These are hard times for the print media. Newspapers and magazine subscriptions are declining and a number of…
A fact that is not very widely known or universally accepted by authors is that manuscripts may be rejected without the due and expected peer review process. While manuscripts have to go through the peer review process in order to be published, they can be rejected without peer review. For high-impact, general science journals, the majority of submitted papers may be rejected in this manner.
Publication usually represents the culmination of most research efforts. The process of selecting the appropriate journal has become increasingly complex due to a number of reasons. Authors have to optimize between many criteria or constraints before reaching a decision about where to publish. Tips about the factors which need to be considered and the approach to be adopted are provided.
Journals have differing recognition factors, either in a specific field or across multiple disciplines. The quality and impact of the journal is usually apparent through how widely it is read, how often it is cited, and its perception in the community. The quality and impact can be quantified in terms of various widely-accepted parameters, like the Impact Factor, SCImago Journal Rank, Article Influence, H-Index, which are described in this post.
In evaluating a manuscript submitted for publication in a journal, a peer reviewer takes into account many factors. The primary considerations related to quality, originality and presentation are listed in the attached presentation. Based on these, suggestions are outlined, which would minimize the possibility of rejection.
Researchers usually dread the prospect of having their manuscript rejected when it is submitted for publication, since it represents a big setback to their endeavors. There are myriad reasons for this, and it is essential to understand the fundamental considerations involved in maximizing the probability of acceptance. This post outlines the journal requirements and research aspects with relevant data.
Once peer reviewers respond with comments on an article submitted to a research journal, authors have to determine the most appropriate way of responding to their comments and recommendations, in order to ensure acceptance and eventual publication of the article. An outline of the strategies which may be adopted are described in the attached presentation.
From the moment you submit your paper to a journal until you receive the referee report may be a period filled with apprehension and/or expectation. The report of the peer reviewer goes a long way in deciding the publication prospects, and therefore the eventual impact of your work. The presentation below summarizes the typical considerations in putting together a referee report, based on the evaluation criteria used by the peer reviewer.