scholarly journals GETTING OVER THE FIRST HURDLE: PREPARING YOUR MANUSCRIPT FOR A POSITIVE REVIEW

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S223-S224
Author(s):  
Suzanne Meeks
Keyword(s):  
High Impact ◽  
Scientific Writing ◽  
Manuscript Preparation ◽  
Good Writing

Abstract In this section of the symposium, I will talk about manuscript preparation for maximizing the likelihood that your work will be sent for review. I will talk about common author errors that usually guarantee an immediate reject decision such as not reading and following the Instructions to Authors. I will emphasize the importance of plain, good writing. Editors of high impact journals receive 10 or more new manuscripts per week, and due to limited page space, have to reject 80-90% of them. Regardless of scholarly quality, if the point and contribution are not clear in a quick scan of the paper, it likely will not be reviewed favorably. I will provide tips for strong scientific writing that are commonly violated in manuscript submissions, and provide references for additional writing support.

scholarly journals Strong and Ethical Scholarly Writing for Multidisciplinary Audiences

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 858-858
Author(s):  
Suzanne Meeks
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Scientific Writing ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Prior Work ◽  
Scholarly Writing ◽  
Good Writing

Abstract This presentation will emphasize the importance of plain, good writing. Editors of high impact journals read 10 or more manuscripts per week, and are under pressure to reject 80-90% of them. Regardless of scholarly quality, if the point and contribution are not clear in a quick scan of the paper, it likely will not be reviewed favorably. I will provide tips for strong scientific writing that are commonly violated in manuscript submissions, and provide references for additional writing support. I will also discuss some common publication ethics issues that arise during the review process, including author contributions and embedding your scholarship in the context of prior work.

scholarly journals Quotation errors in general science journals

2020 ◽  
Vol 476 (2242) ◽  
pp. 20200538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neal Smith ◽  
Aaron Cumberledge
Keyword(s):  
Error Rate ◽  
Scientific Discovery ◽  
Total Error ◽  
Error Rates ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Scientific Writing ◽  
General Science ◽  
Total Error Rate ◽  
Academic Fields ◽  
The Future

Due to the incremental nature of scientific discovery, scientific writing requires extensive referencing to the writings of others. The accuracy of this referencing is vital, yet errors do occur. These errors are called ‘quotation errors’. This paper presents the first assessment of quotation errors in high-impact general science journals. A total of 250 random citations were examined. The propositions being cited were compared with the referenced materials to verify whether the propositions could be substantiated by those materials. The study found a total error rate of 25%. This result tracks well with error rates found in similar studies in other academic fields. Additionally, several suggestions are offered that may help to decrease these errors and make similar studies more feasible in the future.

Comments on Manuscript Preparation

2012 ◽  
pp. 50-72
Keyword(s):  
New Products ◽  
Writing Skills ◽  
Manuscript Preparation ◽  
Related Field ◽  
Technical Writers ◽  
Job Growth ◽  
Good Writing ◽  
Grant Proposals ◽  
Professional Writers ◽  
Year 2000

According to one study of the fastest growing areas of employment, desktop publishing was going to experience a 67% increase in the number of employees from the year 2000 to the year 2010, adding about 25,000 new workers (Bear, 2010). And, in an update of that study, it was noted that job growth in this field has slowed some in part because many employers expect all employees to possess good writing skills. There is a great demand for good writers and specifically technical writers. Among other things, professional writers inform people about new products, produce documentation for software, edit manuals, write books, and develop grant proposals. Nearly all people who work in a science-related field or with computers write a great deal. Since writing is a large facet of many jobs, it is important to write well and efficiently. This chapter will help to improve one’s writing skills and writing habits.

The Art of Scientific Writing: How to Get Your Research Published!

2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 164-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos A. Muñoz-Viveros ◽  
W. Patrick Naylor
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Scientific Writing ◽  
Manuscript Preparation ◽  
Manuscript Submission ◽  
Dental Practice

Abstract Revised on 12/10/04 for The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice The purpose of this article is to provide potential authors with a contemporary guide to scientific writing. It is in essence a handbook that covers the planning for a scientific publication from inception of the project or study to manuscript preparation and, ultimately, acceptance by a journal. Major topics such as manuscript formatting, data analysis, use of charts, graphs and images, reference formats, and manuscript submission are presented. Citation Naylor WP, Muñoz-Viveros CA. The Art of Scientific Writing: How to Get Your Research Published! J Contemp Dent Pract 2005 May;(6)2:164-180.

scholarly journals Do you know the Flesch score of your papers?

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Fenner
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Writing ◽  
Good Writing ◽  
Interesting Discussion

We just had a very interesting discussion in the Ask the Nature Editor Forum about scientific writing. Most people agreed that the quality of the writing in the end doesn't really influence the decision to accept or reject a paper. But good writing, ...

Postmortem and in situ TEM methods to study the mechanism of failure in controlled-morphology high-impact polystrene resin

1996 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 178-179
Author(s):  
R. C. Cieslinski ◽  
M. T. Dineen ◽  
J. L. Hahnfeld
Keyword(s):  
Poisson Ratio ◽  
Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene ◽  
High Impact ◽  
In Situ Tem ◽  
Styrene Copolymers ◽  
Controlled Morphology ◽  
Point Bend ◽  
Mechanism Of Failure ◽  
Impact Energies

Advanced Styrenic resins are being developed throughout the industry to bridge the properties gap between traditional HIPS (High Impact Polystyrene) and ABS (Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene copolymers) resins. These new resins have an unprecedented balance of high gloss and high impact energies. Dow Chemical's contribution to this area is based on a unique combination of rubber morphologies including labyrinth, onion skin, and core-shell rubber particles. This new resin, referred as a controlled morphology resin (CMR), was investigated to determine the toughening mechanism of this unique rubber morphology. This poster will summarize the initial studies of these resins using the double-notch four-point bend test of Su and Yee, tensile stage electron microscopy, and Poisson Ratio analysis of the fracture mechanism.

The Collaborative Network Approach: a model for advancing patient-centric research for Castleman disease and other rare diseases

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Mary Zuccato ◽  
Dustin Shilling ◽  
David C. Fajgenbaum
Keyword(s):  
Rare Diseases ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Castleman Disease ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Collaborative Network ◽  
Network Approach ◽  
Grant Applications ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Novel Strategy ◽  
Patient Centric

Abstract There are ∼7000 rare diseases affecting 30 000 000 individuals in the U.S.A. 95% of these rare diseases do not have a single Food and Drug Administration-approved therapy. Relatively, limited progress has been made to develop new or repurpose existing therapies for these disorders, in part because traditional funding models are not as effective when applied to rare diseases. Due to the suboptimal research infrastructure and treatment options for Castleman disease, the Castleman Disease Collaborative Network (CDCN), founded in 2012, spearheaded a novel strategy for advancing biomedical research, the ‘Collaborative Network Approach’. At its heart, the Collaborative Network Approach leverages and integrates the entire community of stakeholders — patients, physicians and researchers — to identify and prioritize high-impact research questions. It then recruits the most qualified researchers to conduct these studies. In parallel, patients are empowered to fight back by supporting research through fundraising and providing their biospecimens and clinical data. This approach democratizes research, allowing the entire community to identify the most clinically relevant and pressing questions; any idea can be translated into a study rather than limiting research to the ideas proposed by researchers in grant applications. Preliminary results from the CDCN and other organizations that have followed its Collaborative Network Approach suggest that this model is generalizable across rare diseases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document