Workshop para Autores e Pesquisadores 2015 Data: 08 de outubro de 2015 Horário: 10:30 - 14:30 Local: Auditório do INRAD - Instituto de Radiologia do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da USP - Av. Dr. Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, s/nº – Rua 1 – Cerqueira César – São Paulo, SP.

1. Author and Researcher Workshop
São Paulo, 8th October 2015
Vicki Donald, Editorial Director
Stacy Sieck, Library Communications Manager

2. Our history

3. Who are we?
Taylor & Francis
• Publisher of scholarly journals since 1798
• Work in partnership with over 500 societies and universities
• Publish 2,000+ journals across Science, Medicine, Technology, Social
Sciences, and Humanities – that’s 90,000 articles each year
• Global publisher with 20 offices worldwide, including Beijing, Singapore,
Tokyo, Oxford, Philadelphia, Cape Town, New Dehli and Melbourne
• Offers choice in routes to publish: books and journals, subscription and Open
Access
• Partner with innovators to improve the publishing experience for authors
and make articles more discoverable (including Figshare, Kudos and ORCiD).

4. Research Landscape:
Brazil and Latin America

6. Brazilian research is growing!
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Data from Thomson Reuters Web of Science

7. Where is Brazil vs South America?
Data from Thomson Reuters Web of Science
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
WorldResearchOutput(%)
Brazil
Mexico
Chile
Colombia
Uruguay
Ecuador

8. Where is Brazil vs World?
Data from Thomson Reuters Web of Science
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0% 1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
WorldResearchOutput(%)
Brazil
China
Germany
Japan
UK
USA

9. Which subjects does Brazil focus on?
Data from SCImago
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
Agriculture&Biology
Arts&Humanities
Business
Chemistry
ComputerSci
Dentistry
Earth&PlanetarySci
Economics
Energy
Engineering
EnvironmentalSci
HealthProfessions
Immunology
MaterialsScience
Mathematics
Medicine
Neuroscience
Nursing
Pharmacology
Physics&Astronomy
Psychology
SocialSciences
Veterinary
WorldResearchOutput(%)

10. Institutional research output
Data from Thomson Reuters Web of Science
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
USP - Univ
de São
Paulo
Univ
Federal do
Rio de
Janeiro
Univ
Federal do
Rio Grande
UNICAMP -
Univ
Estadual
de
Campinas
UFMG -
Univ
Federal de
Minas
Gerais
UNESP Univ
Federal de
São Paulo
UFSC –
Univ
Federal de
Santa
Catarina
Univ
Federal do
Paraná
UFV - Univ
Federal de
Viçosa

11. JCR (ISI) journal coverage
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Data from Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports

12. Citations per article around the world
Data from Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5

14. Which researchers would you like to reach with your article?

15. Publishing in academic journals
Tips to help you succeed
Vicki Donald, Editorial Director

16. Why publish?
• To exchange ideas
• To build reputation
• To disseminate work on a global scale
Have you got:
• Something new to say?
• A solution to a current or difficult problem?
• A new development on a ‘hot’ topic in your field
Publishing - a necessary step in the research process

17. Think about what you want to publish
• Full articles: offering original insights
• Letters: communicating advances quickly
• Reviews: offer a perspective, summarising recent
developments on a significant topic
• Conference papers: something to consider if your
research project is ‘in progress’

18. What are you publishing?
• Are you publishing new methods and / or results?
• Are you reviewing or summarizing a particular area?
• Does it advance knowledge and understanding of a
particular area?
Most journals will not consider:
• Something of no scientific interest
• Out-of-date work
• A duplication of existing, published research
• Incorrect or unacceptable conclusions

19. The stages to go through before submitting
Idea
Choose
journal
Read
back
issues
Write
first
draft
Use
critical
friend
Refine
further
drafts
Check
Instructions
for Authors
Proof
read
and
submit

20. Author’s View:
What matters to you?

21. What do authors care about?
Will the publishing
standards be good
quality?
Will the review
process be fair?
Will my article be
cited by other
researchers?
Will my article be read
by many people? All
around the world?
How quickly will be
article be
published?
How quickly will my
article be reviewed?
Will my
article help
my career?

