AW - University of Białystok

Download Report

Transcript AW - University of Białystok

An Insider’s Guide to Getting Published in
Research Journals
Białystok 2012
Marcin Dembowski
Regional Manager – Eastern Europe,
Russian & CIS Countries
Agenda for the morning session
1. Explaining the publishing process
2. Measuring quality and maximising impact
Journal rankings
Research impact
3. Surviving peer review
What editors/reviewers look for
How to revise an article
Why you might be rejected, and how to respond
4. Questions
Emerald – who we are
• A leading independent publisher of business,
management, economics and social science research
• We publish research which makes a significant
contribution to practice
• Formed 1967, independently owned, 300 employees
• Publishing offices in US, UK, China, India and Malaysia;
sales/service offices in Canada, Dubai, Brazil, Japan
and Australia
• 300+ peer reviewed journals (54 in ISI)
• 2000+ book series, e-books, stand-alone volumes
Research you can use
Emerald is …
• International
– Over 1,700 university libraries worldwide, including 95 of the FT
top 100 business schools
– Potential readership of over 16 million
• Inclusive – theory and practice, rigour and relevance
– Supportive of scholarly research
• Committed to improve author and reader experiences
• Concerned about globally responsible publishing
– We believe the world needs better management and we publish
materials to reach this goal
Collaborative work
• Emerald collaborates with many
international associations, including:
– the Association to Advance
Collegiate Schools of Business
– the Academy of Management (AOM)
– the European Business Schools
Librarians Group (EBSLG)
– the European Foundation for
Management Development (EFMD)
– the European Aeronautics Science
Network (EASN)
We publish in 28 subject areas
• Full list of Emerald titles:
Measuring quality and maximising impact
European journal rankings (based on
EURAM research 2008)
• Some countries have official national rankings
– France, Germany, Italy, Norway (Finland plan for 2013)
• Some countries follow rankings of neighbouring country
– Austria>Germany, Ireland>UK, (Switzerland>Germany)
• Some countries use supra-national rankings, such as
Thomson Reuters (ISI) or ABS
– Spain (& Belgium, Slovenia) follow ISI, UK follows ABS
• Some countries have no official national ranking,
although some universities create their own rankings
– Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden
Thomson Reuters (ISI)
The ‘best known’ journal ranking
• Thomson Reuters is a subsidiary of the Thomson Group
and is based in Philadelphia, USA
• The ‘Web of Science’ database scores 12,000 selected
journals with ‘Impact Factors’ based on journal citations
• The latest Thomson Reuters statistics were published in
June 2010 for the year 2009
• Emerald currently has 54 journals and 3 book series
ranked on what is still commonly known as ‘ISI’
Thomson Reuters (ISI)
What does that mean?
ISI is the most well known ranking
• It determines tenure, authorship and funding in
many universities worldwide
• It is heavily weighted towards North America
• Data gathering has been questioned
• Citation is not the only way of measuring impact
• Feedback from rejected journals is unclear
Rankings are not always helpful
• A ranking system takes a qualitative
phenomenon (research) and
quantifies it
• Particular rankings enshrine
particular ideologies – so you need
to find out what those are
– To allocate resources?
– To emphasise a particular
tradition of research?
– To compare across disciplines?
• As someone once said: “When do
we stop counting and start thinking?”
Other measures of quality?
There are other indicators to measure quality such as:
• number of downloads (utility)
• dissemination of journal (where it is read)
• quality of the authors
• number of editors from top business schools
• relevance of content and publishing ethos
• links to societies/associations
• internationality
What is your publishing priority?
• Do you want 5 articles in ‘low ranked’ journals or 1 article in a
‘top ranked’ journal?
• Do you want to publish in national journals, or international?
What do we mean by ‘impact’?
Research impacts
upon these areas
Why do we care about impact?
• We have a long-standing Publishing Philosophy:
- bridging the gap between theory and practice
- rigour and relevance
- making the world better managed
- Research You Can Use
• How can we publish business and management
research without caring about the impact on the wider
• Demonstrates our belief in the value of academic
research to the broader social environment
Questions for discussion
Choosing a journal
• What are your most important factors when choosing a journal?
• Which resources do you use to research the journals you publish in?
• Which rankings do you use? How important are they?
• Who do you ask for advice?
• What is the best journal in your field? Why?
Supporting publication
• How can Emerald support you to publish in international peerreviewed journals?
• What are the barriers to publication, particularly for early career
• Are journals with a regional focus more welcome or less welcome?
Before you start………….
• You must have a clear topic or topics to be
reviewed, what is your research question?
Griffith Business School
Publishing your research –
where to begin?
• Are you working on a Doctoral or Master’s thesis?
• Have you completed a project which concluded
• Are you wrestling with a problem with no clear solution?
• Do you have an opinion or observation about business
• Have you given a presentation or conference paper?
