Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Guide to Getting Published

Management, Library & Information St diesStudies ... to produce an Impact Factor for a given year. For example, the Impact Factor for the Internationa...

0 downloads 9 Views 914KB Size
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Guide to Getting g Published 14th April 2015 Ben Sng S i Consultant Senior C lt t – Publishing P bli hi R Relationship l ti hi Emerald East Asia Office, Malaysia [email protected] H/P: 019-210-8690/012-375-8215 www.emeraldinsight.com

Research you can use

Aim and overview Aim: To provide a guide to optimise your academic writing and preparation skills whilst focusing on best practice for submission Overview: •

About Emerald



Wh P Why Publish bli h



Publishing process and peer review



Choosing a journal



Structuring your paper



Writing tips



Publication ethics



Dissemination and promotion



Summary and resources

A brief introduction to Emerald Company history Company history • Emerald Group Publishing Limited  • Founded in 1967 in Bradford, West  Yorkshire • Three Three core markets: Public, Corporate,  core markets: Public Corporate Academic

• 300+ journals, 240+ book series, 300 stand‐alone texts • Over 21 million Emerald articles were downloaded in 2013 – more than 50,000 a day!

Potential readership  Potential readership of 15 million

The Emerald Portfolio 28 subject areas including

Sociology, HR Management, Marketing, Accounting & Finance, Built Environment, Economics, Health Care, Engineering, Education, Politics, Linguistics, Engineering, Tourism & Hospitality, Business & Management Library Management, Librar & Information Studies St dies

Electronic databases: Emerald Management eJournals and Emerald Management First Over 3,000 university libraries worldwide including 98 of the FT top 100 business schools

Full list of Emerald titles:

http://emeraldinsight.com/journals http://books.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald’s publishing philosophy • Emerald believe that good management can – must – make a better world • Emerald believe independence

in

inclusivity,

internationality,

innovation

• Supportive of scholarly research • Committed to improving author, reader and customer experience • ‘Research you can use’

and

Research that has an impact

Financial Times Top 100 Business Schools Emerald is proud to say that: Over 90 of the FT top 100 business schools worldwide are Emerald customers

We have authors from all of the FT top 100 business schools worldwide

In 2010 the FT top 100 business schools worldwide downloaded Emerald articles 1 4 ti 1.4m times – an average of 14,000 per school!

Emerald’s Emerald s new journals on ISI A number of our journals have recently been indexed by Thomson R t Reuters (ISI) (ISI):

Academia Revista Latinoamericana de Administración

Employee Relations

Leadership and Organization Development Journal

Accounting, Auditing & Accounting Accountability Journal

International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education

Key differences between books and journals Journals

Books

Frequency

Regular

Irregular

Format

Predominantly electronic

Predominantly print

Length

1 article approx 3-6,000 words

1 chapter approx 5- 10,000 words

Size

Tends to be around 6 articles

Usually 10-12 chapters

Review Process

Typically double-blind peer-reviewed

Mixed

Route to Market

Predominantly subscriptions from academic libraries

Libraries and individuals

Being published means…. Being published means…. Being published means your paper: • Is permanent • appears in print and electronically • is improved via the review process i i d i th i • is actively promoted yp by the publisher  y p • is trustworthy – material that has been published carries a QA  stamp

Considering co-authorship Benefits • First time authors • Demonstrates the authority and rigour of the research • Especially useful for cross-disciplinary research

Where to find a co author • Supervisor or colleague • Conferences • Journals

Considering co-authorship Tips • Ensure the manuscript is checked and edited so that it reads as one voice • Exploit your individual strengths • Agree and clarify order of appearance of authors and the person taking on the role of corresponding author • Distributing work • Extending your work • Co-ordination Co ordination and revision

How to get started? How to get started? What do I write about? • Have you completed a project that concluded successfully? • Are you wrestling with a problem with no clear solution? • Do you have an opinion or observation on a subject? • Have you given a presentation, briefing or conference paper? • Are you working on a Doctoral or Master’s thesis? • Do yyou have a new idea or initiative? If so, you have the basis for a publishable paper

How to select the right journal? Choosing a journal to publish in is an investment decision. A good choice can enhance the impact of your work and your reputation

•Factors to consider are relevant readership, recent articles, communicative societies and internationality, communicative, internationality likelihood of acceptance, acceptance circulation, time from submission to publication

•What type of paper are you planning to write i.e. practice paper, research paper, case study, review, viewpoint? Check first what type of paper the journal accepts. •Be strategic (e.g. five articles in international peer reviewed journals vs one in ‘top’ ranked journal)

How to select the right journal? How to select the right journal? Measuring quality

Are rankings important to you? Thomson Reuters ISI is the most  well known ranking,  but others exist. Citations are a good, but not  complete, guide to quality o o o o o

IImpactt Factor F t Scopus H-index H index Usage Peer perception

Rankings

ISI Thomson Reuters

What rankings g do yyou use ?