22. Choosing the
right journal

23. Know your audience
Tip 1: the ‘best’ journal is not always the best journal for your
paper
A journal article is not a magazine article, a book manuscript or
your PhD thesis (but you could write a book review…)
Q. Do you:
A) Write an article for a specific journal?
B) Find any journal for your article
A. Be in the minority:
30% of authors write for a specific journal,
70% write the article, then panic

24. Know your audience
Tip 2: You are joining a conversation with other contributors.
Research the journals in your field:
Visit your library
Look at publisher, journal and society websites
Talk to your peers
Pick your type: generalist or niche, international or
region specific?
Read (and understand) the journal’s Aims and Scope
Check it is on your institution’s ‘approved’ list of journals
Check www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo

25. Know your audience
Tip 3: Ask the right questions and know the right answers. Who,
or what, is the journal’s:
• Editor?
• Editorial board?
• Publisher?
• Authors?
• Readership?
• Online/print media?
• Impact Factor?
• Peer review?
• Submission process?
• Open Access policy?
Build up a picture
of the journal and
understand the
stages your paper
will go through
before it is
published.

26. Why you should read a journal’s ‘Aims & Scope’
The ‘Aims & Scope’
will help you
understand what
the journal is about,
and who it is for.
Find it on the
journal page on
tandfonline.com

27. Journal citation metrics
Citation metrics (rightly or wrongly) are widely used as measures of quality by:
• Librarians
• Tenure and promotion committees
• Grant awarding bodies
• Authors
• Publishers.
In the simplest terms, they calculate the average number of citations over a
specified time period. For example:
• Impact Factor/Science Citation Index
• SNIP/ Scopus
• Eigenfactor Score®
• Article Influence Score®

28. Open access: what is it?
• Making article freely available online to read
• Making article reusable by third parties with little or no
restrictions
Two routes to publishing OA:
Gold Open Access
• Refers to publication of the final article (Version of
Record)
• Article is made freely available online (often after
payment of an article publishing charge or APC).
Green Open Access
• Usually refers to archiving of an (earlier version of an)
article
• Deposit of an article in a repository

29. Writing
for a journal

30. What to remember
Do:
 Look at published papers
 Quote key articles in the journal
 Fit the Aims & Scope
 Format your article to the journal
 Know where or who to submit to
 Check spelling and grammar
 Consider English ‘polishing’
 Read it out loud
 Ask a colleague to read it
Don’t:
× Overlook the title
× Rush the abstract
× Dismiss the submission guidelines
× Ignore the bibliography
× Leave acronyms unexplained
× Forget to clear any copyright
× Miss out attachments (figures, tables)
× Send the wrong version of your paper

31. Instructions for Authors

32. What makes a good title
"We would typically expect a strong title, a good
title that really expressed what the article was
about and made it clear to the reader exactly what
the topic was, and it's amazing how often writers
neglect to do that.”
Professor Mark Brundrett, Editor
Education 3-13

33. What makes a good abstract
"“A good abstract will tell you what the key issue that’s
addressed is, it’ll give you an idea of the methods that have
been used and the conclusions that have been arrived at.
So that abstract ought to tell someone whether it’s worth
them spending part of their life reading this paper. If the
abstract doesn’t do that the chances are the paper will have
further weaknesses.”
Professor David Gillborn, Editor
Race, Ethnicity and Education

34. Tips on a good abstract

35. Ethics for authors: the essentials
• Be wary of self-plagiarism.
• Don’t submit a paper to more than one journal at a
time.
• Don’t send an incomplete paper just to get feedback.
• Always include and / or acknowledge all co-authors
(and let them know you’ve submitted the paper to be
published).
• Always mention any source of funding for your paper.
• If you are using data sets gathered by someone else,
check that you have permission to use them in your
article.

36. Adopt a clear writing style
• Be direct – write about the research, not the article
• Be active – avoid ‘is described’, ‘is reported’
• Avoid ambiguity and misinterpretation – many readers
will not have English as their first language
• Be consistent – British or American English; units of
measurement; abbreviations (this applies to figures and
tables too)
• Use subheadings – to break up long sections and aid
reader navigation
• Ask for feedback if you’re not sure – colleagues can
provide constructive comments.

