More Related Content Similar to Scientific writing janssens 2016 (20) Scientific writing janssens 20161. 9/2/2016
1
Lisbon, September 2016
Dr. Barbara Janssens, Career Manager
Scientific Writing
www.wordle.net
www.slideshare.com/barbaja
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing2
The chicken and the egg
Science Editing
Publishing
Science Career
Advising
2. 9/2/2016
2
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Van Dijk et al., Curr. Biol. 2014
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.04.039
Publication metrics and success on
the academic job market
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing4
3. 9/2/2016
3
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing5
Job applications:
Straight to the top of the pile
http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.
1038/nj7410-241a
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing6
Five top tips for your job application
1. Imagine YOU are the recruiter
2. Learn to present yourself in an “elevator pitch”
3. Actively network
4. Most important FIRST
5. Tell stories
http://youtu.be/FH0Hvk2tp-M
4. 9/2/2016
4
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Deese and Kaufman, J. Exp. Psychol. 1957, 54, 180-187.
Murdock , J. Exp. Psychol. 1962, 64, 482-488.
Serial position effect
Recall
Primacy Recency
t
7
most important first!
© Andrew Moore
I’m hungry...
Mustn’t forget
to do the shopping...
Drain needs
unblocking!!
Adapted from Andrew Moore
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing8
What scientists write
Papers
Curriculum vitae
Grants, Fellowships
Reports
Proposals
Web pages
Conferences
Lectures
Meetings
Posters
...
5. 9/2/2016
5
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing9
Think of your audience/reader
Poster – conference
Fellowship – review committee
Personal selection – criteria (formal, CV, host)
Grant – reviewers
Long-term planning
Job application – recruiter
Paper – journal peer review
Imagine you are the recruiter/reviewer!
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Scientific Writing
www.slideshare.net/Barbaja
6. 9/2/2016
6
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing11
Scientific ...Writing <-> ...career
Writing, editing, career development
A career in science/publishing
About publishing and impact
Journals and impact
Titles and Abstracts
Tips on language/style
Writing a paper
IMRAD structure
How to get started & „sculpt“
How to submit with cover letter
Writing a job application
Publication ethics
Author (to be or not to be?)
Plagiarism (never copy-paste?)
Science Communication with the Public
http://www.slideshare.net/Barbaja
Cargill et al. Writing Scientific Research Articles
Nancy Fox The little book of scientific writing
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Peer reviewed publications
Publishers
Societies
Magazines
Scientific American, New Scientist, …
Spektrum der Wissenschaft (npg)
Public communication
Science in School
Cancer Prevention Service
Helmholtz Open Science Coordination
Science Open
Publication landscape
7. 9/2/2016
7
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
PubMed/Medline
Google (Scholar)
Scopus (Elsevier)
CrossRef
BioMed experts
Open Access journals
ISI Web of Science (Thomson)
Where do you find publications?
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Elsevier 2500 journals (Lancet, Cell), 33k books
John Wiley &sons/Wiley-VCH -> Wiley-Blackwell
Wiley 1500 journals, 16k ebooks
EMBO Press 4 journals
Nature (npg) 162 journals /Macmillan
Springer 2400 journals, 170k books
BioMedCentral 300 j
Springer Nature
Open Access:
PLoS
eLIFE
Etc etc…
Publishers
8. 9/2/2016
8
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Elsevier
21%
Npg Springer
12%
Wiley
11%
Other
56%
% of articles 2015
Mergers and Acquisitions…
http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing16
Peer Review principle
Submission
Editorial
Decision
Reject
Peer review
Revision
Editorial
Decision
Referee
recommendation
Accept
9. 9/2/2016
9
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing17
Referee questions
1. Is the subject matter suitable for publication in XXX?
2. Does the manuscript contain new and significant
information to justify publication?
3. Is the technical quality of the paper adequate for
publication?
4. Are the interpretations and conclusions justified by
the results?
5. Is the summary (abstract) informative and concise?
6. Is the English satisfactory?
7. Do the references adequately refer to related work?
Do you peer-review?
Closed
Single blind (author doesn‘t know reviewer)
Double blind (reviewer also doesnt know author)
Triple blind (editor also doesnt know the author)
Open
Author, Editor and Reviewer all know eachother
Possibly published
Post-publication peer-review
11. 9/2/2016
11
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing21
Peer review process file (RPF)
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
The Editor writes…
12. 9/2/2016
12
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing23
Most accessed – most cited
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing24
Impact Factor (IF)
Devised by Eugene Garfield, founder of ISI (Chairman
Emeritus of Thomson Scientific)
1955
Adapted from Matteo Cavalleri
13. 9/2/2016
13
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing25
Impact Factor (IF)
IF = average number of times articles from the journal
published in the past two years have been cited in the
JCR year.
www.webofknowledge.com - Thomson Reuters
time
Year
1
Year
2
Year
3
Articles
published
A1 A2
C12
Citations
published
Slide adapted from Matteo Cavalleri
IF (Year 3) = C12 /(A1+A2)
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing26
All citations from all publications?
