Andreas Kämper SS Publishing Process I. Div. for Simulation of Biological Systems WSI/ZBIT, Eberhard Karls Universität i Tübingen

Transcription

1 Scientific Writing Andreas Kämper SS Publishing Process I Div. for Simulation of Biological Systems WSI/ZBIT, Eberhard Karls Universität i Tübingen

2 Recapitulation

3 Rules to deal with Authorship Discuss who is becoming an author Follow the generally accepted ethical guidelines Discuss the order of the author s names. Follow what is most appropriate in your discipline or your group/laboratory Do not start writing, until all authorship matters are agreed on!

4 Authorship Authorship credit should be based only on substantial contributions to a) conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data; and to b) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and on c) final approval of the version to be published. Conditions (a), (b), and (c) must all be met. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, New England J. Med. 1997, 336(4), 309.

5 Author Sequence sequence-determines-credit Sequence of authors reflects the declining i importance of their contribution. equal contribution Authors with similar contributions in alphabetical sequence first-last-author-emphasis author First and last author are more important than the middle authors Simplified after: T. Tscharntke et al., PLoS Biology 2007, 5(1), e18.

6 Outline The Publishing Process Submission of a Manuscript Review Process Style and Grammar False Friends

7 Submission of a Manuscript Review Process False Friends

8 Instructions to Authors Obtain the Instructions to Authors from the Publisher s or the Journal s homepage Obtain the Style Guide of the Publisher, if applicable Follow all instructions! If a manuscript deviates to a certain extent from the required format it will be returned to you!

9 General Layout of a Manuscript If there are no instructions follow this general layout: Double spacing Large margins, at least 25 mm Left-justify the text Title page ( Page 1) with title, authors names and addresses Abstract on Page 2 Introduction on Page 3, each section starts on a new page

10 General Layout (II) References after the main text Most journals require tables and figures at the end of the manuscript All tables in ascending order after the references All figure legends after the tables Figures in ascending order after the legends, usually without legends Some journals want tables and figures embedded in the main text

11 Final Manuscript (I) Generate a final version of the manuscript Carefully check the manuscript for typos Use spell-checking programs and grammar checker (beware, these programs have a significant ifi false positive/false negative rate) Always manually check for typos If possible, let a native speaker check the manuscript Ch k th i t f l t Check the manuscript for completeness (are all tables and figures included?)

12 Final Manuscript (II) Split the checking process Let all authors check the manuscript Get the final approval of all authors on this final version Get a permission of all people mentioned in the Acknowledgments Send them the Acknowledgment text

13 Cover Letter (I) Include a cover letter containing the journal name you want to submit to (large societies have dozens of journals) the section within the journal (e.g. Biology), if applicable the type of manuscript (e.g. Communication) information whether this is a new or a revised manuscript the current address, telephone and fax number, and address of the submitting/corresponding author

14 Cover Letter (II) Additional information in the cover letter State the most appropriate editor Give names and addresses of possible referees State explicitly names of people you don t want to review the paper (conflict of interest) Everything else, the instructions for authors tell you

15 Submission Electronic submission Make yourself familiar with the system Follow all instructions carefully Upload the manuscript and the cover letter Conventional submission Send in the required number of hardcopies, a cover letter and disks as required Always keep at least one printed hardcopy and a copy of everything you send in Use first class mail, airmail, or a courier,, service

16 Submission Receipt You will obtain an Acknowledgment of Receipt, usually by Dear Dr. Kämper: A manuscript entitled [Title] has been submitted to [Journal] for editorial consideration. The manuscript number is [Number]. ] If you don t get an answer within 2 weeks, call the editorial office to ask whether the manuscript actually arrived

17 Submission of a Manuscript Review Process False Friends

18 The Editor An editor is a scientist, t typically a big shot is an (usually) unpaid volunteer selects the peer reviewers decides about the acceptance of a manuscript Direct complaints about the decision or Direct complaints about the decision or the quality of referee reports to the editor

19 The Managing Editor A managing editor is (usually) ll) a full-time llti employee of the publisher works on all administrative issues is responsible for the publishing process Send queries about post-acceptance problems (e.g. the proof) to the managing editor

20 The Copyeditor A copyeditor (manuscript editor) is editing your paper to fit to the style tl and format of the journal corrects errors in grammar, spelling, etc. might improve wording will write queries to you to help him improving the paper quality

21 Review Process Initial Steps The editor or managing editor will check whether the manuscript fits to the scope of the journal (subject) If not: Immediate rejection! is in appropriate form Is the manuscript complete? If not: Immediate rejection! Is it an acceptable article type? If not: Immediate rejection! Does it follow the style rules of the journal? If not: Immediate rejection!

22 Review Process Peer Review Typically, two or three reviewers (referees) are selected by the editor Experts in the field First choice: Editorial Board Second choice: External experts Reviewers are asked to review the paper (information: title and abstract) t) If they accept, the reviewers get the entire manuscript and have to prepare referee reports for the editor

23 Review Process Decision (I) The editor reads the referee reports If all recommend rejection: Rejected If all recommend acceptance: Accepted If referees disagree, depending on journal Editor selects another referee Editor will ask authors to reply to criticisms The editor decides on acceptance or rejection of the manuscript The decision and the referee reports are mailed to the corresponding author

24 Review Process Decision (II) Results of an editorial decision (I): Accept The manuscript can be published as is Minor revision Only small changes necessary during revision The revised manuscript is handled by the editor alone

25 Review Process Decision (III) Results of an editorial decision (II): Major revision The paper is regarded as relevant and is a significant/novel contribution However, there are limitations on technical quality or presentation ti The revised manuscript is sent to the original reviewers and the changes will be reviewed (round two)

26 Review Process Decision (IV) Results of an editorial decision (III): Resubmit The paper might have potential, however, not in its present form The manuscript needs a major rewrite or additional information (e.g., more data, experiments, comparisons) is required Resubmission encouraged Faster review process after resubmission

27 Review Process Decision (V) Results of an editorial decision (IV): Reject The paper is off-topic, is no substantial contribution over the state-of-the-art ( incremental contribution ), or there are severe problems in methodology or underlying theory If th d id t b it t thi If authors decide to resubmit to this journal, the manuscript is treated as new

28 Review Process Rejection Dear Dr. Kämper, on the basis of the enclosed reviews, I regret to inform you that I cannot accept your manuscript for publication in [Journal]. Perhaps after the reviewers comments have been addressed, d submission i to a more specialized journal would be appropriate. Thank you for considering [Journal].

29 Review Process Revision Dear Dr. Kämper, Your manuscript entitled [Title] submitted for publication in [Journal] has been read by 2 referees; their reports are enclosed. We will be ready to consider your work for publication once you have taken into consideration the referees' comments.

30 Review Process Revision With your revised manuscript please include a cover letter responding to the referees' remarks point-by-point with a detailed description of the changes that you have made giving g their location in the text (page number, paragraph...). In case you do not agree with some of the referees' comments, please clearly state the reasons for your disagreement. Please return your revised manuscript within a month.

31 Revisions (I) Reminder: The editor is making his decisions on the science of your paper Give a point-by-point p rebuttal of the reviewers comments If the reviewers are wrong (in your opinion) be as polite as possible Point out, why you are right and the reviewer is wrong Never say that the editor is wrong! Meet all deadlines!

32 Revisions (II) As for the final manuscript include a cover letter (the rebuttal letter) indicating all changes include the revised manuscript (some journals require to indicate changes in the manuscript, e.g. by bold face) again, ask all co-authors for help If you fail to keep the deadline, the manuscript will be treated as a new manuscript!

33 Review Process Acceptance Dear Dr. Kämper: Your manuscript entitled [Title] has passed all required peer review and has been recommended to me by the Editorial Board. I am pleased to accept the paper for publication in the next available issue of [Journal]. Congratulations on submitting such an excellent study.

34 Review Process Acceptance Figure: Quinn Dombrowski, Two champagne glasses, Pouring_two_champagne_glasses.jpg (Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 2.0 license).

35 Submission of a Manuscript Review Process False Friends

36 False Friends Introduction False friends (false cognates) are pairs of words that sound or look similar but have a different meaning Lists of false friends hilfen words/false_friends.htm Training game false-friends fi

37 False Friends Examples (I) meinen to mean to think bedeuten

38 False Friends Examples (II) prägnant pregnant concise schwanger

39 False Friends Examples (III) eventuell eventually possibly, perhaps endlich, letztlich, schließlich

40 False Friends Examples (IV) Silikon silicon silicone Silizium Figures: silicone caulking, (GNU FDL); single-crystal silicon, (GNU FDL).

41 False Friends Examples (V) Stadium stadium stage, state, t level, phase Stadion Figure: Stadion im Borussia-Park, Borussia-Park_Innenansicht.jpg (S. Brück, GNU FDL).

42 False Friends Examples (VI) Beamer Beemer video projector a BMW data projector motorcycle Figures: projector, (public domain); BMW R32 motorcycle, ( Jeff Dean, free to use).