Seven hurdles impeding your publication and how you can overcome them
Hurdle #1: Choosing the right outlet
A study recently published in the acclaimed journal of Science shows that at least in the life sciences, 25% of submissions, authors have not adjusted their manuscript to the journal to which they submitted. Authors often first submit their work to high impact factor journals. Naturally, for the sake of career advancement, it is important that you publish in such journals.
Therefore…
When you find it difficult to publish a certain manuscript, it is important to focus of those journals where your chances of publication significantly increases because those outlets target the most suitable audience who is most desiring to learn about your research and your findings.
Hurdle #2: Ignoring the time factor
The review process in many journals takes many long months, and if it does not end with rejection, it is likely to end with a long list of required revisions. Revisions and second review will also take time, and an invitation to revise does not necessary equal the promise of publication. Thus, a year may easily pass by before you know if your manuscript will be published or not.
Therefore…
Find out ahead of submission to suitable and preferred journals what the expected review period might be and choose the journal that has the shortest response time.A study recently published in the acclaimed journal of Science shows that at least in the life sciences, 25% of submissions, authors have not adjusted their manuscript to the journal to which they submitted. Authors often first submit their work to high impact factor journals. Naturally, for the sake of career advancement, it is important that you publish in such journals.
Hurdle #3: Considering reviewers’ comments as an extra burden
Authors are often frustrated by reviewers’ comments and are daunted by the revision they fact, which does not guarantee publication.
Therefore…
If you consider the reviewers’ as experts who hold a publication track record, you may see the extensive value in their suggestions for improvement of your manuscript. This about it this way: as scholars just like you, most of the reviewers would like to see your findings published and they invest a considerable effect in the feedback which they offered for precisely that reason. A recent study published in the coveted journal of Nature shows that rejected articles tend to be cited more often once published to their enhanced transformation.The review process in many journals takes many long months, and if it does not end with rejection, it is likely to end with a long list of required revisions. Revisions and second review will also take time, and an invitation to revise does not necessary equal the promise of publication. Thus, a year may easily pass by before you know if your manuscript will be published or not.
CTA – join our writing tips newsletter
Hurdle #4: Non compliance with journal requirements
Nearly all scholarly journals publish guidelines for authors regarding format and style. Authors who do not adjust their manuscripts to comply with these requirements lengthen their publication process because manuscripts that do not meet these requirements are desk rejected with no reference to content.
Therefore…
Take to heart the journal’s guidelines and make sure you meet every single one. Additionally, it is advisable that you read several papers published in recent volumes of the journal so match your writing style with the most common style (attesting to reviewers’ preferences) currently prevalent in the chosen journal.
Hurdle #5: Content issues
Manuscripts are often rejected due to content issues in various sections of the paper. Among the common issues (see Robson et al., 2015 and Pierson, 2004): the literature review does not closely derive from research questions or relies on very old resources; the theory is inappropriate for the study; reports of statistical analysis and study procedures are deficient and do not allow for the replication of the study and its results; the study’s contribution is unclear.
Therefore…
Take to heart the journal’s guidelines and make sure you meet every single one. Additionally, it is advisable that you read several papers published in recent It is advisable to ask a colleague or two to read the manuscript and provide some preliminary feedback on the structure and clarity of your argument. In fact, it would be even better to have someone who is unfamiliar with your content of expertise to read the manuscript and summarize in their own words what they had understood from it. This is invaluable feedback that will save you from minor reviewer comments and will allow the reviewers to focus on more important questions such as the study’s innovation and contribution to extant knowledge.
Hurdle #6: Writing style issues
During the course of their education, researchers acquire a great extent of knowledge and are often expected to know how to write properly despite receiving little or no training. Additionally, English is a second language for most researchers worldwide, who may find it challenging to express themselves accurately in this language.
Therefore…
Facilitate the reviewers work by using the services of professionals whose expertise is in writing, translation, and editing in order to make your point in the most flowing, focused, concise, and clear manner.
CTA – audit review 2
Hurdle #7: Untimely relinquishment
Truly, it is difficult to face one rejection after the next and still keep a positive attitude and believe that the desired publication will indeed manifest.
Therefore…
Constantly seek ways to elucidate your core message and highlight the importance of your findings for scholars and practitioners alike. We know authors who persisted for long periods of time (even eight or ten years!) until their coveted publication. Don’t give up. Disseminate your message in important conferences in your field, develop relationships with leading researchers, take your message to open media, both printed and online, and see new inventive ways to generate a buzz over your work. Mostly, persist in your attempt until you achieve success!
Robson et al – 2015 JAdRes -Navigating the Peer-Review Process — Reviewers’ Suggestions for a Manuscript [editaura].pdf
Pierson – 2004 RespiratoryCare – The Top 10 Reasons Why Manuscripts Are Not Accepted for Publication [editaura].pdf
Leave A Comment