No
WOS is selective on coverage
covers 12,000 journals…
… from a total of 40-50,000
Coverage depends on topic
Ecology 65%
Geology 55%
Nursing 45%
Information sciences 33%
History 9%
Molecular Biology/Biochemistry (80)%
FT Krell, Eur J Sci Editing 2012, 38 (1). www.ease.org.uk
14. 9/2/2016
14
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing27
Cites per paper in 2 years?
Since 2007: 5-year IF
Eigenfactor
Citations to 5 years
Considers from which journals cites come
Self-citations (from same journal) not considered
Article Influence
= Eigenfactor /(# articles in 5 years)
Average (mean) AI = 1.00
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing28
The h factor
A scientist has index h if h of [his/her] Np papers have at
least h citations each,
and the other (Np - h) papers have at most h citations
each.
15. 9/2/2016
15
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing29
The SNIP
Since 2010 SNIP = Source Normalized Impact per Paper
SNIP (Journal)= RIP/CP
RIP = Raw Impact per Paper
CP = Citation Potential
(average number of references in the articles that cite a given journal)
Only cited references from articles in the census period,
and which refer to articles within the target period are
counted
Only cited references indexed in the Scopus database are
counted
www.scopus.com
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing30
The SJR Scimago Journal Ranking
SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) is a prestige metric
based on the idea that ‘all citations are not created
equal’.
the subject field, quality and reputation of the journal
have a direct effect on the value of a citation.
http://www.scimagojr.com/
17. 9/2/2016
17
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
IF = cites y3 / items y1+2
Items
…
Who cites?
av. 1.0
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing34
Pick a rising star?
18. 9/2/2016
18
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
But watch out for Journal self-cites!
(Energy Educ Sci Tech discontinued in 2012)
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Self-citations vs Journal banned
19. 9/2/2016
19
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing37
The author and the IF
It‘s not all up to senior scientists...
Chose the target journal and priorities
Market your article, not just the journal
Expert rating
Cited, accessed, bookmarked xx times
Press release, Higlights/columns, blogs
Talks and presentations
... Perception counts more than the IF
...“publish or perish“
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing38
Albert Einstein
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not
everything that counts can be counted."
20. 9/2/2016
20
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing39
Before writing…
What would you do?
Read read read...
Be critical! What is easy to understand? Well written?
Journal clubs!
Assemble data
Which journal/scope?
Which format?
Who will be author?
Check instructions to authors!
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing40
Select target journal
Journal XXX XXX
Publishes similar work?
Scope/recent content?
Quality/impact?
Fast publication?
Charges for pages, color,
open access?
Article format/length?
21. 9/2/2016
21
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing41
Journal Author Name Estimator JANE
http://www.biosemantics.org/jane/
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing42
Title
The first impression counts...
A strong title will attract readers/citations
Keep it short: 15 words
Clear, informative, raise curiosity
Interesting and easy to read
Main message of the paper
Remember Medline
Key words
Start with a „quick go“, remodel during writing process and
rethink for some days when the whole manuscript is ready
Test: http://www.lulu.com/titlescorer
22. 9/2/2016
22
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing43
Examples: compare
“The X-ray crystal structure of the complex formed
between a recognition domain on a sensor histidine
kinase (CheA) and its cognate response-regulator
(CheY) reveals insights into the mechanism of signal
transduction in bacterial chemotaxis.”
“Structure of the CheY-binding domain of histidine
kinase CheA in complex with CheY.”
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing44
Titles to avoid
Vague titles
Titles starting with
“Studies on..” “Implications of…”
“Involvement of…” “Observations on...” “Evidence for…”
“Investigations into...” “Insights in…” “Characterization
of...”
“The involvement of this in that”
-> “This does that in signal transduction pathway xx”
Titles with jargon or abbreviations
Titles with “new” and “novel” (all research is new)
23. 9/2/2016
23
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing45
Keywords
Donot repeat title words – these come up anyhow
Most cited versus never cited...
Try out in PubMed:
possibly your keywords should be obvious and short but
bring less hits (and rather your than a competitor‘s
article!)
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing46
Title syntax
“Preliminary canine and clinical evaluation of a new
antitumor agent, streptovitacin.” (Clin. Res. 8:134, 1960)
„Evidence for women dreaming more often about food
than men.“
...
24. 9/2/2016
24
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Deese and Kaufman, J. Exp. Psychol. 1957, 54, 180-187.
Murdock , J. Exp. Psychol. 1962, 64, 482-488.
Serial position effect
Recall
Primacy Recency
t
47
Write at beginning!
