Comment publier votre article? des sessions de formation organisés par le CNUDSt en collaboration avec Elsevier en faveur des chercheurs tunisien. 27 - 29 Avril 2015

1. How to get
published?
Presenté par Geneviève Musasa
Customer Consultant Africa
g.musasa@elsevier.com
April 2015
Votre Account Manager
Ahmed Shams
A.Shams@elsevier.com

2. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 2
2|
www.elsevierafrica.com
Registration to the training online to get your certificate
Click on the
above menu
or scroll down
the homepage
and select
Training or
Event
registration

3. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 3
3|
Follow Elsevier Africa Latest News
on Facebook & on the blog

4. AGENDA
I. Introduction to scholarly
publishing
II. How to get published?
Practical Advices
III. Structuring your article
IV. The reviewing process
V. How not to Publish
VI. Get noticed

5. Let’s start off with a film…
http://youtu.be/75xKK2eGQNk

6. I. Introduction to scholarly
publishing

7. 7
Registration
The timestamp to officially note
who submitted scientific results
first
Certification
Perform peer-review to ensure the
validity and integrity of
submissions
Dissemination
Provide a medium for discoveries
and findings to be shared
Preservation
Preserving the minutes and record
of science for posterity
Role of Scientific Publications
Publishers are investing in innovation and technology to fulfil these roles
Use Promoting and facilitating the
“Use” of scholarly information

8. | 8
Academic publishing
The publishing cycle
Solicit &
manage
submissions
30-60%
rejected by
> 13,000
editors
Manage
Peer Review
557,000+
reviewers
Edit &
prepare
365,000
articles
accepted
Production
12.6 million
articles
available
Publish &
Disseminate
>700 million
downloads by
>11 million
researchers in
>120 countries!

9. | 9
 Peer review consists of the evaluation of articles
by experts in the field
 It was first used in 1665, by the Royal Society in
London
 Peer review places the reviewer, with the author,
at the heart of scientific publishing
 Reviewers make the editorial process work by
examining and commenting on manuscripts
 Without peer review there is no control in scientific
communication
 Reviewers are the backbone of the whole process
Academic publishing
What is peer review?

10. | 10
Source: Ulrichsweb Global Serials Directory
Academic publishing
Peer-reviewed journal growth 1990-2013

11. | 11
What is open access?
Gold Open Access Green Open Access
Access  Free public access to the final published
article
 Access is immediate and permanent
 Free public access to a version of your
article
 Time delay may apply (embargo
period)
Fee  Open access fee is paid by the author, or
on their behalf (for example by a funding
body)
 No fee is payable by the author, as
costs are covered by library
subscriptions
Options  Publish in an
open access
journal
 Publish in a journal
that supports open
access (also known
as a hybrid journal)
 Link to your article.
 Selected journals feature open
archives
 Self-archive a version of your article
Free and permanent access to scholarly research
combined with clear guidelines (user licenses) for users
to re-use the content.
For more Open Access information:
http://www.elsevier.com/about/open-access/open-access-options

12. | 12
What is the uptake of open access?
There were in 2013, estimated worldwide 2,041,106 published
subscription and 297,596 published open access articles
500
750
1000
1250
1500
1750
2000
2250
2500
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
(est.)
No.ofarticles(Thousands)
Year
Open access
Hybrid
Subscription
Subscription content:
 Continues to grow year on year at
approx. 3-4%
 Amounts to a total article share of
approx. 87.3% in 2013
 In 2013, Elsevier published over
330,000 articles which included an
increase of 20,000 extra subscription
articles
Open access content:
 Currently growing at approx. 20% in
2013
 Amounts to a total article share (hybrid
+ ‘’pure’’ Gold) of approx.8.2% in 2013
 The total article share of all immediately
accessible OA articles is 12.7%
including subsidized open access
 In 2013, Elsevier published over 6,000
gold open access articles

13. II. How to get published?
Practical Advices

14. …your published papers, are a permanent record of your
research, are your passport to your community…
Always keep in mind that…

15. However, editors, reviewers, and the research
community don’t consider these reasons when
assessing your work.
Your personal reasons for publishing?

16. | 16
Planning your article
Are you ready to publish?
Not ready
Work has no scientific interest
Ready
Work advances the field

17. | 17
 Clear and useful message
 A logical manner
 Readers grasp the research
Planning Your Article
What makes a strong manuscript?
Editors, reviewers and readers all want to receive
well presented manuscripts that fit within the aims
and scope of their journal.

18. | 18
Full articles
• Substantial, complete and comprehensive pieces of research
Is my message sufficient for a full article?
Letters or short communications
• Quick and early communications
Are my results so thrilling that they should be shown as soon as possible?
Review papers
• Summaries of recent developments on a specific top
• Often submitted by invitation
Planning your article
Types of manuscripts
Your supervisor or colleagues are also good sources for
advice on manuscript types.

19. | 19
Citations per Article Type

20. Your paper is worthless if no one reads, uses, or cites it
A research study is meaningful only if...
 It’s clearly described, so
 Someone else can use it in his/her studies
 It arouses other scientists’ interest, and
 Allows others to reproduce the results
By submitting a manuscript you are basically trying to
sell your work to your community

21. Practical Advice
• Evaluate your research area
 http://top25.sciencedirect.com/
 Journals, authors, citations, publications per year (Scopus)
• Evaluate which journal is right for your article
 Impact Factor
 Alternative metrics (H-index, SNIP, SCImago)
 Journal Analyzer (Scopus)
• Find out more about the journals
 Who are the editors?
 Guide for authors
• Getting your paper noticed
 Cite Alert
 Article Usage Alert
IF

22. | 22
Choosing the right journal
Journal Finder Tool
Visit e.g. elsevier.com
to find:
• Aims & Scope
• Accepted types of
articles
• Readership
• Current hot topics
• Ask for help from
your supervisor or
colleagues
• DO NOT submit
manuscripts to more
than one journal at a
time

23. | 23
Choosing the right journal
Best practices
 Aim to reach the intended audience for your work
 Choose only one journal, as simultaneous submissions are prohibited
 Supervisor and colleagues can provide good suggestions
 Shortlist a handful of candidate journals, and investigate them:
• Aims
• Scope
• Accepted types of articles
• Readership
• Current hot topics
Articles in your reference list will usually lead you
directly to the right journals.

24. | 24
Preparing your manuscript
Read the Guide for Authors
 Find it on the journal homepage of the publisher, e.g. Elsevier.com
 Keep to the Guide for Authors in your manuscript
 It will save your time

25. Evaluate your research area – free tools

26. “Save as Alert”: Remind yourself about the new findings.
Evaluate your research area – in Scopus

27. Find out what is being cited and from where
View a citation overview of
the selected documents
View documents citing
the selected documents

28. Review the development of your research area

29. Choose the right journal
Do not just “descend the stairs”
Top journals
Nature, Science, Lancet, NEJM
Field-specific top journals
Other field-specific journals
National journals
DO NOT gamble by submitting your manuscript to more than one
journal at a time.
International ethics standards prohibit multiple/simultaneous
submissions, and editors DO find out!

30. Article Transfer Service
• Editors may transfer
sound submissions to
another Elsevier journal
30
• Provided the submission is of
high-quality and rejected because
it doesn’t fit the Aims & Scope of
the journal

31. Choose a target journal
 Use your own references
 Check databases to find in what journals most articles
on your topic were published

32. Some bibliometric indicators
Key indicators of journal citation impact

33. | 33
Bibliometric indicators
Impact
Factor
Eigenfactor SJR SNIP H-Index

34. | 34
 It indicates how many times the more recent
papers in a journal are cited on average in a
given year
 It is influenced by editorial policies of journals
and turnover of research
Choosing the right journal
The Impact Factor
The impact factor can give you a general
guidance, but it should NOT be the sole reason
to choose a journal.

35. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 35
35|
Journal Impact Factor 2012*
Pain 6.125
Nature Genetics 38.597
Annals of Mathematics 3.027
Computers & Operations Research 2.374
Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 17.778
Addiction Biology 5.914
Remote Sensing of Environment 6.144
*Journal Citation Reports 2013
Answer: All of them are the best journals in their
subject areas.
With IF journals from different subject fields
CANNOT be compared.
Which Journal is the Best Journal?

36. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 36
36|
“There is no single ‘best’ indicator that could
accommodate all facets of the new reality of
bibliometrics.”
- Wolfgang Glänzel, Head of bibliometrics group
Professor at KU Leuven, Belgium
Bibliometrics – A discipline that uses statistical methods to analyze content and
measure research performance

37. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 37
37|
SJR measures the prestige or
influence of a scientific journal
SJR considers not only the raw number of citations
received by a journal…
but also the importance or influence of the source of those citations
SJR is a combination of the quantity & quality of the citations received
SCImago Journal Rank

38. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 38
38| | 38
It is based on
Scopus data
The SCimago Journal Rank
 Freely available at scimagojr.com; on Scopus
 Similar to Impact Factor, but considers 3 years
 Self-citations limited
 Citations weighted by the SJR of the citing
journal
Year 3 Year 2 Year 1 Citing Year

39. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 39
39|
Source Normalized Impact per Paper
SNIP measures the contextual citation impact of a
journal by normalizing citation values
SNIP takes a research field’s citation frequency and the
database field’s coverage into account
It avoids delimitation and counters subject differences to
balance the scales
SNIP shows differences due to journal quality and not citation behavior

40. | 40
Devised at the
University of Leiden,
currently the most
sophisticated
journal performance
indicator
Source Normalized Impact per Paper
 Freely available online via Scopus
 Similar to Impact Factor, but considers 3 years
 Measures contextual citation impact
 Citations weighted by the likelihood of citation in
the subject field of source
Year 3 Year 2 Year 1 Citing Year

41. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 41
41|
Journal analyzer: SJR, SNIP and more

42. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 42
42|
SJR and SNIP: two journal metrics in Scopus
Compare up to 10 journals
SJR is a prestige metric and
weights citations according to
the status the citing journal

43. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 43
43|
SNIP normalized impact per paper between subject field.
SJR and SNIP: two journal metrics in Scopus

44. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 44
44|
Journal Analyzer: More analysis using Scopus

45. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 45
45|
“Using the Impact Factor alone to judge a journal
is like using weight alone to judge
a person’s health.”
Source: The Joint Committee on Quantitative Assessment of Research: “Citation
Statistics”, a report from the International Mathematical Union

46. TITLE OF PRESENTATION
| 46
46|
The h-index: Hirsch index or Hirsch number
In other words: An author has an index of
18 if he has published at least 18 papers;
each of which has been cited at least 18
times (Published by Jorge E. Hirsch in August 2005)
1. h-index : Measures the productivity and impact
of a scientist’s published work

47. Assessment often highly based on
publications and citations
47
“not everything that
can be counted
counts,
and not everything
that counts can be
counted”
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

48. | 48
Recap
Before writing your paper
Determine if you are ready to publish your work
Decide on the best type of manuscript
Choose the target journal
Check the Guide for Authors

49. III. Structuring your article
2015

50. | 50
General structure of a research article
 Title
 Abstract
 Keywords
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results and Discussion
 Conclusion
 Acknowledgements
 References
 Supporting Materials
Read the Guide for Authors for the specific criteria
of your target journal.

51. | 51
 Attract reader’s attention
 Contain fewest possible words
 Adequately describe content
 Are informative but concise
 Identify main issue
 Do not use technical jargon and rarely-used abbreviations
Effective manuscript titles
Editors and reviewers do not like titles that make no sense or fail to
represent the subject matter adequately. Additionally, if the title is not
accurate, the appropriate audience may not read your paper.

52. | 52
Keywords
Article title Keywords
“An experimental study on
evacuated tube solar collector using
supercritical CO2”
Solar collector; supercritical CO2;
solar energy; solar thermal
utilization
 Are the labels of the manuscript
 Are used by indexing and abstracting services
 Should be specific
 Should use only established abbreviations (e.g. DNA)
Check the Guide for Authors for specifics on which keywords should be
used.

53. | 53
 Summarize the problem, methods, results, and conclusions in a
single paragraph
 Make it interesting and understandable
 Make it accurate and specific
 A clear abstract will strongly influence whether or not your work
is considered
 Keep it as brief as possible
Abstract
Take the time to write the abstract very carefully. Many authors write the
abstract last so that it accurately reflects the content of the paper.

54. | 54
The process of writing –
building the article
Title, Abstract, and Keywords
Figures/Tables (your data)
Conclusion Introduction
Methods Results Discussion

55. | 55
Provide a brief context to the readers
Address the problem
Identify the solutions and limitations
Identify what the work is trying to achieve
Provide a perspective consistent with the
nature of the journal
Introduction
Write a unique introduction for every article. DO NOT reuse introductions.

56. | 56
Describe how the problem was
studied
Include detailed information
Do not describe previously
published procedures
Identify the equipment and
materials used
Methods

57. | 57
Include only data of primary
importance
Use sub-headings to keep results
of the same type together
Be clear and easy to understand
Highlight the main findings
Feature unexpected findings
Provide statistical analysis
Include illustrations and figures
Results

58. | 58
Interpretation of results
Most important section
Make the discussion correspond to
the results and complement them
Compare published results with
your own
Discussion
Be careful not to use the following:
- Statements that go beyond what the results can support
- Non-specific expressions
- New terms not already defined or mentioned in your paper
- Speculations on possible interpretations based on imagination

