Author workshop TU Delft 20111122
•Transferir como PPT, PDF•
1 gostou•2,577 visualizações
Elsevier Science, Christiane Barranguet; Mark van Loosdrecht editor- in- chief Water research
![Outline ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Destaque
Destaque (10)
Semelhante a Author workshop TU Delft 20111122
Semelhante a Author workshop TU Delft 20111122 (20)
Último
Último (20)
Author workshop TU Delft 20111122
- 1. How to write a world class paper TU Delft, Netherlands 22 nd of November 2011 Prof.dr.ir. Mark van Loosdrecht, Delft University Dr. Christiane Barranguet , Journal Publisher Elsevier Jan-Albert Majoor MSc., Account Development Manager
- 3. Peer-Reviewed Journal Growth 1665-2001 Source: M A Mabe The number and growth of journals Serials 16(2).191-7, 2003 Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (London) 2009 1,4 million articles in 23,000 journals by 2,000 publishers 1 100 10000 1665 1765 1865 1965 Year No of titles launched and still extant 2001
- 7. Spotlight MAP of Delft University of Technology : STRONG FOCUS ON ….Engineering & Physics! MEDICINE INFECTIOUS DISEASE BIOLOGY EARTH SCIENCE ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY MATH & PHYSICS COMPUTER SCIENCE SOCIAL SCIENCE BRAIN RESEARCH HEALTH SCIENCE HUMANITIES MULTI-DISCIPLINARY RESEARCH AREAS RESEARCH AREA WITH GLOBAL STRENGTH
- 11. What metrics are used to compare journals?
- 14. Influences on Impact Factors: Subject Area
- 19. Find out what’s Hot
- 21. Coming soon!
- 23. Make sure you are up-to-date with what’s going on in your field “ Save as Alert”: Remind yourself about the new findings.
- 24. Register & Personalize your searches
- 26. And Finally…… - Guide for authors!
- 27. Task-based Navigation Traditional & PDF-like Add value & Context Article of the Future! Content & Context
- 28. Key Article of the Future improvements: content Example: Google Maps, using author-supplied KML files
- 29. Key Article of the Future improvements: context Example: Protein Viewer, pulling in data from NCBI
- 30. A o/t F feature: View figures independently of main text Since each pane can be scrolled independently, it is possible to have both the text and an image in view at once http://www.articleofthefuture.com/S0008622310002770/ Background: We noticed that very often, when the image and related text do not fit the same page, scientists have two PDFs open on their screen (or on two different screens) at the same time. These allow scientists to simultaneously view the image and read the explanatory text
- 42. The process of writing – building the article Methods Results Discussion Conclusion Figures/tables (your data) Introduction Title & Abstract Conclusion Discussion
- 46. Title: Examples “ English needs help. The title is nonsense. All materials have properties of all varieties. You could examine my hair for its electrical and optical properties! You MUST be specific. I haven’t read the paper but I suspect there is something special about these properties, otherwise why would you be reporting them?” – the Editor-in-Chief Electrospinning of carbon/CdS coaxial nanofibers with optical and electrical properties Fabrication of carbon/CdS coaxial nanofibers displaying optical and electrical properties via electrospinning carbon Titles should be specific . Think to yourself: “How would I search for this piece of information?” when you design the title. Inhibition of growth of mycobacterium tuberculosis by streptomycin Action of antibiotics on bacteria Long title distracts readers. Remove all redundancies such as “observations on”, “the nature of”, etc. Effect of Zn on anticorrosion of zinc plating layer Preliminary observations on the effect of Zn element on anticorrosion of zinc plating layer Remarks Revised Original Title
- 60. The Peer Review Process - Overview Michael Derntl Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing. http://www.pri.univie.ac.at/~derntl/papers/meth-se.pdf
- 67. Data Fabrication and Falsification - often go hand in hand A Massive Case Of Fraud Chemical & Engineering News February 18, 2008 Journal editors are left reeling as publishers move to rid their archives of scientist's falsified research William G. Schulz A CHEMIST IN INDIA has been found guilty of plagiarizing and/or falsifying more than 70 research papers published in a wide variety of Western scientific journals between 2004 and 2007, according to documents from his university, copies of which were obtained by C&EN. Some journal editors left reeling by the incident say it is one of the most spectacular and outrageous cases of scientific fraud they have ever seen. …