Adapted from Andrew Moore
I’m hungry...
Mustn’t forget
to do the shopping...
Drain needs
unblocking!!
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing48
Have a look at titles
Never cited...........well cited
Reviews
Yoghurt fermentation at elevated temperatures by
strains of Streptococcus thermophilus expressing
a small heat-shock protein: Application of two-
plasmid system for constructing food-grade strains
of Streptococcus thermophilus
New insights into mechanisms of growth and b-
carotene production in Blakeslea trispora
Research Articles
Separation of catechin compounds from different teas
Production and characterization of theromstable α-
amylase by thermophilic Geobacillus
stearothermophilus
Molecular characteriazation of rpoB gene mutations in
rifampicin-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis
strains isolated from TB patients in Belarus
Investigating pH and Cu(II) effects on lipase activity
and enantioselectivity via kinetic and
spectroscopic methods
Metabolic flux analysis of the two astaxanthin-
producing microorganisms Haematococcus
pluvialis and Phaffia rhodozyma in the pure and
mixed cultures
Reviews
Essential fatty acids: Biochemistry, physiology and
pathology
Metagenomics: An inexhaustible access to nature‘s
diversity
Production of biopharmaceuticals and vaccines in plants
via the chloroplast genome
Application of inkjet printing to tissue engineering
Research Articles
Arenicola marina extracullar hemoglobin: A new
promising blood substitute
Directed evolution of industrial biocatalyst 2-deoxy-D-
ribose-5-phosphate aldolase
Bio-electrosprays: The next generation of electrified jets
A rapid, high content, in vivo model of glucocorticoid-
induced osteoporosis
25. 9/2/2016
25
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
More titles from JCS
1. Suppression of synaptotagmin II restrains phorbolester-
induced downregulation of protein kinase C alpha by
diverting the kinase from a degradative pathway to the
recycling endocytic compartment
2. Identification of an alpha-tubulin mutant of fission yeast
from gamma-tubulin-interacting protein screening: genetic
evidence for alpha-/gamma-tubulin interaction
3. Genetic and molecular interactions of the Erv41p-Erv46p
complex involved in transport between the endoplasmic
reticulum and Golgi complex
4. Kendrin/pericentrin-B, a centrosome protein with
homology to pericentrin that complexes with PCM-1
5. Regulatory mechanisms governing the oocyte-specific
synthesis of the karyoskeletal protein NO145
6. Association of human ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme
CDC34 with the mitotic spindle in anaphase
7. Inactivation of MAPK in mature oocytes triggers
progression into mitosis via a Ca2+-dependent pathway
but without completion of S phase
8. Repression of Wnt-5a impairs DDR1 phosphorylation and
modifies adhesion and migration of mammary cells
1. Secreted antagonists of the Wnt signalling
pathway
2. PKB/Akt: a key mediator of cell
proliferation, survival and insulin
responses?
3. Metalloproteinase inhibitors: biological
actions and therapeutic opportunities
4. Clonal mesenchymal progenitors from
human bone marrow differentiate in vitro
according to a hierarchical model
5. SH3 domains: complexity in moderation
6. Cell adhesion and motility depend on
nanoscale RGD clustering
7. Mechanisms of capacitative calcium entry
8. Release of an invasion promoter E-
cadherin fragment by matrilysin and
stromelysin-1
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing50
Abstract
© Janssens 2014 - Scientific Writing
Hardest part to write
Second most important part
Maximum 200 words (Medline truncates at 250 words)
What are the significant results?
Important methodology (in vitro vs. in vivo, human, model
systems)
What are the conclusions/implications?
Start with writing these in bullet points and take time to re-
re- and re-write this part with some distance
Write in PAST TENSE
NO citations, avoid non-standard abbreviations
26. 9/2/2016
26
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing51
Optimize abstract
Be specific, not just one word
e.g. women's fiction not fiction.
Key phrases need to make sense within the title and
abstract and flow well.
Focus on a maximum of three or four different keyword
phrases rather than try to get across too many points.
Finally, always check that the abstract reads well,
remember the primary audience is still the researcher not a
search engine, so write for readers not robots.
http://authorservices.wiley.com/bauthor/
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing52
Language tips
Be cautious with imprecise words:
Several, some, many, affected, somewhat, quite,
relatively
Don‘t add doubt unnecessarily. Could you replace...
Could -> can
Would -> will
Hopefully -> Possibly
Difficulty -> challenge
27. 9/2/2016
27
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing53
Structured abstract
BACKGROUND: Infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus have
become increasingly common in hospitals worldwide. S aureus continues to be a cause
of nosocomial bacteremia. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical significance (mortality)
of MRSA and methicillin-susceptible S aureus bacteremia in a retrospective cohort study
in a 2900-bed tertiary referral medical center. Survival and logistic regression analyses
were used to determine the risk factors and prognostic factors of mortality. RESULTS:
During the 15-year period, 1148 patients were diagnosed with nosocomial S aureus
bacteremia. After controlling potential risk factors for MRSA bacteremia on logistic
regression analysis, service, admission days prior to bacteremia, age, mechanical
ventilator, and central venous catheter (CVC) were independent risk factors for MRSA.
