Scientific writing and publishing
As citation counts, h-indexes, and impact become increasingly important to matters of funding and promotion, Melissa Terras asks why more scholars are not chasing up publishers to find out how their work is faring among the online audience, and makes some pleasing discoveries on how her own research has been received. A month or so ago, I posted about whether blogging and tweeting about academic research papers was “worth it”. Whilst writing up my thoughts, the one thing that I found really problematic was the following: “I also know nothing about how many times my other papers are downloaded from the websites of published journals, or consulted in print in the Library. The latter, no-one can really say about – but the former? It seems strange to me that we write articles (without being paid) and we get them published by people who make a profit on them, then we don’t even know – usually – how many downloads they are getting from the journals themselves.”
Welcome to the BioMed Central author academy, a guide from BioMed Central and Edanz on writing and publishing a scientific manuscript. You can use the links to the left or below to find advice on specific topics. Why publish in English? Because English is the language scientists in different countries use to communicate with each other, publishing in English allows you to reach the broadest possible audience. This will help you achieve the goal that led you to publish in the first place: To add to our understanding of the world by informing other scientists about your research. Of course, if English is not your first language, having to use it may add to the challenges of writing and publishing.
<a href="//ad.doubleclick.net/jump/teg.fmsq/pfw6/a;subs=n;wsub=n;sdn=n;!c=21552574;dcopt=ist;pos=ldr_top;sz=728x90,970x90,970x250;tile=1;ord=908603324?" target="_blank"><img src="//ad.doubleclick.net/ad/teg.fmsq/pfw6/a;subs=n;wsub=n;sdn=n;!c=21552574;dcopt=ist;pos=ldr_top;sz=728x90,970x90,970x250;tile=1;ord=908603324?" width="728" height="90" border="0" alt=""></a> <a href="//ad.doubleclick.net/jump/teg.fmsq/pfw6/a;subs=n;wsub=n;sdn=n;!
A couple of weeks ago, in my post “ The Value of Prescriptivism ,” I mentioned some strange reasoning that I wanted to talk about later—the idea that there are many usages that are not technically wrong, but you should still avoid them because other people think they’re wrong. I used the example of a Grammar Girl post on hopefully wherein she lays out the arguments in favor of disjunct hopefully and debunks some of the arguments against it—and then advises, “I still have to say, don’t do it.” She then adds, however, “I am hopeful that starting a sentence with hopefully will become more acceptable in the future.” On the face of it, this seems like a pretty reasonable approach. Sometimes the considerations of the reader have to take precedence over the facts of usage. If the majority of your readers will object to your word choice, then it may be wise to pick a different word.
By Robert A. Giacalone The journal-review process is always the subject of some scorn among scholars. I've been in the academic profession for nearly 30 years, and while I've heard few people unequivocally applaud blind reviews, it seems that in the last five years, more colleagues at all levels have expressed consternation with the process.
At the urging of Twitter user beautyiswhatudo , I have posted up here my academic template for writing journals and publications according to a somewhat generally accepted approach. The reader can download the Scrivener 2.0.4 template here . I do have some notes for someone intending to use this template; these notes are included in the Academic template. To the user: This Scrivener 2.04 template provides an overall structure of how to proceed with writing an academic paper in Scrivener. Much of this generated table of contents etc is based on research in the social sciences (Information Systems discipline). Other advice has been sourced from the University of Queensland RHD Handbook (included as part of the research materials at the bottom), and from the publication Turabian, K.
Tutorial Home Page: How to Recognize Plagiarism, School of Education, Indiana University at BloomingtonTutorial Home Welcome! This tutorial will help you to understand and recognize plagiarism. Avoiding plagiarism is important -- both in writing and speaking. When you properly acknowledge the contributions to knowledge made by other people, you are showing respect for their work, and you are giving credit where credit is due.
A one-sentence overview of the poster concept A large-format poster is a document that can communicate your research at a conference, and is composed of a short title, an introduction to your burning question, an overview of your novel approach, your amazing results in graphical form, some insightful discussion of aforementioned results, a listing of previously published articles that are important to your research, and some brief acknowledgement of the tremendous assistance and financial support conned from others — if all text is kept to a minimum, a person could fully read your poster in under 5 minutes (really). [ © copyright Colin Purrington ... fine print is in red at bottom of page. ]
The scientific research enterprise is built on a foundation of trust. Scientists trust that the results reported by others are valid. Society trusts that the results of research reflect an honest attempt by scientists to describe the world accurately and without bias. But this trust will endure only if the scientific community devotes itself to exemplifying and transmitting the values associated with ethical scientific conduct. On Being a Scientist was designed to supplement the informal lessons in ethics provided by research supervisors and mentors.