How NOT to Write
an Academic Paper?
Nguyen Xuan Hoai, Hanoi University
Outline



Who am I?
Why your papers get rejected?
Common pitfalls in writing paper:




Ethical aspect.
Presentation aspect.
Language aspect.
Response to reviewers.
Briefs about me



I come from the computer science background,
working at the IT R&D Center, Hanoi University.
My publication count is around 80 (27 was
published with Springer!)… not including many
rejected ones!
I have reviewed hundreds of academic papers
for prestigious academic conferences and
journals in my field of study (including – IEEE
Trans on Evolutionary Computation, IEEE Trans
on Neural Networks, IEEE CEC, ACM SIGEVO
GECCO, EuroGP, ….)
Disclaimer




I will be more focused to publication in natural
sciences (in particular Computer Science).
I do not try to over-generalize but only use my
experience; everything said might have
counterexamples.
I give some examples of my own and others
without any mean to offense.
The list of common pitfalls in paper presentation
is far from complete!
So after a long period of hard
working, you have decided to
submit an academic paper …
And wait ….
Notification to your submitted paper:



Why?
Why?
Why? …
Most common reasons for
papers get rejected


Does not fit the scope of journal or conference.
Does not make any contribution to the knowledge
of the field.



Lacking of new ideas/results.
Solving insignificant problems.
Does not meet the ethical standards.


Originality.
Ethical issues of research problems.
Most common reasons for
papers get rejected

Research contents are weak








Literature review is inadequate.
Methodological problems.
Data/samples are problematic.
Insufficient statistical analysis.
Misinterpretation of the results.
Reproducibility of the results.
The paper is poorly written.
Does not follow the journal’s guidelines for
presentation.
Badly Written Papers
Misconception:
“My paper should not be rejected as
long as the results (contents) are
good” ….
 The truth is:
“Many papers have been rejected
for they are badly written”

Common Pitfalls
in Writing Papers
Ethical Aspect:

Plagiarism




Self-plagiarism




Any text in the paper.
Tables, figures.
Zero tolerance.
Is this paper look similar to your previous one?
Copy-and-paste.
Quotation and Paraphrase.
Plagiarism checking tools.
Common Pitfalls
in Writing Papers
Presentation Aspect:

Write paper for you only!


Lacking of context



Suppose reviewers/readers have known everything
you know.
Lacking of problem definition or crowded with them.
Lacking of literature review or unfairly diminish others
work.
Purely descriptive

No alternative, no comparison, no comments just “we
did this, we did that…”
Common Pitfalls
in Writing Papers
Presentation Aspect:

Bad structured




Unbalance in parts.
Include irrelevant or unnecessarily long contents.
Incoherence.
Obscure writing



Many acronyms and abbreviations.
Inconsistence in notation usage.
Use footnote more than text.
Common Pitfalls
in Writing Papers
Language Aspect:
Academic writing is a discipline!

Writing paper with colorful language


Write long and complex sentences


KISS – Keep it short and simple
Context repetition


Straight and simple.
Should not repeat ourselves.
Inconsistent tense in a paragraph
Common Pitfalls
in Writing Papers
Language Aspect:
Academic writing is a discipline!

Active vs. Passive voice


Bad word choice




Vietnamese tends to use more active voice while
formal English tends to use passive.
Over-sell/over-generalize words (e.g “paradigm”)
Buzz words (cool but shallow).
Controversy words.
Typos and bad graphics
Response to Reviewers
But if you have a chance to response to the
reviewers of your paper …
Response to Reviewers
Don’t:





Use aggressive or defensive tone.
Use one reviewer’s response against another.
I am right because the reviewer is wrong!
Say things like “we agree” or “this is excellent ..”
if you are going to change the paper as
suggested by reviewers.
Referring back for similar comments


“See my response to comment X above..”
Submit same version to other journals.
Response to Reviewers
Do:





Give thanks to the reviewers and editor.
Understand and address all points raised by the
editor and reviewers.
Pick your battle and present your disagreement
in a polite way!
Restate the comments and clearly show your
major revisions.
Resubmit your paper and responseto-reviewers on time.
THANK YOU !
Acknowledgement – apart from my own experience,
I have consulted various writings related to the
topic on the internet; in particular,
www.vietphd.org
Prof. McKay from SNU should be thanked for giving
his experience on the common academic language
mistakes committed by Asian researchers