The crude mortality rate of S aureus bacteremia was 44.1%. The difference between the
mortality rates of MRSA (49.8%) and MSSA bacteremia (27.6%) was 22.2% (P < .001).
Upon logistic regression analysis, the mortality with MRSA bacteremia was revealed to
be 1.78 times higher than MSSA (P < .001). The other predicted prognostic factors
included age, neoplasms, duration of hospital stay after bacteremia, presence of
mechanical ventilator, and use of CVC. CONCLUSIONS: Resistance to methicillin was
an important independent prognostic factor forpatients with S aureus bacteremia.
PMID: 18313513 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/policy/structured_abstracts.html
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing54
Structured abstract
Developed in the late 1980s and early 1990s to assist
health professionals in selecting clinically relevant and
methodologically valid journal articles
Mainly medical
Makes text mining (search engines) easier
Could start to be used in life sciences (MedLine
encourages)
28. 9/2/2016
28
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing55
Graphical abstract
Started in chemical journals
VISUALISE the main message in ONE figure
Chemical reaction
Signal transduction pathway
Hypothesis
Structure
Etc…
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing56
LAY abstract
Sometimes asked at submission
Summary for non-expert
Here you CAN say why it is new
Always write this, it can be useful
In cover letter to convince Editor
After acceptance to highlight your work
To explain your friends and family
29. 9/2/2016
29
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing57
Edit title/abstract
Title: short? Main message? What first?
Provide 2 alternative titles to chose from
Mark key statements
Do you get what it is about?
What could be left out?
First and last sentence: strong?
Positive wording
Sentence length
…
What would you write in a “lay” abstract?
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing58
Scientific Writing
Introduction and basics
Mutual introductions
About journals and peer review
Online access and searches, IF
Before writing
Tips on language/style
Writing
IMRAD structure
How to get started & ‘sculpt’
How to submit with cover letter
Publication ethics
----
Application writing
Science communication
30. 9/2/2016
30
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing59
Style = Clarity
Write to be understood
Think of your audience
Make information accessible
Make reader feel comfortable
THINK what you want to say
Clear thinking = clear writing
Arrange your thoughts in a logical order (MIND MAP)
Errors don‘t always affect the meaning
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing60
Errors vs meaning
© M. Cargill - Scientific Writing
31. 9/2/2016
31
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing61
Errors vs meaning
© M. Cargill
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing62
# languages…
© Janssens 2014 - Scientific Writing
… different challenges!
Sentences too long/too short
False friends
Commas
32. 9/2/2016
32
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing63
www.nature.com/scitable
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing64
www.nature.com/scitable
33. 9/2/2016
33
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing65
www.nature.com/scitable
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing66
Sentence structure
Simple
Precise
Concise
Topic near the beginning!
Active tense where possible
KISS
Keep
It
Short and
Simple
34. 9/2/2016
34
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing67
Sentence structure
Which sentence is easier to understand?
The primary site of contact with airborne allergens,
irritants, pathogens and other proinflammatory agents is
the pulmonary ephithelium
The pulmonary epithelium is the primary site of contact
with airborne allergens, irritants, pathogens and other
proinflammatory agents
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing68
Sentence structure
Often splitting in two is better, even if result is longer:
Wiley-VCH is a Weinheim, Germany, global STM
publisher specialized in chemistry and life sciences,
belonging to the Wiley-Blackwell group.
Wiley-VCH is a publishing house located in Weinheim,
Germany. As a part of the global Wiley-Blackwell
scientific/technical/medical (STM) program, it is
specialized in Chemistry and Life Science publications.
35. 9/2/2016
35
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing69
Paragraphs
Units of thought, not length
Provide visual relief
Contain related thoughts
Thoughts in logical order
Consistent organization
Use topic sentences
At beginning or end
Rarely in the middle (unless preceding is transitional)
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
I’m hungry...
Mustn’t forget
to do the shopping...
Drain needs
unblocking!!
recency
recall
primacy
t
PI3K
© Andrew Moore
Serial Position Effect
36. 9/2/2016
36
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing71
Which/that
Which/that: relative clauses
Defining clause: NO comma
That/which in UK, only that in US
No comma
Non defining clause: comma
, which ((by the way)) ….
Not essential to basic meaning
Comma before which
Land which/that is surrounded by water is an island.
Tasmania, which is surrounded by the waters of Bass
Strait, is an island of great natural beauty.
www.writeresearch.com.au
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing72
The comma: A matter of life and death?
“Panda: large black and white bear-like mammal,
native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves.” [1]
Help the reader understand!/list information
Before the “and” is optional
To date, …
Use commas as you would salt and pepper: don’t
overdo it!
[1] Truss, L., Eats(,) Shoots and Leaves, Profile Books Ltd., UK 2003
Fay Wolter, BiotecVisions April 2011
37. 9/2/2016
37
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writinghttp://www.facebook.com/sujaybarc73
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing74
Active vs passive (p.39)
Avoid passive (is, was, are, being...)
Use active: the subject of the sentence performs an action
The man was bitten by the dog - pass
The dog bit the man - active
Only use passive if you cannot use the „we“ form
Gel electrophoresis was used - pass
We used gel electrophoresis – active
Example from Adam Ruben
ACTIVE VOICE: We did this experiment.
PASSIVE VOICE: This experiment was done by us.
SEMI-PASSIVE VOICE: Done by us, this experiment was.
Yes, for the semi-passive voice, you’ll want to emulate Yoda. Yoda,
you’ll want to emulate.
A. Ruben
dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.caredit.a1200033
38. 9/2/2016
38
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing75
Anthropomorphism
= assigning actions that can only be performed by
humans to non-living subjects. Subjects like method,
theory, research, table, figure, etc. cannot determine,
conclude, find, summarize, compare, or actively “act”
as human subjects do
www.biotecvisions.com
Anthropomorphism Solution
HPLC was able to determine
the composition.
We determined the
composition by HPLC.
The research found… The researchers found…
Table 1 summarizes the
results…
The summary in Table 1.
Figure 1 compares activities
at 4°C and 37°C.
Activities at 4°C and 37°C are
compared in Table 1.
Our hypothesis says… We hypothesize…
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing76
Some rules
Shun and avoid the employment of unnecessary, excess extra words.
Make certain all sentences are full and complete. If possible.
Avoid cliches like the plague.
Take pain's to spell and, punctuate correctly.
BE Consistent.
Don't approximate. Always be more or less precise.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity or prolixity.
Avoid pointless repetition, and don't repeat yourself unnecessarily.
Always try to remembr t he/E extreme importance of being accurit; ne
at, and carfful.
Don't use no double negatives.
Don't never use no triple negatives.
All generalizations are bad.
Take care that your verb and subject is in agreement.
From
http://www.union.edu/PUBLIC/BIODEPT/wicked.html
39. 9/2/2016
39
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing77
Some rules ii
A preposition is a bad thing to end a sentence with.
Don't use commas, which aren't necessary.
"Avoid overuse of 'quotation' marks."
Writing carefully, dangling participles must be avoided.
And don't start a sentence with a conjunction.
Reserve the apostrophe for it's proper use and omit it when its not necessary.
Avoid run-on sentences they are hard to read.
Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
Never use that totally cool, radically groovy out-of-date slang.
Avoid those long sentences that just go on, and on, they never stop, they just
keep rambling, and you really wish the person would just shut up, but no, they
just keep on going, they're worse than the Energizer Bunny, they babble
incessantly, and these sentences, they just never stop.
From http://www.union.edu/PUBLIC/BIODEPT/wicked.html
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing78
If you don‘t know…
Google!!
Merriam Webster (US) or Oxford
www.merriamwebster.com
www.oed.com
Software ConcApp p.130
www.edict.com.hk/pub/concapp/
Build your own corpus (articles) of english journal articles
Search gives you CONTEXT of search words
www.writeresearch.com.au
40. 9/2/2016
40
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing79
Funny syntax...
“A large mass of literature has accumulated on the cell
walls of staphylococci.” (From a MS submitted to the editor
for publication in J. Bacteriol.)
“….He presented evidence that women who smoke are
likely to have pulmonary abnormalities and impaired lung
function at the annual meeting of the American Lung
Association.” (From a Press release)
“THF is a single heat-stable polypeptide isolated from calf
thymus composed of 31 amino acids with a molecular
weight of 3,200.”
“For sale, fine grand piano, by a lady, with three legs.”
“For sale, German Shepherd dog, obedient, well trained,
will eat anything, very fond of children.”
From Martin Welch, BIOCAM course
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing80
First letter… brain does the rest
http://www.positscience.com/games-teasers/brain-teasers/teasers/scrambled-text
42. 9/2/2016
42
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing83
Start To WRITE…
• “The time to begin writing an article is when you have
finished it to your satisfaction. By that time you begin to
clearly and logically perceive what it is you really want
to say.” (Mark Twain, 1902)
• 1) Have something to say
2) Say it
3) Stop as soon as you have said it (Billings, J., An
address to our medical literature. Brit. Med. J. 1881, xx,
262-268)
• NOT instant messaging, tweeting, status updating...
