How to publish

download How to publish

If you can't read please download the document

  • date post

    24-Feb-2016
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    19
  • download

    1

Embed Size (px)

description

How to publish. Jeff McDonnell Dept. Forest Engineering, Resources and Mgmt. Oregon State University. How journals work. How journals work a few of the ones that I’ve had experience with. Hydrological Processes Water Resources Research Journal of Hydrology - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of How to publish

Outline

How to publishJeff McDonnellDept. Forest Engineering, Resources and Mgmt.Oregon State University

How journals workHow journals worka few of the ones that Ive had experience withHydrological ProcessesWater Resources ResearchJournal of HydrologyHydrology and Earth System ScienceASCE Journal of Hydrologic EngineeringHydrological Sciences JournalEcohydrology

ISI Web of KnowledgeJournal Citation Index 10 Sept. 2008~60 journals on the listStatisticsImpact factorImmediacy IndexArticles published per yearHalf-lifeHow to view these statsExact numbers not so importantThey change!Top quartile importantKey factoids for a P&T dossier:JoH top impact factor in Civil engineering groupingEtc (know these for your P&T dossier!)

Top 10 infoJournalWater ResearchHESSJournal of HydrologyWater Resources ResearchJ Contam. Hydrol.Adv. Water ResourcesHydrological Proc.Irrig. Sci.Env. ToxicologyHydrol. Sci. J.Impact factor3.4272.2702.1612.1541.8521.8171.7981.7971.7281.604Half-life6.94.78.1>10.07.05.66.19.55.46.5

Journal half-life is the number of journal publication years, going back from the current year, that account for 50% of the total citations received by the cited journal in the current year.

the cited half-life: the median age of the articles that were cited in Journal Citation Reports each year. For example, if a journal's half-life in 2005 is 5, that means the citations from 2001-2005 are half of all the citations from that journal in 2005, and the other half of the citations precede 2001.[2] the aggregate impact factor for a subject category: it is calculated taking into account the number of citations to all journals in the subject category and the number of articles from all the journals in the subject category.

The impact factor of a journal is calculated based on a two-year period. It can be viewed as the average number of citations in a year given to those papers in a journal that were published during the two preceding years.[4] For example, the 2003 impact factor of a journal would be calculated as follows:A = the number of times articles published in 2001-2 were cited in indexed journals during 2003 B = the number of "citable items" (usually articles, reviews, proceedings or notes; not editorials and letters-to-the-Editor) published in 2001-2 2003 impact factor = A/B (note that the 2003 impact factor was actually published in 2004, because it could not be calculated until all of the 2003 publications had been received.) A convenient way of thinking about it is that a journal that is cited once, on average, for each article published has an IF of 1 in the expression above.

5Typical Time-Line After Submittalvery different for open source journals!02 yearsReview by JournalAcceptanceRevision and Re-reviewActual Printing

Modified after Don SiegelTypes of papersReview papersRegular submissionsData notesInvited CommentaryComment/ReplyTechnical NoteLetters

What you are striving forsadly, most papers are not even cited!

Reviews and reviewingThe ReviewerA busy scientist with too many demands on her/his time.Will compare yours with the 2 or 3 others that they are currently reviewingWill read it in 60 min or lessWill compose her review in less than 30 min

Therefore, the paper must be extraordinarily well writtenFrom Don SiegelThe EditorWill always side with the most critical reviewRisk intolerantOverwhelmed with papersE.g. WRR 900+ submissions per year back when Jeff McDonnell was AE

What reviewers are askedReferee reports Is original Is methodologically sound Follows appropriate ethical guidelines Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions Correctly references previous relevant work

Need to:Anticipate review issues before submissionSometime finesse review comments

Responding to reviewsAt best, minor revision required (rare)Usually, more major revisionSometimes a re-review, sometimes a then rejectionDont give up!Sometimes outright rejectionDont give up!Write a polite, appreciative letter back to the editor outlining the changes madeDont give upSpeed and detail in responding to review comments directly proportional to ultimate acceptanceDont give up

The Galley Proofsanswering their questions

The Galley Proofschecking your words: critical!How I review a paperRead it with a pencil in my handCircle sections where comments are neededNumber sequentially each sectionFollowing reading (same day!), go back to numbered areas and write-up commentsSpelling/grammarSubstantiveGeneralReview has a beginning paragraph that starts with praiseworthy aspects of paper then segues with a these favorable comments nothwithstandingThen bullets with page/line numbers Summary paragraph ending with proposed fate of paperFirst WRR review took me >8 hr

Wrap-upA quick recap of previous comments on publishingIts your only portable currencyKey prerequisite for getting a job / promotionMisc. other things weve discussed:Write PhD papers sequentially and submit as they are finished (so simple yet so seldom done)Consider writing a review paper as part of your set of PhD papers (can yield very high citation stats)Publish in the best journals possible where work will be recognized and readDevelop a PhD brand identityDo comment/reply on something recently publishedBe careful about special issues

Why we publishYou want to write a paper that is cited You want your ideas to influence othersThe very best papers impact other fields (but this is very rare)To do this:Publish in the best possible journal Write a paper that will set the world on fireDo not give up if rejected!!!!

On co-authorshipAlways err on the side of inclusiveness rather than exclusivenessRemember the AGU motto: unselfish cooperation in researchPerson taking the lead on writing usually goes first Student usually firstNumber of authors on the paper inversely proportional to the workload of the senior author

Conclusions

PublishingIt is an obligation to your scienceIt is an obligation to your funderIf English is your first language, then you are very lucky indeedyou have no excusesFollow the topdown formula and it will make life much easierPractice helps a lot (your 3rd paper from your PhD thesis always has less redmarks than the first) Write when you feel inspireddont force it. Try a daily early morning writing hour