Journal Publications are the primary means for research professionals to be able to market their work and ultimately obtain the means for their papers to be paid attention to by the world. The most basic element of the paper publication process, whether it is in an SCI, SCOPUS or Web of Science Journal is planning, writing and quickly publishing a great research paper that contains world-class research outcomes and studies.
A lot of researchers (both early career professionals as well as seasoned ones), however, lack the essential know-how about the typical publication processes followed by top SCI, SCOPUS and Web of science journals.
Preparing The Manuscript To Be A World-Class Published Article or Paper
The best way for one to learn how to write world-class articles is to practice as much as they can. Before one proceeds to decide which journal and which database (SCI, SCOPUS or Web of Science) to have their research work published in, they should make sure to get any queries that they may have about the research paper writing process completely sorted out and clarified.
Starting From Scratch & Building
Creating the first draft, approaching post-doctoral or graduates or even professors for their opinions and recommendations, is a great way to start getting a manuscript to meet the world-class standards of publication that will be followed by any journal indexed within the SCI, SCOPUS, Web of Science and other popular databases.
Knowing When To Stop
Once one is fully in experimentation and carrying out their research work, it can be pretty difficult to abstain from producing data at full speed and realizing when to stop. This is where the ability to judge when the data that has been acquired so far is sufficient enough to write a research article.
Getting The Timing Right
Writing too early can result in the researcher not having enough data to work with. Waiting too long can result in the research putting itself at risk of not getting accepted by popular journals. Stopping and proceeding to write when there is enough data to tell a full and logical story is an art and requires keen self-awareness.
Self-Awareness & External Supervision
The key is to always keep the goal of the paper published in mind as one carries out their daily experimentation. When one is too immersed in the details of their work, it can be difficult to stay objective and notice the gaps in their research work.
It is always good to have a supervisor who is observing on the outside and knows when to stop the experimentation and proceed with the conversion of the data and findings accumulated into an easy-to-understand, high-quality manuscript that is worthy of being accepted by the manuscript reviewing committee of any top SCI, SCOPUS and Web of Science Journal.
Picking The Best & Most Appropriate Journal
Steering one’s article towards the most appropriate journal can save them a lot of effort and reveal their groundbreaking results to the world sooner. A lot of self-proclaimed world-class journals give more value to novelty and unexpected discoveries, while other journals are more interested in in-depth and profound analyzes of critical phenomena and processes.
Patience In Assessing & Ascertaining The Right Journal
Going through several journals and determining which journal is the most appropriate for one’s research paper or article to be published is the way to go. Availing guidance from associates and others in the profession who have the expertise as journal authors, critics and editors will help tremendously in this regard.
It can be tempting to send one’s article to a leading journal even if their results are not of the greatest novelty, but they should bear in mind that they can save time by sending their work to the correct journal first instead of waiting for it to be rejected by a high-level journal.
Nailing The Submission Process
In the eyes of readers, editors and reviewers included, the quality of the paper that a researcher sends is directly reflective of the quality of the research and experimentation behind it. A carefree approach to writing can undermine the most meticulous experience.
It is, therefore, essential that the paper is free from reckless errors, especially in the data. Checking regularly and then subsequently even double-checking that every single piece of information, including every picture, graph and table is consistent, is a must.
Ease-Of-Reading Is Critical
Again, concrete data is a researcher’s best ally in conveying their story, so making them easy to understand is paramount. Each figure should only present one or a few related points and together they should present all the important points of the document in an easy to understand way. Putting as much information about the data and conditions of the experiment directly on the figure as possible will offer more credibility and transparency about the entire work.
Grammar Is Vital
It is important to remember that the article should be written clearly, in such a way that it contains absolutely no spelling or grammatical errors and that the logic is crisp. Availing advice from superiors and peers helps in this regard.
Preparing To Deal With The Reviewing Process
Journals are usually run either by professional editorial teams or academics who take on the role of editor for a set period of time. Researchers send their articles to peer reviewers who are scientists who rate submitted manuscripts for accuracy, logic and scientific relevance.
Some journals have an initial screening step where manuscripts that are highly unlikely to go through the review process are rejected beforehand. Editors typically make these initial screening decisions with advice from members of the peer-review committee.
Familiarising Oneself With The Reviewing Process Of Their Target Journal
Reviewers are chosen by the publisher based on their expertise in the field, often using large databases assembled by the journal and the publisher’s subject matter knowledge. Some scientists are better reviewers than others as they are more critical and in-depth.
These are the sort of reviewers that editors typically look for. The review process for most SCI, SCOPUS and Web of Science journals takes anywhere from a few days to several weeks. After review, the publisher decides on the publication, taking into account all comments received.
Cover Letters Work Wonders
Researchers can help make sure that the review process for their submitted manuscripts goes completely sleekly by presenting a cover letter that includes, in very plain words, a condensed account of all the reasoning of their manuscript, offering more clarity on the importance and context of their research work and findings. If there are any special considerations that the editor and reviewers should take into account, they ought to be included in the cover letter.
Dealing With Reviews Professionally
It is on very rare occasions that reviewers will recommend that one’s article be accepted without necessitating a review. New experiments, those that are usually done in a matter of weeks are often part of their review requests. Reviewers often offer authors detailed advice on how to further edit their articles.
It is important to remember that the editor and reviewers are interested in the article when they do this. All they want is to see it improved and published in its best form. Researchers can increase the chances of their article being accepted if they assume that reviewers offer their suggestions in the form of constructive criticisms.
Taking Any & All Comments As Constructive Criticism
With this attitude, researchers can make every attempt possible to accommodate their requests, including performing additional revisions and data collection, even if they think they are unnecessary. Of course, the claims of reviews are sometimes wrong or based on faulty reasoning.
In these cases, particularly if they have agreed to respond to other reviewer comments, the editor may be willing to consider a reasonably worded argument that the request does not need to be met for their article to be accepted.
Resubmitting The Revised & Corrected Manuscript
When returning the revised article to the journal, researchers should include a detailed, point-by-point explanation of how they responded to comments from each of the reviewers and editors, always treating the reviewer’s comments and motivations with respect. It is not recommended for researchers to initiate personal attacks or send comments on reviews or critiques. Being as polite as possible to the editor is also highly recommended.
Leaving No Room For Dejection
Despite one’s best efforts, they can always receive a rejection letter from the journal of their choice. That doesn’t mean the paper they submitted is not good. Only about one-tenth of all submitted manuscripts are ever accepted by these reviewing committees.
Maintaining Professionalism At All Cost
Rejection can be overwhelming and it’s often a good idea to let give it some time before beginning to think about what the next course of action should be. It is not a good idea to send an angry email to the editor explaining why the review process was unfair and biased.
If, after careful consideration, one believes there has been a misunderstanding or error, some journals will receive a request for reconsideration, usually in the form of a letter or clear message explaining the researcher’s point of view. Some editors might even be willing to have a phone conversation.
Using Rejection As An Opportunity To Learn
In most cases, the most effective and quickest course is to quickly re-evaluate one’s journal choice, correct any weaknesses that may have been pointed out in the review process, reformat the paper for their second choice journal and to send it.
All rejected manuscripts are ultimately published elsewhere. Even a submission that ends in a rejection is an opportunity to hone one’s writing and editing skills that will stand them in good stead for years to come. You can reach for the latest research publishing steps in the latest journal publication from high indexed journals from the ARDA conference portal.