(that‘s marketing AFTER your publication)
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing84
Manuscript draft
- IMRAD -
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
Figures and Tables
Cover letter
44. 9/2/2016
44
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing87
...writing order
Figures and Tables
Title
Abstract
Results
Materials and Methods
Introduction
Discussion
Cover letter
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing88
45. 9/2/2016
45
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing89
...writing order
Figures and Tables
Title
Abstract
Results
Materials and Methods
Introduction
Discussion
Cover letter
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing90
Start with the data
This will cut your writer‘s block!
(Pictures of gels, graphs etc)
Order in Figures: write legends
What is the story?
(Title, abstract draft)
46. 9/2/2016
46
www.ScienceMatters.io
Publish data first, then stories?
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing92
Figures
Should tell the story - quick readers will read the
abstract and check the figures
Are the data comprehensive?
Not too many panels (6)
If too many data: provide as supporting material
Think: what do I need to convince the reviewer? What
is the minimum to satisfy a reader without “losing the
forest because of the trees”? e.g. No need to repeat
all different conditions as a proper figure
Include a concluding visual scheme, diagram,
overview
47. 9/2/2016
47
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing93
Figures II
Detail how many times the experiments were
performed
Detail the number of animals/replicates
Provide clear statistical analyses
Should enable the reader to fully understand the
figure
Ensure everything is described: abbreviations,
symbols etc.
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing94
Figure or Table?
Table
Recording data (raw or processed)
Showing actual data values, precision
Multiple comparisons
Has a short title and footnotes
Figure
Showing trend or picture
Shape rather than numbers
Compare few elements
Has a legend with all details needed
48. 9/2/2016
48
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Keep source data! Statistics…
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing96
Clinical trial data online
Online archive of ALL trial data
Data protection issue…
…But it will come
Statistal analysis: some journals require author to pay
for cost of second analysis if needed
Sometimes data need to be reanalysed decades after
publication
49. 9/2/2016
49
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing97
Image processing
Regulations by Rockefeller University Press
(now adopted by most journals)
No specific feature within an image may be enhanced,
obscured, moved, removed, or introduced.
Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are
acceptable if they are applied to the whole image and as long as
they do not obscure, eliminate, or misrepresent any information
present in the original.
The grouping of images from different parts of the same gel, or
from different gels, fields, or exposures must be made explicit by
the arrangement of the figure (e.g., dividing lines) and in the text
of the figure legend.
If the original data cannot be produced by an author when
asked to provide it, acceptance of the manuscript may be
revoked.
http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3363
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
MANIPULATION OF BLOTS
B
r
i
g
t
h
n
e
s
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
t
r
a
s
t
a
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
s
.
Rossner M , Yamada K M J Cell Biol 2004;166:11-15© 2004 Rockefeller University Press
50. 9/2/2016
50
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing99
Figure 2:
A B
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing100
Results
Follow the figures: Present the experiments performed in a
logical and clear manner. Why did this lead to the next
experiment?
Written in the PAST TENSE
Provide statistical analysis and clearly indicate significant data
Cite relevant literature but only the FACTS to understand (as
previous studies showed XXX [23] we tested the cells with
XXX). Comparing is for the discussion
Do not lose in technical details („we transfected and then
purified cell extracts and then separated...“): these go to the
M&M
Be SELECTIVE
Present your results ONCE, either in the text, OR a Table OR
Figure
51. 9/2/2016
51
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing101
Materials & Methods
Should be concise but complete
Written in PAST TENSE
DO NOT include any results!
A colleague should be able to repeat the experiment
All new reagents, sequences, etc should stated;
New method: provide ALL detail
Standard procedures: cite and only mention modifications
If too lengthy: decide afterwards if parts can be cut or
removed to supporting information
Write 20 mL (not ml), 5 mm, 3 min (not mins), kDa (not
Kda; molecular mass – not weight), M (not mole)
Check chemical nomenclature www.chem.qmw.ac.uk/iubmb
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing102
Funny M&M
“After standing in boiling water for an hour, I loaded the
sample on a gel…..”
“Blood samples were taken from 48 informed and
consenting patients….. the subjects ranged in age from 6
months to 22 years.” (Pediatr. Res. 1972, 6, 26)
“Employing a straight platinum wire rabbit, sheep and
human blood agar plates were inoculated….”
“Lying on top of the small intestine, we observed a small
transparent thread”
“In this experiment, one third of the mice were cured by the
test drug, one third were unaffected by the drug and
remained moribund, and the third mouse got
away.”(Reputedly from a MS submitted to Infection and
Immunity)
From Martin Welch, BIOCAM course
52. 9/2/2016
52
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing103
Introduction
Entrance to manuscript
Make sure referees/readers continue to read
3 major stages: Country, city, house
1. Broad general statement, what is known, present tense
(also non-expert understands)
2. Justification for study, research gap, need (interesting?)
3. Aim (start with this). State your principal results and
conclusions in one sentence
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing104
Discussion
QUICKLY summarize the findings
This is not just the results presented in another format, they
need to be discussed in the wider context of the field
What are the implications for future work?
