Overview of the Journal Article

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marin S Robinson ◽  
Fredricka L Stoller ◽  
Molly Constanza-Robinson ◽  
James K Jones
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Journal Article ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Writing Quality ◽  
Journal Quality ◽  
Primary Literature ◽  
Public Record ◽  
Chemistry Journal

This chapter introduces the journal article module. The chapter describes some of the defining characteristics of a journal article while emphasizing concise writing and organization. By the end of this chapter, you should be able to do the following: Recognize the importance ■ of concise writing ■ Identify the broad organizational structure of journal articles ■ Explain what is meant by targeted reading and keywords As you move through the chapter, you will begin to plan your own journal- quality paper. The Writing on Your Own tasks throughout the chapter will guide you in this process: 2A Get started 2B Select your topic 2C Conduct a literature search 2D Find additional resources 2E Decide on the broad organization of your paper Module 1 focuses entirely on writing a journal-quality paper, a paper suitable for submission to a refereed chemistry journal. Refereed journals include only articles that have made it through a rigorous peer-review process. In this process, a submitted manuscript is critically reviewed by two or more anonymous reviewers. The reviewers are asked to judge both the scientific merit and writing quality of the manuscript. Authors are often required to revise their work before it can be accepted for publication. The entire review process can take six months or longer. An account of the review process typically appears in the published article, for example, Received for review March 9, 2008. Revised manuscript received August 3, 2008. Accepted August 5, 2008. Once published, the journal article becomes part of the primary literature of chemistry. The primary literature is a permanent and public record of all scientific works, many of which are refereed journal articles.

scholarly journals Publication practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: Biomedical preprints and peer-reviewed literature

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yulia V. Sevryugina ◽  
Andrew J. Dicks
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Journal Article ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Biomedical Sciences ◽  
Online Journal ◽  
Publication Practices ◽  
Comprehensive Study

AbstractThe coronavirus pandemic introduced many changes to our society, and deeply affected the established in biomedical sciences publication practices. In this article, we present a comprehensive study of the changes in scholarly publication landscape for biomedical sciences during the COVID-19 pandemic, with special emphasis on preprints posted on bioRxiv and medRxiv servers. We observe the emergence of a new category of preprint authors working in the fields of immunology, microbiology, infectious diseases, and epidemiology, who extensively used preprint platforms during the pandemic for sharing their immediate findings. The majority of these findings were works-in-progress unfitting for a prompt acceptance by refereed journals. The COVID-19 preprints that became peer-reviewed journal articles were often submitted to journals concurrently with the posting on a preprint server, and the entire publication cycle, from preprint to the online journal article, took on average 63 days. This included an expedited peer-review process of 43 days and journal’s production stage of 15 days, however there was a wide variation in publication delays between journals. Only one third of COVID-19 preprints posted during the first nine months of the pandemic appeared as peer-reviewed journal articles. These journal articles display high Altmetric Attention Scores further emphasizing a significance of COVID-19 research during 2020. This article will be relevant to editors, publishers, open science enthusiasts, and anyone interested in changes that the 2020 crisis transpired to publication practices and a culture of preprints in life sciences.

scholarly journals Peer review reduces spin in PCORI research reports

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan Mayo-Wilson ◽  
Meredith L. Phillips ◽  
Avonne E. Connor ◽  
Kelly J. Vander Ley ◽  
Kevin Naaman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Journal Article ◽  
Research Report ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Press Releases ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Peer Reviewers

Abstract Background The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) is obligated to peer review and to post publicly “Final Research Reports” of all funded projects. PCORI peer review emphasizes adherence to PCORI’s Methodology Standards and principles of ethical scientific communication. During the peer review process, reviewers and editors seek to ensure that results are presented objectively and interpreted appropriately, e.g., free of spin. Methods Two independent raters assessed PCORI peer review feedback sent to authors. We calculated the proportion of reports in which spin was identified during peer review, and the types of spin identified. We included reports submitted by April 2018 with at least one associated journal article. The same raters then assessed whether authors addressed reviewers’ comments about spin. The raters also assessed whether spin identified during PCORI peer review was present in related journal articles. Results We included 64 PCORI-funded projects. Peer reviewers or editors identified spin in 55/64 (86%) submitted research reports. Types of spin included reporting bias (46/55; 84%), inappropriate interpretation (40/55; 73%), inappropriate extrapolation of results (15/55; 27%), and inappropriate attribution of causality (5/55; 9%). Authors addressed comments about spin related to 47/55 (85%) of the reports. Of 110 associated journal articles, PCORI comments about spin were potentially applicable to 44/110 (40%) articles, of which 27/44 (61%) contained the same spin that was identified in the PCORI research report. The proportion of articles with spin was similar for articles accepted before and after PCORI peer review (63% vs 58%). Discussion Just as spin is common in journal articles and press releases, we found that most reports submitted to PCORI included spin. While most spin was mitigated during the funder’s peer review process, we found no evidence that review of PCORI reports influenced spin in journal articles. Funders could explore interventions aimed at reducing spin in published articles of studies they support.

