withdrawing You may want to consider withdrawing

Editor’s feedback is keyEditor’s feedback is key

Reminder e-mail to editorReminder e-mail to editor

““I’m just e-mailing to inquire about I’m just e-mailing to inquire about the status of my article titled______, the status of my article titled______, which I submitted to your journal on ( which I submitted to your journal on ( date ).”date ).”

Don’t get angrier over timeDon’t get angrier over time

Sometimes editors appreciate the Sometimes editors appreciate the reminderreminder

Do not attack refereesDo not attack refereesIt is not a good idea to attack the reviewers. It is not a good idea to attack the reviewers.

– Do not say: Do not say: – "The referee's idea is bad, but mine is "The referee's idea is bad, but mine is

good." good." – Better Better – ““The referee has an interesting idea, but The referee has an interesting idea, but

the proposed idea is also good, the proposed idea is also good, particularly because of this or that fact.” particularly because of this or that fact.”

– If the referee makes a good point, explain If the referee makes a good point, explain why you are not doing itwhy you are not doing it

Habit #7Habit #7Writers write (and don’t always enjoy it)Writers write (and don’t always enjoy it)

Common misunderstanding that good wCommon misunderstanding that good writers enjoy writing riters enjoy writing Many hate writingMany hate writing,, bbut enjoy the results ut enjoy the results Forced themselves into a daily writing roForced themselves into a daily writing routine utine

Building the Writing HabitBuilding the Writing HabitThe same timeThe same time The same placeThe same placeCarry a notebookCarry a notebookQuiet placeQuiet place Get rid of rid of negative thoughtsGet rid of rid of negative thoughtsSit alone in silenceSit alone in silence Ideas, not grammar, for the first draft. Ideas, not grammar, for the first draft. RewriteRewrite

Do not Do not read to avoid writingread to avoid writingMany use more reading to prevent writing Many use more reading to prevent writing You canYou can’’t read every paper on a subject t read every paper on a subject YY our goal is to write and publish a paper, not to rour goal is to write and publish a paper, not to r

ead everything ead everything If you read a dozen papers on a topic, you shoulIf you read a dozen papers on a topic, you shoul

d have enough material to start writingd have enough material to start writing

Researchers are proud of the term researResearchers are proud of the term researcher and their total impactcher and their total impact

QuoteQuote““I used to think that research all happened in I used to think that research all happened in a lab. That my results were the only thing that a lab. That my results were the only thing that mattered. I now realize that the experiment ismattered. I now realize that the experiment isn’t over and the results haven’t really happn’t over and the results haven’t really happened until they have been shared with a wider ened until they have been shared with a wider academic community. Writing is part of researacademic community. Writing is part of research and I’m proud to be both a researcher and ch and I’m proud to be both a researcher and author because the two can’t be separated.author because the two can’t be separated.” – Computer Science Professor - #77” – Computer Science Professor - #77

Conclusion: Effective ResearchersConclusion: Effective Researchers

1) P1) Publication ublication ““Supply ChainSupply Chain””

2) Sacrifice other interests2) Sacrifice other interests

3) 3) Practice research like a golf gamePractice research like a golf game4) Dramatize process by creating mental 4) Dramatize process by creating mental modelsmodels

5) 5) Use competitive, political and supportive eUse competitive, political and supportive energynergy6) 6) Get rejectedGet rejected7) Write, (and don’t always enjoy it)7) Write, (and don’t always enjoy it)

For More InformationFor More InformationWrite down email for a copy of the ppt

www.wallaceediting.cnwww.wallaceediting.cnwww.wallaceediting.cn/www.wallaceediting.cn/blogblogTwo Stage EditingTwo Stage EditingThree Stage TranslationThree Stage Translation