Systematically compare findings with supporting and/or
conflicting literature
Discuss implications and applications, future directions to take
Be clear, honest, don‘t over-interprete but also don‘t minimize
Are there any models/rules that can be established?
If it was a model system, what are the implications for the
human system? Parallels, differences?
If primarily in vitro studies, what is the scope for further in vivo
studies? Relation to published in vivo studies?
53. 9/2/2016
53
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing105
...writing order
Title
Abstract
Figures and Tables
Results
Materials and Methods
Introduction
Discussion
Cover letter
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing106
Last but not least: Cover letter
Convince the editor of the importance of your work
State in a few sentences what the paper is about (not
abstract)
Why does it fit the scope of the journal?
Why is it novel?
Why will it be of interest to reviewers? If you state
non-preferred reviewers, you may explain why
Write this for the EDITOR
54. 9/2/2016
54
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing107
What the Editor wants?
OURS
Originality
Understandibility
Reliability
Suitability
Poorly written or conceived papers will be rejected
editorially
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing108
Cover letter example
Dear Dr. Brown,
Please find attached the manuscript „Arbuscular mycorrhizal associations of
the southern Simpson Desert“. This manuscript examines the mycorrhizal
status of plants growing on the different soils of the dune-swale systems of the
Simpson Desert. There have been few studies of the ecology of the plants in
this desert and little is known about how mycorrhizal assocaitions are
distributed amonst the desert plants of Australia. We report the arbuscular
mycorrhizal status of 47 plant species for the first time. The manscript has
been prepared according to the journal‘s Instructions fo Authors. We believe
that this new work is within the scope of your jounal and hope that you will
consider this manuscript for publication in the Australian Journal of Botany.
We await your response and the comments of reviewers.
Yours sincerely,
55. 9/2/2016
55
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing109
Cover letter quotes
“It gives me immense satisfaction to be able to share with
you an additional application of….”
“We, the Arthurs of this mansucript …”
“The conception of Chapter 1..”
“We hope that paper should priority handing”
“I would like to express my honour to submit our hard
work to your respected journal”
“Dear Sir, Thank you for the sweet reviewing process and
find here the responce for the reviewers comments”
“After deep thinking of the comments, we made statement
as follow:”
Thanks to Lucie and Uta, EJLST and ELS
Job application cover letter....
Different?
Tell STORIES – EXAMPLES of skills
STAR
Situation
Task
Action
Result
I‘m a very organised person.
For example I introduced Trello to organise our student
conference 2016, which saved time and got us excellent
feedback from invited speakers.
56. 9/2/2016
56
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing111
Scientific Writing
Introduction and basics
introduction
About journals and peer review
Online access and searches, IF
Before writing
Tips on language/style
The manuscript - IMRAD
Publication ethics
Authorship
Plagiarism
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing112
Authors
57. 9/2/2016
57
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing113
Authors
Author = significant contributor
Providing reagents, scientific/moral support = acknowledgement
First author =„paternity“ („the one without whom the work could
not have been accomplished“)
Last author =„Senior author“ (often the group leader or head of
Department)
Corresponding author (usually first and/or last) = assumes
responsibility for writing, submiting, revising and answering
questions after publication. Most prestigious.
„These authors have contributed equally“
Decide authors and order as early as possible
Which author you are will be important for your CV – but being
an author in the first place is what matters
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
recommends that authorship be based on the following four
criteria:
(1) substantial contributions to the conception or design of
the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data
for the work;
(2) drafting the work or revising it critically for important
intellectual content;
(3) final approval of the version to be published;
(4) agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work,
thereby ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or
integrity of any part of the work are appropriately
investigated and resolved.114
Authors ICMJE
58. 9/2/2016
58
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing115
Authors
FIRST AUTHOR: Weary graduate student who spent hours
doing the work.
SECOND AUTHOR: Resentful graduate student who thinks he
or she spent hours doing the work.
THIRD AUTHOR: Undergraduate just happy to be named.
FOURTH AUTHOR: Collaborator no one has ever met whose
name is only included for political reasons.
FIFTH AUTHOR: Postdoctoral fellow who once made a chance
remark on the subject.
SIXTH AUTHOR: For some reason, Vladimir Putin.
LAST AUTHOR: Principal investigator whose grant funded the
project but who hasn’t stood at a lab bench in decades, except
for that one weird photo shoot for some kind of pamphlet, and
even then it was obvious that he or she didn’t know where to
find basic things.