37. Working with Figures and Tables
• Is the figure or table necessary? – if you can explain
the point and a sentence or two, probably not
• Beware information overload – is all the data
necessary in the table?; would 2 figures be easier to
understand for the reader?; can the reader
understand the figure without commentary?
• Are there enough clues? – legends, scale bars and
axes should be clearly labelled; NB histograms usually
need standard deviations
• Avoid non-essential colour – patterns may be best
• Ensure you have the correct copyright clearance.

38. Working with References
• Use a software tool to organise references – many
journals have templates for use in packages e.g. Endnote
• Numbered lists – should always start at 1
• All references cited in text should appear in the
bibliography – and vice versa. Don’t forget to include key
relevant papers published in the journal.
• Cite the most recent papers – not a full history of
research in the area. Citing “Taylor, et al. and references
therein” can help in covering what’s required
• Unpublished results – references to these should be kept
to a minimum

39. Useful books on Academic Writing

40. Guidance, news and ideas for authors
authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com

41. Taylor & Francis Editing Services
Making the process of preparing and submitting a
manuscript easier.
www.tandfeditingservices.com

42. Your submission checklist
 A title page file with the names of all authors and co-authors
 Main document file with abstract, keywords, main text and all
references
 Figure, image or table files (with permission cleared)
 Any extra files, such as your supplemental material
 Biographical notes
 Your cover letter
 The correct version of your paper
You will need to format your article to meet the
requirements of the journal. Word templates are available
for many Taylor & Francis journals. Check the journal’s
Instructions for Authors (on every journal page on
tandfonline.com).

43. What happens in
Peer Review?

44. What is peer review?
Allows an author’s research to be evaluated and commented upon by
independent experts.
Which can take different forms:
• Single-blind review: where the reviewer's name is hidden from the
author.
• Double-blind review: where the reviewer's name is hidden from the
author and the author's name is hidden from the reviewer.
• Open review: where no identities are concealed.
• Post-publication review: where comments can be made by readers
and reviewers after the article has been published.
Every article published in a Taylor & Francis journal goes through
rigorous peer review.

45. Stages of peer review
Editor receives
manuscript &
makes an initial
assessment
Sent out to
reviewers
Accept
Minor
amendments
Major
amendments
Reject
Feedback to
author
Amend
Publisher proof
stage
Article
published

46. How to handle reviewers’ comments
• Try to accept feedback with good grace
• Revise as requested
• If you can’t, explain why
• Turn the paper round on time
• Thank the reviewers for their time
If you’re responding:
• Be specific
• Defend your position: be assertive and persuasive, not
defensive or aggressive
Don’t be afraid to ask the Editor for guidance. A good Editor will
want to help.

47. Possible decisions
• Accept, in present form
• Accept, with minor revisions
• Revise, with request for major revisions
• Reject, with the option to resubmit a new version in
the future
• Reject
(some journals now allow the transfer of reviewer
reports to accompany rejected papers to other
journals)

48. Top ten reasons for rejection (what to avoid)
1. Sent to the wrong journal – doesn’t fit the Aims and Scope, or
fails to engage with issues addressed by the journal
2. Not a true journal article – too journalistic or clearly a thesis
chapter or consultancy report
3. Too long/too short
4. Poor regard of the journal’s conventions – haven’t consulted the
Instructions for Authors, or to confirm academic writing standards
5. Unclear language – poor style, grammar, punctuation or English.
6. Scrappily presented – and not proof read.
7. Fails to say anything of significance – no new contribution to the
subject or states the obvious at length
8. Not properly contextualised – may be parochial.
9. Poor theoretical framework – and lack of relevant references.
10. Inappropriate – libellous, unethical, rude or lacks objectivity.

49. What to do if your article is rejected
• Do nothing for a few days: try to calm down and try not to
take it personally.
• You could use the reviewers’ comments, alter the paper and
submit to another journal.
• If you do submit elsewhere, make sure you alter your paper
to the new style of that journal. Editors can easily detect a
paper that was submitted to another publication.
• If you are asked to make heavy amendments and resubmit,
you must decide if it is worthwhile.