- 69. Publication ethics – Self-plagiarism 2003 2004 Same colour left and right Same text
- 70. Publication ethics – How it can end ..... “ I deeply regret the inconvenience and agony caused to you by my mistake and request and beg for your pardon for the same. As such I am facing lot many difficulties in my personal life and request you not to initiate any further action against me. I would like to request you that all the correspondence regarding my publications may please be sent to me directly so that I can reply them immediately. To avoid any further controversies, I have decided not to publish any of my work in future.” A “pharma” author December 2, 2008
- 71. The article of which the authors committed plagiarism: it won’t be removed from ScienceDirect. Everybody who downloads it will see the reason of retraction…
- 73. Figure Manipulation Example - Different authors and reported experiments Am J Pathol, 2001 Life Sci, 2004 Life Sci, 2004 Rotated 180 o Rotated 180 o Zoomed out ?!
- 74. Thank You! Questions welcome https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/SurveyDELFT
Notas do Editor
- The other key feature of Scopus is its international scope. Scopus journal coverage is global by design, and many of the journals currently being added to its indexing coverage are coming from emerging research countries such as China, Brazil, and South Korea. At the same time, Scopus comprehensively covers all of the major journals in North America and Europe, traditional journal publication leaders. This international emphasis can help overcome the longstanding bias towards English-language journals published in well-established research countries.
- The second tool we have used for this analysis is called SciVal Spotlight. The traditional methodology uses journal classification codes to categorize any particular article; thus if a paper were published in the journal Water Treatment, it would be considered to be 100% about that field. Instead, by looking at the individual articles within the journal and doing a co-citation analysis on the references, we can see that the same paper might have 20% of its references to computer sciences and 10% to economics fields. The article can then be fractionally assigned to these disciplines, and give a far more accurate and sensitive picture of the paper and the interdisciplinary fields it contributes to. Co-citation analysis has been used for many years, having been introduced in 1973 by Henry Small. Eugene Garfield, another pioneer in bibliometrics, said in 2001 that “Co-citation analysis has had an enormous and measurable impact on the field of information science itself as well and outside the field by scholars who have used it as a tool for mapping their disciplines or specialties.” The other great benefit of the bottom-up approach is that it changes as the underlying science changes in a way that any traditional, top-down hierarchical schema cannot. An interesting thought experiment here would be to compare genetics in 1999 to genetics in 2001, with human genome being fully sequenced in late 2000, the fundamentals of genetics itself had changed, and opened up broad areas of research that weren’t possible a few years earlier. Thus this analysis, which makes interdisciplinary research and its components visible for the first time, changes as the underlying science itself changes. When all of this analysis has been completed, what we are left with is what we call the Wheel of Science. This allows us to visualize research strengths for individual institutions, or at a different level of aggregation, for individual countries. This map happens to be Georgia Tech’s map, and you can clearly see that its research strengths are concentrated in the computer sciences, math and physics, and engineering disciplines.
- BioBased Economy, Climate, Nutrition & health, Animal welfare
- Here is one example of how crowded some subject areas have become. In the category of “Analytical Chemistry”, 11 journals titles are unveiled here. The point is that not only do the titles sound very similar in certain respects, it is difficult to judge which journal might be better than others unless you had a deeper understanding of the journal histories, editors, prestige, and audience. Furthermore, these are just 11 of more than 60 journals in this subject area. The second point is that journals must vigorously compete with one another to attract the best authors and best editors and elevate their reputation and prestige. There are various metrics which can serve as useful tools to help in assessing the relative standing of journals.
