Screening Papers for Suitability The first step many journals take is to screen papers for suitability. Factors included are as follows: Does the paper fit into the scope of the journal? Is the paper well presented, with a high quality of language, logical organisation of sections, figures, tables etc.? Does the paper fit into the main stylistic constraints of the journal, in some cases involving considerations of length? Is the paper of sufficient novelty and generic interest to readers of the journal? In some cases screening may involve a high level of rejections, but in other cases there may be no screening. Read the instructions for authors to get an idea of whether there is screening. There are several benefits: Authors do not waste their time, often waiting many months, just to get their paper rejected, and they can immediately move on and submit elsewhere. Referees are often overburdened and are usually doing a voluntary job during busy office hours and so can focus only on a portion of papers. If your paper is rejected during screening, you can make a number of decisions: The most usual would be to submit the paper elsewhere, although this could result in significant rewriting as different journals have different styles. In some cases submitting a very much changed paper might change an editor’s mind : however, this often fails unless the reason for rejection was presentational rather than one of scope or generic interest. Finally some people abandon papers. However if the journal that has rejected the paper has a high Impact Factor, it is usually a good idea to try again with an easier journal. If the paper passes the screening, or there is no screening, then usually it is assigned to an editor. Sometimes there is no choice, sometimes authors can choose and sometimes the Editor in Chief or Publisher assigns an editor. Usually you are told the editor’s name. Refereeing of Scientific Papers The next stage is refereeing. Usually the editor will choose between one and four referees: the typical number is two. These referees are likely to be a mixture between your recommendations (if you were asked), editorial board members, and anyone the editor feels active in the field. You do not normally know the identities of the referees although sometimes they give agreement. Dependent on the journal, refereeing can take between one week and six months. The more theoretical the journal the slower the refereeing on average. If you have not heard back within a few weeks, you can make a polite enquiry. However editors are very busy and usually fit this in around their main work, so aggressive and frequent letters are not likely to help. Editorial Decisions About Publishability and How to Respond After a while the editor will respond. He or she will take the recommendations of the referees into account, but does not necessarily need to agree with them. Sometimes referees disagree about acceptability. Usually if this is so an adjudicative referee is asked to comment, but sometimes the editor can make the final decision. You should normally receive a report from each referee, giving you their verdict, with their reasons. Reports may vary from a few lines to ten pages. Very few papers are accepted without changes. Usually the best verdict is minor revision, in which case often all that may be needed is to change some diagrams, add some more data, or whatever is suggested. Major revision involves quite significant changes. These could take several weeks : do not hurry as an editor can reject a paper that is not thoroughly revised. Many papers are rejected first time round. This is no shame, but be sure you get the referee comments. If a paper is rejected there are several options: The first is to resubmit it to the same journal. This should only be done if you feel you can counter the referees’ arguments. If you decide to do this, usually you need the agreement of the editor first. The second is to revise it, often taking the referees’ comments into account, and submit elsewhere. It is usually not necessary when submitting to a fresh journal to state that the paper has been rejected from a rival journal unless you wish. The third is to abandon the paper in its current form. If you are asked to resubmit the paper do as follows: Write a response to the referees. This response should list each comment that the referees have made and what you have done about it. If you feel that a comment is wrong due to a misunderstanding, politely state why. Otherwise, use each comment as a basis for improvements in the manuscript and state what changes you have made. Create a modified manuscript. Some journals like also to see the original manuscript with tracked changes as well, to see what sections have been changed from the earlier submission, as well as the modified manuscript. Check on the journal website if this is a requirement Once a paper is resubmitted several things can happen: The editor reads your response and accepts the paper. The editor sends it back to one or more referees, or even an independent referee that was not previously involved. In some cases they will advise the paper is now acceptable, in other cases they will ask for further revision, and sometimes they will reject it. The editor feels your response is inadequate and rejects the paper; you can of course resubmit it elsewhere. This procedure may take from a few weeks to one or more years, but ultimately will hopefully end up with a reputable scientific publication.
essays service online
Article Source: http://www.writerspenarticledirectory.com
Please Rate this Article
5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5
Not yet Rated
Powered by Article Dashboard
Sign Up
