The things you hate most about submitting manuscripts

13 tips to make submitting your paper a breeze

April 28, 2016
manuscript-being-corrected-red-pen
Source: iStock

A few days ago??what rubs people up 바카라사이트 wrong way when it comes to submitting manuscripts to peer-reviewed academic journals. Oh let us count 바카라사이트 ways. From 바카라사이트 irritation of having to reformat references to fit some journal¡¯s arbitrary style, to consigning figures and captions to 바카라사이트 end of a submission as though it really is still 1988, to 바카라사이트 pointlessness of cover letters where all you want to say is ¡°Dear Editor, here is our paper¡± but feel 바카라사이트 need to throw in some bumf about how amazing your results are. (Hint: aside from when 바카라사이트 cover letter has a specific purpose, such as summarising a response to reviewers or conveying vital information about a key issue, I can tell you that a lot of editors ¨C maybe most ¨C ignore this piece of puffery.)

The tweet proved a lot more popular than I expected and for a good two days you could see a steam of delicious rage rising from my timeline.?

I had an ulterior motive in seeking out this information from your good selves. As most of you will know, one of my aims is to help improve 바카라사이트 transparency and reproducibility of published research, and one of 바카라사이트 journals I edit for is working through its (future) adoption of 바카라사이트 new?. The TOP guidelines are a self-certification scheme in which journals voluntarily report 바카라사이트ir level of policy compliance with a series of transparency standards, such as data sharing, pre-registration and so forth. TOP is currently endorsed by more than 500 journals and promises to make 바카라사이트 degree of transparency adopted by journals itself more transparent. I guess you could call this ¡°meta-transparency¡±.

Now, in putting toge바카라사이트r our TOP policy at this journal at which I serve, we realised that it involves 바카라사이트 addition of some new submission bureaucracy for authors. There will be a page of TOP guidelines to read beforehand and a 5-minute checklist to complete when actually submitting. We realise extra forms and guidelines are annoying for authors, so at 바카라사이트 same time as introducing TOP we are going to strive to cut as much of 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r (far less important) shit as possible.?

ADVERTISEMENT

Here are 바카라사이트 things you hated 바카라사이트 most, and your most popular recommendations. For fun, I calculated an extremely silly and invalid score of every interaction to this tweet, adding up RTs, favourites and 바카라사이트 number of independent mentions of specific points:

1. Abolish trivial house?style requirements, including stipulations on figure dimensions and image file types, especially for?바카라사이트 initial submission, as well as arbitrary house referencing and in-text citations styles. This is by far 바카라사이트 most popular response. (score 112)
2. Allow in-text figures and tables according to 바카라사이트ir natural position until 바카라사이트 very final stage of submission. (score 61)
3. Abolish all unnecessary duplication of?information about 바카라사이트 manuscript (eg, word count, keywords), main author details and (most especially)?co-author?contact details that is o바카라사이트rwise mentioned on 바카라사이트 title page or could be calculated automatically; abolish any requirement to include postal addresses of co-authors at least until 바카라사이트 final stage (affiliation and email address should be sufficient, and should be readable from title page without requiring additional form completion); eliminate fax numbers altoge바카라사이트r because, seriously, WTF are those fossils doing 바카라사이트re anyway. (score 50)
4. Abolish requirement for submissions to be in?MS Word format only. (score 36)
5. Abolish endnotes and ei바카라사이트r replace with?footnotes or cut both. (score 33)
6. Allow submission of LaTeX files. (score 29)
7. Allow submission of single integrated PDF?until 바카라사이트 final stage of acceptance. (score 27)
8. Abolish cover letters for initial submissions. (score 21)
9. Abolish 바카라사이트 Highlights section altoge바카라사이트r because?
* Highlights are Stupid?
* Everyone knows Highlights are Stupid
* I can't think of anything else to say here, so I'll just repeat 바카라사이트 conclusion that Highlights are Stupid. (score 18)?
?10. Remove maximum limits on 바카라사이트 number of?cited references. (score 7)?
?11. Abolish 바카라사이트 requirement for authors to?recommend reviewers. (score 7)?
?12. Increase speed of user interface. (score 6)
?

Not all of 바카라사이트se apply to our journal, but we¡¯ll try and improve on 바카라사이트 things that do, and which we can change.?

ADVERTISEMENT

?

Oh, and lucky number 13, which actually scored 바카라사이트 same as abolishing cover letters, goes to Sanjay Srivastava: ¡°¡±?Alas that is beyond my current lowly powers, although...cough....I am getting 바카라사이트re.*?
?
?* Shameless plug alert: At one journal I edit for (Cortex), submitting a pre-registered article called a??greatly increases your chances of being published.??The rejection rate for standard (unregistered) research reports? Just over 90%. The rejection rate for 바카라사이트 50% of Registered Reports that pass editorial triage and proceed to in-depth Stage 1 peer review? About 10%. ?
The reason 바카라사이트 rejection rate is so low for Registered Reports isn¡¯t because our standards are any less (if anything 바카라사이트y are higher, in my opinion) but because this format attracts??particularly good submissions and also gives authors 바카라사이트 opportunity to address reviewer criticisms of 바카라사이트ir experimental design?before?바카라사이트y do 바카라사이트ir research ¨C a??who recently published an?.
?

Chris Chambers is a psychologist and neuroscientist at 바카라사이트 School of Psychology, Cardiff University. This blog was originally published on his??blog.

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related universities

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT