首页
登录
职称英语
How to Get a Paper Published I. Prerequisite— doing (1
How to Get a Paper Published I. Prerequisite— doing (1
游客
2024-12-04
19
管理
问题
How to Get a Paper Published
I. Prerequisite
— doing (1)______researches
— collecting mass information and data
I. Things you should do after the submission of your paper
A. If you do not get an acknowledgement
— post (2)______
B. When not informed of a review decision for long
— write to the editor in a(n) (3)______way
I. Advisable (4)______to the editor in different situations
A. If the paper is rejected with good reasons
— accept and learn from the experience
B. If you view the rejection as (5)______
— make a protest supported by strong evidence and good reasons
C. When confronted with the editor’s constructive advice
— consider (6)______and attempt to revise
D. When sending back the revised manuscript
— write a general (7)______:
—thank for his effort and comments
—- promise comments considered
— reproduce the editor’s review aligned with the reply:
— remind the editor
— show him your (8)______
— offer a good reason for suggestions not followed
— try to (9)______the reviewer rather than fight with him
IV. Other warnings and advice
— attach importance to established (10)______of academia
— avoid overemphasizing quantity of papers [br]
How to Get a Paper Published
Good morning, everyone! As college students, all of you, I believe, have the capacities to do researches by your own, and also have the basic knowledge of writing research papers. But do you know how to make your paper published? Today, I’m going to give you a lecture on this.
First of all, you should write your papers well on the basis of doing mass researches and collecting mass information and data. It’s the prerequisite. Then, please focus your minds on the following tips. After you have followed all the advice on how to write a paper, had it submitted to a journal of your choice, here are things you should do.
First, if the editor and the journal are established and responsible, you should receive an acknowledgement within two weeks. Otherwise, you should post an inquiry. Manuscripts do get lost at times.
Then, once receipt is acknowledged you should wait patiently for a review decision. (3) I personally suggest that if you have not heard from the journal in four months, then you should politely write to the editor to inquire about progress on the review, since occasionally there are irresponsible editors and reviewers. Once they agreed to process your paper, they owe you some timely response. But be polite and professional in your dealings. Remember reviewing a manuscript is a volunteer activity. As authors, "demanding" actions will get you nowhere.
Finally, the reply comes back from the editor. If the editor accepts the paper without modification or with request for minor revisions only, congratulations!
More likely than not, however, the paper is not accepted as is and the editor wants major revisions and re-review; or worse, the paper is rejected. (4) In either case, you have some decisions to make-Here I offer my own experience on what to do next.
If the paper is rejected outright, then you need to decide if the decision is justified. Most of the time, this is done with good reason including value judgment. The author should accept and learn from the experience. (5) On the rare occasion when you think a real injustice has been committed and you want to protest, you had better do it with very strong evidence and well supported reasons. Furthermore , if you balance your action against the cost of protest some times you will realize it is not worth the trouble. For almost everyone, you will only have truly significant discovery a couple of times in your entire life. No one said the world is fair and most of the time, it is not worthwhile to get angry with the "small stuff".
Most reviewers are fair and have constructive things to say which you should consider carefully when attempting to revise your paper. Try not to get annoyed by the sometimes sarcastic remarks of the reviewer. Often it is their chance to payback when they were on the receiving end as authors. Thus, don’t be sarcastic and mean in responding to their reviews. Getting angry will only hurt your cause. As the saying goes "don’t get mad, get even by having your paper accepted".
When responding to a reviewer with your revised manuscript and/or specific replies, remember that months probably has gone past since the reviewer read your paper and wrote his review. Make the job easy and pleasant for him. (7) First, write a general covering letter to each reviewer thanking him for his effort and comments. Then promise that you have considered each of his comments and what you have done and responded to each. Then, reproduce his review and give your reply side by side for each remark. Remember, by this time most reviewer probably has forgotten what he said about your paper. You need to make things easy and to remind him. (8) Also showing you took his comments seriously will impress him with your effort and sincerity.
But you need not agree with everything the reviewer said. If you must disagree, do it professionally and with no discomfort. Above all. explain why you cannot do what he suggests with a good reason. Fair referees and editors will respect you.
Above all, remember your task is to win over the reviewer and not to fight with him. The playing field between a reviewer and an author is not level. You can seldom win a fight with an editor or a reviewer.
In addition to dealing with the relationship with an editor or a reviewer, another thing I need to remind you is that though currently quantity of publication is all important, conforming to established custom and traditions of academia is of great significance. The emphasis on quantity will soon pass and you will regret if you give in to some incentives for aberrant and unethical behavior. Therefore, I want to say that you should put correct eyes on the publishing of papers. Never copy anybody’s work!
Well, in summary, when you contact a reviewer, remember to be patient and professional to him, learn from the experience rather than get annoyed if the paper is rejected, and furthermore, do something to remind a reviewer when you send to him your revised manuscript. If you follow my advice, chances are that you will have your paper published. OK, today’s lecture is over. Thank you very much!
选项
答案
mass
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3873006.html
相关试题推荐
HowtoGetaPaperPublishedI.Prerequisite—doing(1
HowtoGetaPaperPublishedI.Prerequisite—doing(1
HowtoGetaPaperPublishedI.Prerequisite—doing(1
HowtoGetaPaperPublishedI.Prerequisite—doing(1
HowtoGetaPaperPublishedI.Prerequisite—doing(1
HowtoGetaPaperPublishedI.Prerequisite—doing(1
ThomasMalthuspublishedhisEssayonthePrincipleofPopulationalmost200
ThomasMalthuspublishedhisEssayonthePrincipleofPopulationalmost200
ThomasMalthuspublishedhisEssayonthePrincipleofPopulationalmost200
ThomasMalthuspublishedhisEssayonthePrincipleofPopulationalmost200
随机试题
TheFrench,longproudoftheirreputationforhigh-classcuisine,strongly____
与普通合伙企业相比,下列各项中,属于股份有限公司缺点的是()。A.筹资渠道少
下列用于镇静催眠的最佳药物是A、氯氮卓 B、地西泮 C、巴比妥类 D、苯妥
Numbersenseisnottheabilitytocount
电磁流量计在工、农业生产中有广泛的应用,常用来测量高黏度,强腐蚀性带电流体的流量
结构性票据不一定派发利息,而且大部分结构性票据也不保本。()
下列属于绩效管理系统的组成要素的是()。A:考评者与被考评者 B:绩效指
《机电产品国际招标投标实施办法》规定,不予受理的质疑情况有()A.由非投标人提
我国的资本市场主要包括( )。A.同业拆借市场、回购市场和票据市场 B.股票
治疗肾癌的主要方法是 A.单纯性肾切除 B.肾肿瘤剜除术 C.放疗
最新回复
(
0
)