THOMSON REUTERS (ISI)

Background Thomson Reuters, formerly known as Thomson Scientific, (and formerly known as Thomson ISI!) ISI!), has provided access to academic research information for over 50 years following the work of its founder Dr Eugene Garfield ISI is by far the most respected ranking for academic journals in the world, and is used for key decisions such as whether an author will publish with a journal, and whether a library will subscribe to it. More information at http://scientific.thomsonreuters.com/

THOMSON REUTERS (ISI) What is an Impact Factor (IF)? Journals are ranked in the JCR depending on how many times the articles included in that journal are cited in other ISIranked k d journals. j l The Th ranking ki is i published bli h d every JJune and d corresponds to the previous year’s data. ISI uses a calculation of citation data over a three year period to produce an Impact Factor for a given year. For example, the Impact Factor for the International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management (our highest ranked jjournal)) is 2.617 and relates to 2011

How are Impact Factors calculated? An example: Using the Journal of Newcastle Business School Genius as an example, there were 20 citations in 2010 in other ISI journals from its 2008-2009 issues (A) (A). In this two-year period there were 60 articles published (B), which meant that the impact factor for Journal of Newcastle Business S h l Genius School G i in i 2010 was 20/60 = 0 0.333 333 A= B=

2010 cites (20) ( ) articles published (60)

A/B = 2010 impact factor (0 (0.333) 333)

Apart from ISI……….

While ISI may have most attention in Europe, there are many other rankings that provide useful – and potentially more relevant – information…

RANKINGS

• • • •

ISI,, Scopus, ABS, ERA/ABDC

France, Germany, Denmark, Norway

What makes a good paper? HINT: Editors and reviewers look for • Originality – what what’s s new about subject, subject treatment or results? • Relevance to and extension of existing knowledge • Research methodology – are conclusions valid and objective? • Clarity, structure and quality of writing – does it communicate well? • Sound, logical progression of argument • Theoretical and practical implications (the ‘so what?’ factors!) • Recency and relevance of references • Internationality/Global focus • Adherence to the editorial scope and objectives of the journal • A good d title, titl keywords k d and d a wellll written itt abstract b t t

Emerald has introduced structured abstracts A structured abstract – in 250 words or less (no more than 100 in any one section) •

Purpose – Reasons/aims of paper



D i Design – Methodology/’how M th d l /’h it was d done’/scope ’/ off study t d



Findings – Discussion/results



Research limitations/Implications (if applicable) – Exclusions/next steps



Practical implications (if applicable) – Applications to practice/’So what?’



[NEW] Social implications (if applicable) – Impact on society/policy



O i i lit / l – Who Originality/value Wh would ld b benefit fit ffrom thi this and d what h t iis new about b t it? •

www.emeraldinsight.com/structuredabstracts g

Example of a good abstract Terry Evans, Ian Brailsford, Peter Macauley, (2011) "History researcher development and research capacity in Australia and New Zealand", International Journal for Researcher Development, Vol. 2 Iss: 2, pp.117 – 132 •Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present data and discussion on history researcher development and research capacities in Australia and New Zealand, as evidenced in analysis of history PhD theses' topics. •Design/methodology/approach – The paper is based on two independent studies of history PhD thesis topics, using a standard discipline coding system. •Findings – The paper shows some marked differences in the Australian and New Zealand volumes and distributions of history PhDs, especially for PhDs conducted on non-local/national topics. These differences reflect national researcher development, research capacities and interests, in particular local, national and international histories, and have implications for the globalisation of scholarship. p – Thesis topics p are used as a p proxy y for the g graduate's research capacity p y within that •Research limitations/implications topic. However, as PhD examiners have attested to the significance and originality of the thesis, this is taken as robust. The longitudinal nature of the research suggests that subsequent years' data and analysis would provide rich information on changes to history research capacity. Other comparative (i.e. international) studies would provide interesting analyses of history research capacity. •Practical implications – There are practical implications for history departments in universities, history associations, and government (PhD policy, and history researcher development and research capacity in areas such as foreign affairs). •Social implications – There are social implications for local and community history in the knowledge produced in the theses, and in the development of local research capacity. Originality/value – The work in this paper is the first to collate and analyse such thesis data either in Australia or New •Originality/value Zealand. The comparative analyses of the two datasets are also original. Keywords: History Researcher, Australia, New Zealand, Doctoral theses, History PhD, Researcher development,