59. | 59
Conclusion
 Be clear
 Provide justification for the work
 Explain how your work advances the present state of knowledge
 Suggest future experiments

60. | 60
Acknowledgments
 Advisors
 Financial supporters and funders
 Proof readers and typists
 Suppliers who may have donated materials

61. | 61
References
 Do not use too many references
 Always ensure you have fully absorbed the
material you are referencing
 Avoid excessive self citations
 Avoid excessive citations of publications from
the same region or institute
 Conform strictly to the style given in the
Guide for Authors

62. Using proper scientific
language
2015

63. | 63
Do publishers correct language?
No!
It is the author’s
responsibility...
...but resources
are available

64. 64
Editing and Translation services

65. | 65
Manuscript language: Overview
 Clear
 Objective
 Accurate
 Concise
Always read the journal’s Guide for Authors to check for any additional
language specifications.

66. | 66
Manuscript language: Sentences
 Write direct, short, and factual
sentences
 Convey one piece of information per
sentence
 Avoid multiple statements in one
sentence
The average length of sentences in scientific writing
is only about 12-17 words.

67. | 67
Manuscript language: Tenses
Present tense:
Use for known facts and hypotheses
Past tense:
Use for experiments conducted
and results

68. | 68
 Use active voice to shorten sentences
 Avoid contractions and abbreviations
 Minimize use of adverbs
 Eliminate redundant phrases
 Double-check unfamiliar words or
phrases
Manuscript language: Grammar

69. | 69
 Proper English is important so editors
and reviewers can understand the work
 Use short, concise sentences, correct
tenses, and correct grammar
 Refer to the journal’s Guide for Authors
for specifications
 Have a native English speaker check
your manuscript or use a language
editing service
Recap
Are you using proper manuscript language?

70. IV. The reviewing process

71. A well understood concept, based on
impartiality, transparency and confidentiality
Without it there is no control in scientific
communication
Improving, validating, registering, and
preserving research in a fair and unbiased
way
Principles of Peer Review
71

72. Purpose of Peer Review
Ensures best quality papers are selected
Improves quality of the published paper
Ensures previous work is acknowledged
Detects plagiarism and fraud
Plays a central role in academic career
development
72

73. So how does it work?
Michael Derntl. Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing.
http://www.pri.univie.ac.at/~derntl/papers/meth-se.pdf

74. Role of Reviewer and tasks
The peer review process is based on trust
The scientific publishing enterprise depends largely
on the quality and integrity of the reviewers
Reviewer should write reports in a collegial
and constructive manner
Treat manuscripts in the same manner
as if they were your own
74

75. Issues to review as Reviewers
Importance and Clarity of Research Hypothesis
Originality of work
Strengths & weaknesses of methodology, approach &
interpretation
Writing style and figure/table presentation
Ethics concerns (animal/human)
75

76. Rejection without external review
The Editor-in-chief evaluates submissions and
determines whether they enter into the external review
process or are rejected
English language is inadequate
Prior publication of the data
Multiple simultaneous submissions of same data
76

77. | 77
Articles are initially reviewed by at least two reviewers
When invited, the reviewer receives the abstract of the manuscript
The Editor generally requests that the article be reviewed within 2-4
weeks
Articles are revised until the reviewers agree, or until the Editor
decides that the reviewer concerns have been adequately
addressed
The reviewers’ reports help the Editors to reach a decision on a
submitted paper
Review process (I)

78. | 78
Review process (II)
If report has not been received after 4 weeks, the editorial office
contacts the reviewer
If there is a notable disagreement between the reports of the
reviewers, a third reviewer may be consulted
The anonymity of the reviewers is maintained, unless a reviewer
asks the Editor to have their identity made known

79. | 79
Review process (III)
Reviewers must not communicate directly with authors
All manuscripts and materials must be treated
confidentially by Editors and reviewers
The aim is to have a first decision to the authors by 4-6
weeks (depending on the field) after submission
Meeting the schedule objectives requires a significant
effort by all involved
Reviewers should treat authors as they themselves would
like to be treated

80. | 80
What can you get back from peer review?
• Accepted without change (very rare!)
• Accepted after minor revision (means you will have to change a few
things)
• Accepted after consideration (means you will have to rewrite a few
things, possibly sections, figures, provide more data, etc)
• Reconsider after major revision (means you will have to address
some fundamental shortcomings – possibly doing additional
research and certainly rewriting big sections)
• Rejection (means the manuscript is not deemed suitable for
publication in that journal)