• If so, you have the basis for a publishable paper
There are 1,000,000’s of published studies
• You need to be an
authority on your topic
• You need to be able to
clearly summarise what
is already known about
your topic(s)
• You must demonstrate an
awareness of what has
gone on before and what
is going on now
How to find relevant papers
• Google Scholar provides
a great starting point
• Universities have journal
• Enter your key words –
start broadly then narrow
your search, use
synonyms (these can be
found in Word)
Task 1: Can you answer (some of) the
Think of a literature review as a jigsaw
Surviving peer review
Research is all about peer review
1. You need to avoid
a desk reject
2. You may need to
revise and
3. You will almost
certainly need to
alter your paper
‘Journals are ongoing conversations
between scholars’ (Lorraine Eden)
• Study the author
guidelines, and read
the journal, to
understand the
• You will be ‘desk
rejected’ if you
appear to be
unaware of what has
being said, or why
you are submitting
The Process
• Submission is an important step on the road to
being published
• Reviewers are selected for their expertise by
the Editors
• They do sometimes make mistakes and their
opinions may not be valid
• But generally they raise genuine concerns
about the work – conceptualization, execution
and/or interpretation of the work
The Process
• Their comments are aimed at maintaining the
quality of papers publish in the journal, the
overall journal reputation and ultimately at
improving your work to attain a high standard of
academic writing.
“Many papers are desk rejected because they
simply don’t fulfil journal requirements.
They don’t even go into the review process.”
• Identify a few possible target journals but be realistic
• Follow the Author Guidelines: scope, type of paper, word length,
references style, etc
• Find where to send your paper (editor, regional editor, subject
area editor) …
• … and how to send it (email, hard copy, online submission)
• Send an outline or abstract to editor: is it suitable? how can it be
made so?
• Read at least one issue of the journal
Don’t do this
Dear Sir
I am a student at University of Vaasa,
Finland. I want to publish my articles
with you. Please send me details.
Example of author guidelines
Every journal
published will
have detailed
notes and
Plagiarism and referencing
• Plagiarism (from the Latin plagium meaning
‘a kidnapping’) is the act of taking someone
else’s work and pretending it is yours. It is
considered fraud!
• It isn’t always detected in peer review but
electronic tools can help
• Emerald’s entire portfolio is included in
iThenticate web-based software from
iParadigms (
• View Emerald’s Plagiarism Policy online
• As the author, you need to ensure that you get
permission to use content you have not created
• If you don’t, it may delay your paper being
• 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 request
form is available at:
What makes a good paper?
HINT: Editors and reviewers look for …
• Originality – what’s new about 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 title, keywords and a well written abstract
Some key questions
• Readability – Does it communicate well? Is it clear?
• Contribution – Why was it written? What’s new? Where
does it fit into the ‘conversation’? Position your paper.
• Credibility – Is the methodology robust? Are the
conclusions valid? Do you give credit to others when due?
Don’t hide limitations of research - you’ll be found out.
• Applicability – What should people do with your article?
Do your findings apply to the world of practice? Do they
map out areas of future research? Use for teaching?
• Internationality – Does the paper have a global
perspective? If not, why not?
Your own peer review
Let someone else see it!
• show a draft to
friends/colleagues and ask
for honest criticism
• we always get too close to
our own work
• remember that computer
spell-check software is not
• With supervisor, different departments or institutions
• Exploits individual strengths
• Especially useful for cross-disciplinary research
• Demonstrates the authority and rigour of the research
• Increases potential pool of citations
But remember
• Ensure paper is edited so that it reads as one voice
• Identify the person responsible for closing the project
• Agree and clarify order of appearance of authors
Improving electronic dissemination
• Research shows people read 20-30 articles per month –
you need to get on that shortlist
• Short title containing main keyword
– Emerald articles with 6-10 words in the title are
downloaded more than any others
• Clear and descriptive abstract
– include the keywords, keep it short
• Use relevant and known keywords – not new jargon
• Ensure references are correct – vital for reference
linking and citation indices
Emerald requests structured abstracts
250 words or less (no more than 100 in any one section)
• Purpose – Reasons for research, aims of paper
• Design – Methodology, scope of study
• Findings – Discussion, results
• Research limitations/implications – Exclusions, next
• Practical implications – The ‘so what?’ factor
• Social implications – Wider benefits to society
• Originality/value – Who benefits, what’s new?
• A request for revision is good news!
– You’ve avoided a desk reject and you are in the publishing cycle
– Nearly every published paper is revised at least once
– So now, close the deal!
• Acknowledge the editor and set a revision deadline
• Clarify if in doubt – ‘This is what I understand your
comments to mean…’
• Meet the revision deadline
• Attach a covering letter showing how you met the
reviewers’ requests (or if not, why not)
Major revisions required
• As you re-read it remember
– These comments are designed to help you
improve your work
– The reviewers see value in your work (they have
not rejected it) but they see a need for more work
– Reflect on the suggestions and think how they can
be achieved
– Think how many days work are involved and give
yourself a target date to complete the re-draft
Major revisions required
• The flow of the argument, maybe too much repetition
• Maybe trying to say too much in one paper
– One idea, one paper
• Degree of explanation given
• Material could be better presented – in a table, figure
• More data needed
• More literature to be included
• Not meeting the journal guidelines
Major revisions required
• Of course you could reject the reviewers comments
and send the paper to another journal
• But what if that journal approaches the same
• It is likely you will still get major revisions…the review
process is not perfect but there tends to be some
Major revisions required
• Best advice is to deal with the suggested revisions in
a methodical manner and send the paper back to the
same journal.