Structuring your paper Introduction Convince readers that you know why your work is relevant and answer questions they might have: – – – – –

What is the problem? Are there any existing solutions? Which one is the best? What is its main limitation? What do you hope to achieve?

Structuring your paper Literature review

•Quote from previous research •What are you adding? Make it clear •Use recent work to cite •Self citing – only when relevant •Any work that is not your own MUST be referenced •If you use your own previously published work, it MUST be referenced http://www.emeraldinsight.com/authors/guides/write/literature.htm

Structuring your paper Method •indicate the main methods used •demonstrate that the methodology was robust, and appropriate to the objectives. •Focus on telling the main story, stating the main stages of your research, the methods used, the influences that determined your approach, why you chose p particular samples, p , etc. •Additional detail can be given in Appendices.

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/authors/guides/write/structure.htm?part=3

Structuring your paper Results As with the methodology, focus on the essentials; the main facts and those with wider significance, rather than giving great detail on every statistic in your results. What are the really significant facts that emerge? These results will feed into your discussion of the significance of the findings. g

Structuring your paper Discussion •Consider: Consider: – Do you provide interpretation for each of your results presented? – Are A your results lt consistent i t t with ith what h t other th iinvestigators ti t have reported? Or are there any differences? Why? – Are there any limitations? – Does the discussion logically lead to your conclusion? •Do not – Make statements that g go beyond y what the results can support – Suddenly introduce new terms or ideas

Structuring your paper Conclusion

• Present global and specific conclusions • Indicate uses and extensions • Answer the original g q question • Apply to theory and practice • State limitations • State implications for further research

• Summarise the paper – the abstract is for this • Start a new topic/introduce new material • Make obvious statements • Contradict yourself

Writing tips Avoid: Generalisations As a rule, for the most part, generally, in general, potentially, normally, on the whole, in most cases, usually, the vast majority of…

Avoid unless you can qualify them in some way …contracts have tended to reinforce the position of large community it organisations, i ti and d di diminish i i h th the position iti off smaller ll organisations. For example, Ernst & Young's (1996) study of the New Zealand Community Funding Agency found that there was a clear concentration of public resources in favour of large community organisations ... "A comparison of contracting arrangements in Australia, Canada and New Zealand" Neal Ryan, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 12 No. 2

Writing tips Avoid: Idioms and analogies •Fit as a butcher's dog •Speak S k off the th Devil D il •Hold your horses •He H h has a chip hi on hi his shoulder h ld Avoid using them at all if you are unsure www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk (a general resource for academic writers, designed primarily with international students whose first language i not E is English li h iin mind) i d)

Writing tips Voice •Active - direct, clear. A subject or ‘agent’ is the ‘doer’ of the sentence and performs an action on the ‘object’: ‘The The University [agent] employs [action] researchers [object]’. •Passive Passive - can depersonalise depersonalise, can confuse confuse. The object becomes the agent of the sentence and has an action performed on it/them: ‘Researchers [agent] are employed [action] by the University [object]’.

Publication ethics • Don’t Don t submit to more than one journal at once • Don’t self-plagiarise • Clear permission to publish interviews/case studies • Seek agreement between authors • Disclose any conflict of interest • Authors and editors are supported by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

Publication ethics Plagiarism • The act of taking someone else’s else s work and passing it off as your own (false attribution). It is considered fraud! • H Hard d tto d detect t t with ith peer review i b butt th there are new tools to help us • Emerald’s entire portfolio is included in iThenticate web-based software from iParadigms http://www.ithenticate.com/ • Emerald’s Plagiarism g Policy y can be seen at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/about/policies/plagi arism.htm • For more general information visit http://www.plagiarism.org/