81. | 81
What leads to acceptance ?
• Attention to details
• Check and double check your work
• Consider the reviewers’ comments
• English must be as good as possible
• Presentation is important
• Take your time with revision
• Acknowledge those who have helped you
• New, original and previously unpublished
• Critically evaluate your own manuscript
• Ethical rules must be obeyed
– Nigel John Cook
Editor-in-Chief, Ore Geology Reviews

82. V. How to not publish

83. | 83
What is plagiarism?
“Plagiarism is the appropriation
of another person’s ideas, processes,
results, or words without giving appropriate
credit, including those obtained through
confidential review of others’ research
proposals and manuscripts.”
Federal Office of Science and
Technology Policy, 1999
“Presenting the data or interpretations
of others without crediting them, and
thereby gaining for yourself the
rewards earned by others, is theft, and
it eliminates the motivation of working
scientists to generate new data and
interpretations.”
Professor Bruce Railsback, Department of
Geology, University of Georgia

84. | 84
What may be plagiarised?
Work that can be plagiarised includes…
 Words (language)
 Ideas
 Findings
 Writings
 Graphic representations
 Computer programs
 Diagrams
 Graphs
 Illustrations
 Information
 Lectures
 Printed material
 Electronic material
 Any other original work
Higher Education Academy, UK

85. | 85
Correct citation is key
 To place your own work in
context
 To acknowledge the findings of
others on which you have built
your research
 To maintain the credibility and
accuracy of the scientific
literature
Crediting the work of others (including your advisor’s or your own
previous work) by citation is important for at least three reasons:

86. | 86
Plagiarism high amongst ethics issues
Sample of cases reported to Elsevier Journals publishing staff in 2012

87. | 87
How big is the problem of plagiarism?
 Huge database of 30+ million articles, from 50,000+ journals, from
400+ publishers
 Software alerts Editors to any similarities between the article and this
huge database of published articles
 Many Elsevier journals now check every submitted article using
CrossCheck

88. | 88
Plagiarism is serious but easily avoidable
 Plagiarism is easily avoided
 You can use ideas, phrases and
arguments from sources already
published, just acknowledge the
source and the original author

89. | 89
Paraphrasing
It is unacceptable:
 Using exact phrases from the
original source without enclosing
them in quotation marks
 Emulating sentence structure
even when using different words
 Emulating paragraph
organization even when using
different wording or sentence
structure
Paraphrasing is restating someone else's ideas while not copying
their actual words verbatim.
– Statement on Plagiarism
Department of Biology, Davidson College.
www.bio.davidson.edu/dept/plagiarism.html

90. | 90
Recap
When in doubt, cite!
Never cut & paste
(even to save time in
drafts)
If you suspect:
REPORT
Responsibility

91. VI. Get noticed
Promoting your researcher for maximum
impact

92. | 92
You want to make sure your research gets the attention
it deserves
7 hrs/week
average time
spent on literature
1970 2013
0
40M
 The volume of research articles is
growing at an accelerated pace
 For most researchers, it’s a real
challenge to keep up with the literature
 Your job: make sure your research
doesn’t fall through the cracks!

93. | 93
1. Preparing your
article
2. Promoting your
published article
3. Monitoring your
article

94. Getting your paper noticed
94
• Usage Alerts
Quarterly e-mail to authors, with
a link towards a customized
web page per article
• Cite Alerts
Weekly notification to authors
once their article is referenced
in a newly published article.

95. Make your paper stand out from the crowd…
Share your knowledge

96. Create your professional research profilePromoting your article

97. | 97
Monitoring your article
My Research Dashboard:
 Early feedback on downloads,
shares and citations
 Data about the geographic
locations and research disciplines
of your readers
 Search terms used in ScienceDirect
to find your publications
 A comparison of the
performance of your article with
other people’s articles

98. | 98
Monitoring your article
Altmetrics:

99. | 99
Getting noticed
 Sharing research,
accomplishments and
ambitions makes you more
visible
 With greater visibility, you get
cited more, promote your
research, and career

100. | 100
Further reading at
publishingcampus.com
elsevier.com/authors
elsevier.com/reviewers
elsevier.com/editors
Get Published – top tips on writing, reviewing and grant writing etc.
Publishing Ethics brochure – top reasons to publish ethically
Get Noticed – new ways to promote your article and research
Understanding the Publishing Process with Elsevier – complete guide
Open access – definitions and options
Career Planning Guide – download in 12 languages

101. | 101

102. Visit Elsevier Publishing Campus
www.publishingcampus.com
For more information on publishing ethics:
www.elsevier.com/ethics
For writing/submission tips and author
services: :
www.elsevier.com/authors
Thank you