After publication, 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: listservs, a press release
• Link to the article in your email signature
• Contact the authors in your reference list
• Ask the publisher to provide you with book or journal
If your paper is rejected …
• Ask why
Most editors will send you detailed comments. Take a
deep breath, and listen carefully.
• Don’t take it personally
The review process is double blind for a reason.
• Fix it, then try elsewhere
Target your paper as closely as possible, and remember
you might get the same reviewer again.
• Don’t give up
The more you publish, the more you get rejected – and
everyone gets rejected at least once.
Possible reasons for rejections
• Lack of fit (‘why was it sent to this journal’?)
• Problem with quality (inappropriate methodology, not
reasonably rigorous, speculation without theoretical
framework, excessively long)
• Insufficient contribution (does not advance the field, a
minor extension of existing work, there is no ‘gap in
our understanding’, no broad principles or ‘big picture’,
you over-promised but under-delivered)
• Did you understand the “journal conversation”?
Typical criticisms (journal dependent)
• Paper motivation is weak
– is there really a gap in our understanding?
– why does the gap need filling?
• Theory development is weak
– theory by assertion, or reinvention of existing theory
• Empirical work is weak
– methodology not plausible, tests don’t rule out alternative
• ‘So what’?
– nothing wrong with the paper – but nothing very insightful either
– only incremental research, doesn’t affect an existing paradigm
Dealing with the comments
• It makes sense to do this in a way that makes it as
clear as possible to the reviewers what changes you
have made
– Provide a document which details the reviewer’s
comments and then provide your response as to
what you have done
• Some authors use a table format to do this
• Some include the changed text or additional
• Deal with Reviewer 1 and 2 separately
– Whatever your style the focus must be on clarity
Dealing with the comments
• Answer as completely as possible
• Answer politely, be tactful
• Answer with evidence
• If you feel the reviewer has misunderstood then
address the point with a good argument explaining
why the reviewer is mistaken
– It may be the reviewers are conflicted on a point
– It is ok to use one reviewer to argue against
Dealing with the comments
• Avoid emotive language
• Don’t say “We disagree completely with the
reviewers comments...”
• Try “While the reviewer makes an interesting
case in relation to…we would point out that…”
and then go onto present your argument
Some Don’ts
• Do not submit your article to two or more journals at
the same time
– It is unethical
– Editors do talk
– You must build your publishing reputation not
degrade it by following poor practice
And finally…
• The process of getting your work into a peer
reviewed journal can be a long and winding road.
• The final acceptance email feels good to get and then
when you see the journal in print and receive the reprints you get an additional buzz
• Of course by then you will be well advanced in your
next journal article!
Publishing your research means…
• Your paper is permanent – published material enters
a permanent and accessible knowledge archive – the
‘body of knowledge’
• Your paper is improved – through the interventions of
editors, reviewers, sub-editors and proof-readers
• Your paper is actively promoted – it becomes
available to a far greater audience
• Your writing is trustworthy – material which has been
published carries a QA stamp. Someone apart from
you thinks it’s good!
Emerald supporting authors
Dedicated editorial and author relations support staff
Quality-assured copy-editing and production service
Emerald Literati Network with more than 90,000 members
Signatories of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Emerald is
committed to protecting its authors’ work from copyright infringements
Online Scholar One Manuscript Central submission process
Complimentary journal issue and five reprints upon publication
Online resources
For Researchers
For Authors
• How to… guides
• Outstanding Doctoral Research Awards
• Research Fund Awards
• Emerald Research Connections
• For 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
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
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!
Publishing ALSO puts your work in front of
the best managers of tomorrow
Hong Kong UST, Indian School of
Business, University of Cape Town
Wharton, Harvard, Stanford,
Chicago, Yale, Thunderbird
Business Schools
IMD, INSEAD, Rotterdam, Bocconi,
EM Lyon, Instituto de Empresa,
London, Lancaster,
Cranfield, Warwick,
Saïd, Strathclyde
Business Schools
Why to promote the idea among researchers?:
Quality of teaching materials within your library/university
Access to the lastes management knowledge
Quality of research results of your academics
Stronger networking in the world of international universities
Knowledge and quality of students for potentioal employers
Image and Reputation of your Universities
… here …
… and here
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 get today (or were
too shy to ask) …
Marcin Dembowski
+48 795 132 895
[email protected]
Emerald Group Publishing Ltd
Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, West Yorkshire, BD16
1WA, England