50. Congratulations,
you’re published!

51. Lunchtime!

52. Editor’s View:
What is their focus?

53. Think like an editor
“... I think authors need to be a little bit empathetic.
I think authors need to think ‘what is it like to be an
Editor of a journal?’. How many papers is the Editor
receiving per day, per week? What is going to
actually make the journal pay attention to my
paper?”
Monica Taylor, Co-Editor
Journal of Moral Education

54. An Editor’s role is a difficult one!
• Managing peer review – pressure to review quickly;
increasing numbers of submissions; finding reviewers
• Maintaining quality – attracting consistent standard
of articles; pressure to attain/sustain Impact Factor
• Relationship management – authors, reviewers,
board members (and sometimes society or university)
• Looking to the future – creating a distinct vision for
the journal and its future; responding to changes in
the research world e.g. research openness, data
mining, economic pressures

55. How Editorial Boards support the Editor
• Act as ambassadors for the journal – both at home
and abroad
• Balance across subjects and gender
• Represent different regions and countries
• Add lustre – well-known names
• Mix of career stages essential
• Review/recommend reviewers
• Help generate special issue themes
• Each has their own individual (international) network
– essential that they use it
• Bring experience from Boards of other journals

56. How Regional Editors support the Editor
• Regular contact
• Responsibility and accountability for issues,
papers, reviewer selection if appropriate
• Ownership for region:
– Conference attendance
– Recruiting new board members
– Gathering knowledge on local trends, research
assessments

57. How do reviewers support the Editor
• Bob Franklin, Editor-in-Chief of Journalism Studies
and Journalism Practice
• Gary McCulloch, Editor-in-Chief of British Journal
of Educational Studies
• Mike Smith, Editor-in-Chief of Journal of Maps

58. Get involved!
• Sign up to peer review papers
• Join an Editorial Board
• Contribute to a special issue on a hot topic
• Present a working paper
• Write a book review
• Publish a paper in one of the journals everyone in your
discipline reads – get known within your community
• Write a literature review – these often have higher
citation potential than original research papers
• Many scientific societies now offer awards or grants for
the best research paper or best new author

59. Peer Review in 2015: A Global View
Findings from the Taylor & Francis White Paper
Stacy Sieck, Library Communications Manager
Author Event, University of Sao Paulo
08 October 2015

60. The Numbers
• 7,438 survey respondents internationally
• Views from editors, authors and reviewers
• 6 focus groups held in the UK, China and South Africa
• Data spanning the sciences, social sciences, and
humanities

61. What are the benefits of peer review?
• 68% of researchers believe they can have confidence
in the academic rigour of published articles because
of the peer review process.
• The majority strongly agree that peer review
improved their most recently published article.

62. Biggest problems with the peer review process
• Rated the highest: regional and seniority bias
• Rated the lowest: identity and gender bias

63. How Long is too Long?
Most researchers wait between one and six months for
an article they’ve written to undergo peer review, yet
authors think up to two months is reasonable.

64. Which peer review models do researchers prefer?
Our study found a strong preference for double blind
review, with a rating of 8 or above out of 10 - echoing
previous peer review studies.

65. Where does peer review fall short?
• Researchers expect peer review to detect
plagiarism and fraud, check factual accuracy, and
judge novelty
• But ratings show peer review falls short, with
STM researchers moderately more satisfied than
their HSS colleagues that these outcomes are
achieved

66. Motivation: Why do you peer review articles?
• The top rated reasons:
– Play their part in the academic process
– Reciprocate the benefit (for their own reviewed
articles)
– To improve articles
• Each rated higher than 7.5 out of 10 – with a very
similar pattern between STM and HSS reviewers.

67. Should peer review be out in the open?
• Personal preference weighs heavily in responses from
researchers in our international peer review study.
• Overall, we found balanced views across open, open
and published, and post-publication review, with
competing views for and against these newer models
across roles, locations and experience levels.