An Analysis of Pronouns Used in Selected International Journal Articles: Exploring Authors’ Flexibility and Consistency

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 73-78
Author(s):  
Rumintang Harianja ◽  
Ratih Saltri Yudar ◽  
Susy Deliani ◽  
Mutia Sari Nursafira ◽  
Budianto Hamuddin
Keyword(s):  
Current Issue ◽  
Journal Article ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
The Impact

This study aims at identifying the pronouns used in journal articles in terms of numbers and familiarity. The data taken from three different journals from three various fields, i.e., Education, Medics and Engineering. It consists of  21 articles taken from the current issue 2018, where this study started. It is selected conveniently due to its unique and fame as a discipline and reputable sources. In collecting the data, the researcher accessed the journals published by science direct (Q1 Scopus indexed). The analysis showed that the writer in these three international journals commonly used several pronouns interchangeably. However, some articles in journal from Medical and Engineering consistently used only one chosen pronoun, which was recorded found at different sections in the journal article. The data then coded and transcribed to ease the analysis in this researcher. As a result of the study, it was found out that the data showed 19 kinds of pronouns in total were used in these three different fields. These results showed us that the pronoun usage in a scientific article from these three various fields varies with options of different pronouns.  The pronoun seems used to help the impact of imposition and showing politeness or quality of the articles. 

scholarly journals Peer Review Process in Scholarly Communication and Scientific Publishing

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 15-19
Author(s):  
Bishnu Bahadur Khatri
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Scientific Publishing ◽  
The Public ◽  
Quality Control Mechanism

Peer review in scholarly communication and scientific publishing, in one form or another, has always been regarded as crucial to the reputation and reliability of scientific research. In the growing interest of scholarly research and publication, this paper tries to discuss about peer review process and its different types to communicate the early career researchers and academics.This paper has used the published and unpublished documents for information collection. It reveals that peer review places the reviewer, with the author, at the heart of scientific publishing. It is the system used to assess the quality of scientific research before it is published. Therefore, it concludes that peer review is used to advancing and testing scientific knowledgeas a quality control mechanism forscientists, publishers and the public.

scholarly journals Evaluating, Improving, and Appreciating Peer Review at IJTMB

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Ann Blair Kennedy, LMT, BCTMB, DrPH
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Scientific Publishing ◽  
Publication Process ◽  
Improve Efficiency ◽  
Peer Reviewers

  Peer review is a mainstay of scientific publishing and, while peer reviewers and scientists report satisfaction with the process, peer review has not been without criticism. Within this editorial, the peer review process at the IJTMB is defined and explained. Further, seven steps are identified by the editors as a way to improve efficiency of the peer review and publication process. Those seven steps are: 1) Ask authors to submit possible reviewers; 2) Ask reviewers to update profiles; 3) Ask reviewers to “refer a friend”; 4) Thank reviewers regularly; 5) Ask published authors to review for the Journal; 6) Reduce the length of time to accept peer review invitation; and 7) Reduce requested time to complete peer review. We believe these small requests and changes can have a big effect on the quality of reviews and speed in which manuscripts are published. This manuscript will present instructions for completing peer review profiles. Finally, we more formally recognize and thank peer reviewers from 2018–2020.

scholarly journals Online Journals: the Path Towards Visibility and Quality

1970 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 175-184
Author(s):  
Julie Walker
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Editorial Office ◽  
Online Journal ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Virtuous Cycle ◽  
Journal Visibility