Publication ethics Copyright •

As the author, author you need to ensure that you get permission to use content you have not created, to avoid delays, this should be done before you submit your work



Supply written confirmation from the copyright holder when submitting your manuscript



If permission cannot be cleared, we cannot republish that specific content

More information including a permissions checklist and a permissions request form i available is il bl at: t http://www.emeraldinsight.com/authors/writing/best_practice_guide.htm http://www.emeraldinsight.com/authors/writing/permissions.htm

Not all Editors are scary... • Send an outline or abstract and ask if this looks suitable and interesting (or how it could be made so) • If it’s not suitable for their journal, can they suggest another journal for you to consider? • Confirm how an editor would like a submission e.g. submission, e g e-mail; e mail; hard copy or online submission system

Example cover letters with editor comments There are two useful things which should be included in a covering letter if relevant. 1. A statement of why the paper is being submitted to this journal, if it is a bit unusual, or outside the journal's usual scope. 2. A statement about any papers on similar topics being submitted elsewhere, whether or not these are referenced in the article. So a good covering letter dealing with these points would say: • I am submitting this article to Journal of Documentation. You will see that it deals with public library management, which I appreciate is outside JDoc's normal scope. However, it focuses on the novel application of a theoretical model to the topic, and hence I think it is appropriate for JDoc. JDoc • I am submitting an article with a similar title to 'Public Library Journal'. However, that article gives a series of case studies, rather than describing and applying the model, and so is quite distinct from the paper submitted here. I can send a copy of the PLJ paper if required. A 'bad' covering letter would be one which either gave a poor reason for submitting the paper to a particular, or which showed lack of understanding of the peer review process. An example would be: • I am sending this article for you to publish in Journal of Documentation, after your editorial amendments amendments. I have chosen JDoc to publish this paper paper, as it is a high high-impact impact and well-regarded journal.

Before you submit your article: your own peer review • Let someone else see it – show a draft to f i d or colleagues friends ll and d askk for f th i their comments, advice and honest criticism • We are always too close to our own work to see its failings • Always proof-check thoroughly – no incorrect spellings no incomplete references. spellings, references Spell checkers are not fool-proof

Spot the error: “A A knew research methodology introduced in 2007… 2007 ”

Timetable from submission to initial feedback to authors • The Editor(s) do an initial read to determine if the subject bj t matter tt and d research h approach h is i appropriate i t for the journal (approx. 1 week) ( ) identifyy and contact two reviewers • The Editor(s) (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 feedback: 3-4 months

submission

to

review

Possible editor decisions You will be advised of one of three possible decisions: Accept Reject Revise

What if your paper is rejected? • 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 paper. Take a deep breath, and listen to what is being said • T Try again! i ! Try to improve the paper, and re-submit elsewhere. Do your homework and target your paper as closely as possible • Keep trying!

Reasons for rejection •

Not following instructions – author guidelines id li



Lack of fit (‘why was it sent to this j journal’?) )



Problem with quality (inappropriate methodology, not reasonably rigorous excessively long) rigorous,



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



Did you understand the “journal conversation”? ”?

Sorry!

Where submissions often fall short • The theory base or market analysis is dated and general • The conceptualization is weak - either the questions, or the 'big big idea’ idea • The level and depth of discussion is shallow, weak, and lacks critical reflection • More needs to be done to apply findings to theory and practice • The presentation lacks clarity and could be a more compelling read

Surviving peer review Rejection tips Don’t give up! Everybody has been rejected at least once Ask and listen most editors give detailed comments about a rejected paper. Try to improve and re-submit. Do your homework and target your paper as closely as possible

Don’t be in the 16% who gave up

Suggestions • Forming teams across industries, institutions and countries, with cross-functional skills •More M writing iti practice. ti This Thi can start t t off ff with ith Blogs Bl and d magazines, then culminating in research papers • More social media engagement, where people champion and share their big ideas - receiving useful feedback •More meetings, events and conferences where people get to debate

Request for revision A request for revision is good news! It really is • You are now in the publishing cycle. Nearly every published paper is revised at least once Don’tt panic! • Don • Even if the comments are sharp or discouraging, they aren’t personal “One Emerald author likes to let reviews sit for a week to let his blood pressure return to normal”.