A. Ruben
dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.caredit.a1200033
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing116
Ghost or guest authors?
Ghost authors: individuals not named as authors but who contributed
substantially to the work
Guest authors: named authors who have not met authorship criteria
Confidential survey of corresponding authors of 809 articles
156 articles (19%) had evidence of honorary authors
93 articles (11%) had evidence of ghost authors
Flanagin et al., Prevalence of Articles with Honorary Authors and Ghost
Authors in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1998, 280,
222-224.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.3.222
59. 9/2/2016
59
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing117
Author acknowledged
From PNAS, EMBO Press…
Author contributions: A.B. designed research; A.B.,
M.G.K., and J.-E.S. performed research; A.B., M.G.K.,
and J.-E.S. analyzed data; and A.B., M.G.K., and J.-
E.S. wrote the paper.
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing118
Ethics/plagiarism
What is plagiarism?
The „Guttenberg syndrome“
Plagiarism is the representation of another person's
words, ideas, or information as if they were one's own
... Do not publish previously published work!
However you may reuse some of your own and
„CITED“ [1] material
Check COPE - the Committee on Publishing Ethics
(http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/about).
Check „copyright transfer agreement“
60. 9/2/2016
60
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing119
Plagiarism
Definition (http://plagiarism.org)
Plagiarism is the representation of another person's words, ideas, or
information as if they were one's own
Publishers policy
COPE - Committee on Publishing Ethics
(www.publicationethics.org.uk/about)
CTA (copyright transfer agreement)
Crosscheck database (www.crossref.org/crosscheck/)
Non-for-profit use of DOI (Digital Object Identifier)
30 Billion websites
100 Million articles
100k Journals
iThenticate: to detect words http://ithenticate.com
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing120
Copyright Transfer Agreement CTA
……………
a. Contributors may re-use unmodified abstracts for any non-
commercial purpose. For on-line uses of the abstracts, Wiley-Blackwell
encourages but does not require linking back to the final published
versions.
b. Contributors may re-use figures, tables, data sets, artwork, and
selected text up to 250 words from their Contributions, provided the
following conditions are met:
(i) Full and accurate credit must be given to the Contribution.
(ii) Modifications to the figures, tables and data must be noted.
Otherwise, no changes may be made.
(iii) The reuse may not be made for direct commercial purposes, or for
financial consideration to the Contributor.
(iv) Nothing herein shall permit dual publication in violation of journal
-------------------------------
http://onlinelibrarystatic.wiley.com/central/cta/UKscta.pdf
61. 9/2/2016
61
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing121
www.publicationethics.org.uk
http://publicationethics.org/files/COPE_plagiarism_discussion_%20doc_26%20Apr%2011.pdf
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing122
Types of Plagiarism
http://publicationethics.org/files/COPE_plagiarism_discussion_%20doc_26%20Apr%2011.pdf
62. 9/2/2016
62
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing123
Manuscript submission system
http://scholarone.com
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing124
SIMILARITY REPORT
63. 9/2/2016
63
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing125
30% = Plagiarism?
Individual for each article…
When the sources are not cited
High similarity = ethical misconduct -> reject
Depending on response by author, the Editor may
inform the head of the research institute and/or
ban the author from publication for 1-3 years.
reasonable similarity -> revise -> further consideration
When the sources are correctly cited
high degree of flexibility towards e.g. methods and
introduction (up to 250 words, see CTA), but
If results or conclusions are copied -> reject
mosaic-type (patchwork) article -> reject
A review type article -> at least revise
Hidden plagiarism is still possible (http://plagiarism.org)
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing126
SIMILARITY REPORT
64. 9/2/2016
64
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing127
~(30)% similarity -> manual check
Not cited High similarity Reject
Ethical misconduct
Inform Head of
Institute and Funding
Ban publicationReasonable similarity
Cited
Results, content
Review Article Revise
250 words
Methods,
Introduction,Abstract
Accept
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
http://publicationethics.org/
Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines
Flowcharts on how to handle ethical problems
Database of all cases, advice given and outcome
COPE – commission of pulication ethics
65. 9/2/2016
65
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing129
Further reading
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing130
Go to get a grant
http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.10
38/nj7385-429a
66. 9/2/2016
66
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Editing
Nomenclature and terminology
Policies and processes
Peer review
Ethics
Publishing and promoting
EASE Science Editors Handbook
http://www.ease.org.uk/
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Training for Editors www.ease.org.uk
67. 9/2/2016
67
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
http://www.ismte.org/
ISMTE
Intl. Soc. Managing & Technical Editors
© Janssens Aug-16 - Scientific Writing
Thank you!
"Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken."
- Oscar Wilde
For questions:
de.linkedin.com/in/janssens
www.dkfz.de/careers
www.slideshare.net/barbaja
www.facebook.com/phdcareers