Increasing the visibility of a journal is the key to increasing quality. The International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publications works with journal editors in the global South to publish their journals online and to increase the efficiency of the peer review process. Editors are trained in using the Open Journals System software and in online journal management and strategy so they have the tools and knowledge needed to initiate a ‘virtuous cycle' in which visibility leads to an increase in the number and quality of submissions and in turn, increased citations and impact. In order to maximise this increase in quality, it must be supported by strong editorial office processes and management. This article describes some of the issues and strategies faced by the editors INASP works with, placing a particular emphasis on Nepal Journals Online. Key words: INASP; Open Journals System; Journals Online Projects; Nepal Journals Online; journal visibility; peer review DOI: 10.3126/dsaj.v3i0.2786 Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology Vol.3 2009 175-184

scholarly journals An Analysis of Pronouns Used in Selected International Journal Articles: Exploring Authors’ Flexibility and Consistency

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 83-88
Author(s):  
Rumintang Harianja ◽  
Ratih Saltri Yudar ◽  
Susy Deliani ◽  
Mutia Sari Nursafira ◽  
Budianto Hamuddin
Keyword(s):  
Current Issue ◽  
Journal Article ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Journal Articles

The aim of this study is to identify the pronouns used in journal articles in terms of numbers and familiarity. The total of the journal in this research was 21 articles taken from the current issue 2018 from three different fields i.e., Education, Medics and Engineering. Its selected conveniently due to its unique and fame as a discipline. In collecting the data, the researcher accessed the journals indexed in science direct. The analysis showed that the writer in these three international journals commonly used several pronouns interchangeably. However, some articles consistently used only one pronoun, which were recorded at different in different sections in the journal article. The data then coded and transcribed to ease the analysis in this researcher. As a result of the analysis, it was found out that the data showed 19 kinds of pronouns in total were used in these three different fields. These results showed us that the pronoun usage in a scientific article from these three different fields varies with options of different pronouns.  The pronoun seems used to help an impact of imposition and showing politeness or quality of the articles. 

scholarly journals How to choose and become a reviewer for a scientific medical journal

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 151
Author(s):  
Paola Gnerre ◽  
Giorgio Vescovo ◽  
Paola Granata ◽  
Cecilia Politi ◽  
Andrea Fontanella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Journal ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Scholarly Work ◽  
Publication Delay ◽  
Area Of Interest ◽  
Good Review

Peer review is the process of subjecting an author’s scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. The peer review of scientific manuscripts is a cornerstone of modern science and medicine. Some journals have difficulty in finding appropriate reviewers who are able to complete reviews on time avoiding publication delay. We discuss some of the main issues involved during the peer review process. The reviewer has a direct and important impact on the quality of a scientific medical Journal. Editors select reviewers on the basis of their expertise. Reviewers are more likely to accept to review a manuscript when it is relevant to their area of interest. They should respond to ethical principles, excluding any conflict of interest condition. The reviewer has to be professional, constructive, tactful, empathetic and respectful. Structured approaches, quality indicators and step-by-step process check list formats could be useful in obtaining a good review.

scholarly journals Peering into peer review: Good quality reviews of research articles require neither writing too much nor taking too long

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula CABEZAS Del FIERRO ◽  
Omar SABAJ MERUANE ◽  
Germán VARAS ESPINOZA ◽  
Valeria GONZÁLEZ HERRERA
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Average Length ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Review Time ◽  
Feedback Quality ◽  
Review Reports ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract The value of scientific knowledge is highly dependent on the quality of the process used to produce it, namely, the quality of the peer-review process. This process is a pivotal part of science as it works both to legitimize and improve the work of the scientific community. In this context, the present study investigated the relationship between review time, length, and feedback quality of review reports in the peer-review process of research articles. For this purpose, the review time of 313 referee reports from three Chilean international journals were recorded. Feedback quality was determined estimating the rate of direct requests by the total number of comments in each report. Number of words was used to describe the average length in the sample. Results showed that average time and length have little variation across review reports, irrespective of their quality. Low quality reports tended to take longer to reach the editor, so neither time nor length were related to feedback quality. This suggests that referees mostly describe, criticize, or praise the content of the article instead of making useful and direct comments to help authors improve their manuscripts.

scholarly journals Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author’s perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 113 (1) ◽  
pp. 633-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janine Huisman ◽  
Jeroen Smits
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document