How to revise your paper  Acknowledge the editor and 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…’  Consult with colleagues or co-authors and tend to the points as requested t d  Meet the revision deadline  Att Attach h a covering i letter l tt which hi h identifies, id tifi point i tb by point, i t h how revision requests have been met (or if not, why not)  For example p “The change g will not improve p the article because…”

Example – agreeing with the reviewers comments Dear Editor, Let us open by thanking the two reviewers for their insightful comments. They gave us p y g g yg clear guidance and some positive critiques. Following their suggestions, we spent more time reading and came to the revision process better prepared. We enjoyed the process and think that the reviewers’ comments have tremendously affected the revised draft. Both reviewers should now clearly see the difference they made to the p g g revised manuscript. In the following lines we detail the changes in line with the reviewers’ comments. 

 Reviewer: 1 
 g , p pp y y g Again, we would like to express our appreciation for your extremely thoughtful suggestions. As you will see below we have been able to revise and improve the paper as a result of your valuable feedback. 

 You highlighted that we did not spend enough time discussing the implications of our arguments for current understandings of Drucker’s work. We agree with your t f t d t di fD k ’ k W ith suggestion and have added in two additional paragraphs in the conclusion (p.30‐1), and a few comments within the paper (i.e p.11), that are devoted to outlining the implications of our analysis. We have kept our discussion brief to ensure we maintain the commitment to the appropriate page and word length, but what we do outline should make clear what this perspective on Drucker makes relevant for tli h ld k l h t thi ti D k k l tf management practitioners and scholars alike.

Accept Congratulations!! Following a lot of hard work and at least one revision your paper has been accepted accepted. “In In all the years I have been an editor I have not accepted a single paper on first submission.” Typical editor comment

How to promote your work Why? •

Influence policy



Raise your profile



Attract collaborators and funding



New opportunities e.g. in consulting, the media

How? •

Use your network e.g. through listservs, press releases or simply link to the article in your email signature



Contact the authors in your reference list



Hone your media skills and ‘brand image’



Ask the publisher to provide you with book or journal leaflets Check with your Librarian for Support and services for authors and Editors

Beyond authorship Other important publishing work that you might wish to get involved in includes: • Book reviewing • Refereeing/peer review • Editorial advisory board membership • Contributing editorship • Regional editorship • Editorship Interested in proposing a book/series or a journal? Contact us at [email protected]

For details of opportunities in this area please do get in touch with us!

To summarise…. Keep these points in mind to achieve….

Presentation Understand your target market Be ethical Learn from the review process In collaboration Check and check again Attention to detail Take your time Involve your peers Originality Now spread the word!

Emerald supporting authors • • • •

Dedicated editorial and author relations support staff Quality-assured copy-editing and production service Emerald Literati Network with more than 100,000 members Signatories of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), (COPE) Emerald is committed to protecting its authors’ work from copyright infringements • ListAssist free to Emerald subscribers Journals  EarlyCite • O li Scholar Online S h l One O Manuscript M i t Central C t l submission b i i process • Complimentary journal issue and 3 months free access upon publication Online resources

For Researchers

For Authors

• www.emeraldinsight.com/research ldi i ht / h • How to… guides • Outstanding Doctoral Research Awards • Research Fund Awards • Emerald Research Connections • Case Study Competitions

• For F A th Authors www.emeraldinsight.com/authors • How to… guides • Meet the Editor interviews and Editor news • Editing service • Annual Awards for Excellence • Calls for Papers and news of publishing opportunities

Books



Marketing plan for your book including: • Direct mail campaigns, leaflets and brochures, media and journal advertising • Conference presence and promotion • A landing page for your title on the Emerald website

Other useful resources •

www.isiwebofknowledge.com (ISI ranking lists and impact factors)



www.harzing.com (Anne-Wil Harzing's site about academic publishing and the assessment of research and journal quality, as well as software to conduct citation analysis)



www.scopus.com (abstract and citation database of research literature and quality web sources)



www.cabells.com (addresses, phone, e-mail and websites for a large number of journals as well as information on publication guidelines and review information)



www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk (a general resource for academic writers designed primarily with international students whose first language writers, is not English in mind)



http://www.esrc.ac.uk (impact toolkit)

What do you use?

Talk to us, use us! • Tell us how we can help you • Give us feedback online • Use Emerald Management eJournals

!

For any answers you didn’t didn t get today (or were too shy to ask) … Contact : Ben Sng E-mail: [email protected] Mobile h/p : 012 375 8215/019 210 8690 Write for us!