68. Communication and peer review: Where’s my article?
• Researchers report that being kept informed on the
progress of an article as it goes through peer review
is not being handled effectively.
• There is strong support (ranking 8 or more out of 10)
for journals to publish review times, from submission
to publication decision, online.

69. How structured should peer review reports be?
• Researchers say they find a basic checklist the most
beneficial format for ensuring the quality of the
review.
• The more highly structured and rigid the review
format is, the less beneficial reviewers find them.
• However, the least beneficial of all is a totally
unstructured review, with no guidance whatsoever.

70. What incentivizes researchers to do more peer review?
• As in previous large-scale studies, there is no
consensus amongst reviewers about whether being
paid would make them more or less likely to accept
invitations to review.
• Some suggestions from survey respondents:
– Free access to the journal
– Waive color fees
– Waive APCs (article publishing charges) for open access
publication

71. Dis-incentives
• Reviewers would be most put off peer reviewing
articles by having their reviewer’s report published
publicly and by making their identity known to the
author.

72. Sign me up!
• Over two-thirds of authors (72% HSS / 69% STM) who
have never peer reviewed a paper would like to yet
many journal editors struggle to locate reviewers.
• Our forthcoming peer review white paper also looks
at ways to close this gap

73. Locating Reviewers
• Two-thirds of editors find it difficult to find a reviewer
for articles and this is consistent for STM and HSS.
• This is a considerable challenge for editors who also
report that submission volumes have increased in
every discipline.

74. Stay tuned for the complete white paper!
• Find our ‘Peer review in 2015: A global view’ white
paper on authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com in
mid-October
• Sign up for author alerts at http://bit.ly/1Wnlkuu to
stay informed!

75. Promoting your
article

76. Maximising your article’s impact
Use these tips to maximise the potential of your article to be seen,
read, and cited.
• Use your contacts – circulate any free copies received to people
you know in the field who need to read the article
• Talk about it: present your paper to conference delegates
• If you are a blogger or have a personal webpage write about your
article and link to it. Then write about your post on social media,
linking to it and the article.
• Post updates and link to your article on academic and professional
networking sites.
• Use social media to post a link to your article and highlight key
points.

77. Commonly used social media channels
• Twitter
• Facebook
• Linked-In
• MyNetResearch
• Academici
• CiteULike
• Blogs

78. Using social media to highlight your research
Plus an excellent example of linking your article to the news:

80. What can do at your university or institution?
• Think your research is newsworthy? Speak to your
institution’s press office, provide them with a link to
your article, and include them in social media posts.
• Add a brief summary and link to your article on your
department website
• Add a brief summary and link to your article on your
personal page on the university website.
• Add it to your students’ reading lists.
• Put your pre-print in your institutional repository

81. What next?
Future trends

82. Global authorship, 1999-2003 vs 2004-2008
Research
output 45%
worldwide
2003-2008
Source: The Royal Society Knowledge, Networks and Nations: global scientific collaboration in the 21st century (2011)

83. Work placements at T&F  screen 83Taylor & Francis http://www.elprofesionaldelainformacion.com/contenidos/2013/enero/07.pdf

84. Work placements at T&F  screen 84Taylor & Francis© Paul Butler

85. Interacting with journal articles: enhanced PDF

86. Interacting with journal articles: geolocation

87. Interacting with journal articles: video

88. Evaluating reputation

89. Journal evaulation tools
• Primarily a journal search, comparison
and suggestion tool
• Journal information and metrics can be
provided directly by publishers.
• Also provides a forum for community-
driven rating and comments provided
by authors.

90. Recognition for authors and reviewers
• Community-driven rating and comments sites.
• Journal data and metrics can be provided by
publishers and editors.
• Caution advised.
• Can we trust the reviews?

91. Excellence in print and online  Increased visibility  Supported journal development  slide 91Confidential Taylor & Francis

92. Data: big and small

93. altmetric

94. altmetric

96. What are measures of impact?
Value
Downloads Citations
Press
Coverage
Readers
EaseofMeasurement
Tweets
Other
Social
Media
Teaching Resources
Practical Outcomes:
* drugs &
treatments
* policy changes
* public
understanding
Patents
Legislative
Evidence

97. Muito obrigada!