- Section Title Slide
- The use of citation data and bibliometrics can be effectively used as one means for measuring the impact or influence of articles, authors, and journals. Academic institutions often use journal metrics to evaluate faculty for tenure and promotion. Some of the more commonly used journal metrics are listed here and each will be described in detail in the slides ahead: Impact Factor H-index SCImago Journal Rank Usage
- There are too many occasions that need your to consult the Guide for Authors. We will mention them later!
- Both apps do not sync to the desktop version of Scopus or ScienceDirect meaning alerts and settings on your desktop version will not be saved to your iPhone and you need to email yourself if you want to read an article/citation on your desktop rather than on your iPhone
- Image and its description may not always fit the same page. Scrolling through the article back and forward can be tedious.
- The scientific message must be clear, useful, and exciting The author’s messages must be presented and constructed in a logical manner. The reader should arrive at the same conclusions as the author. The format chosen should best showcase the author’s material. Readers, reviewers, and editors should be able to easily grasp the scientific significance of the research Editors, reviewers and readers all want to save time and not waste it.
- The scientific message must be clear, useful, and exciting The author’s messages must be presented and constructed in a logical manner. The reader should arrive at the same conclusions as the author. The format chosen should best showcase the author’s material. Readers, reviewers, and editors should be able to easily grasp the scientific significance of the research Editors, reviewers and readers all want to save time and not waste it.
- You should consider publishing if you have information that advances understanding in a certain scientific field This could take the form of: 1. Presenting new, original results or methods 2. Rationalizing, refining, or reinterpreting published results 3. Reviewing or summarizing a particular subject or field You should consider NOT publishing yet if: Your report is of no scientific interest The work is out of date You would be duplicating previously published work Your conclusions are incorrect/not acceptable A STRONG manuscript is crucial in order to present your contributions to the scientific community
- The key is to write clearly, objectively, accurately, and with brevity or concision. The most common errors are as follows and I will go into each one of these in the subsequent slides. Sentence construction Incorrect tenses Inaccurate grammar Not consistent use of English throughout the paper. Once again, language specifications can also be referenced at the Guide for Authors. Foreign language students should practice writing English at any moment they can. Maybe keep records in English during the research?
- 1. Sentences should be constructed in short, factual bursts. Long sentences confuse readers. Short sentences look more professional. The average length of sentences in scientific writing is about 12-17 words. Only one idea should be conveyed per sentence. The example given is an extreme case of a very long run-on sentence. When read, the messages are easily lost.
- Actual examples of titles that have been revised. Blue titles are the original. Green titles are the revised. Remarks and comments are on the right.
- The abstract should just be one paragraph and should summarize the problem, the method, the results, and the conclusions. The abstract acts as an advertisement for you article since it is freely viewable via search and indexing. You want to make it as catchy and impactful as possible. An abstract written clearly will strongly encourage the reader to read the rest of your paper. An example of an abstract is given here and is shown with the two distinct sections that are most important. Different journals have different requirements for the content of abstract. (Again, consult the Guide for Authors. ) But the two “ whats ” are essential. Make it interesting, and easy to understand without reading the whole article (avoid using jargon and uncommon abbreviations if possible) Note that some journals ask for a graphical abstract. Many authors write the abstract last so that it accurately reflects the content of the paper.
- The cover letter offers you a chance to correspond directly with the journal editor. Many editors won ’ t reject a manuscript only because the cover letter is bad. However, a good cover letter may accelerate the editorial process of your paper. It is submitted along with your manuscript. You want to mention what would make your manuscript special or worthwhile to the journal. Do not summarize your manuscript, or repeat the abstract. You should mention why your manuscript is original and what your purpose is. Your letter should also state the final approval of all co-authors as well as if your manuscript has been previously rejected. Consider mentioning other special requirements such as conflicts of interest, suggested reviewers, people who should not review.