PUBLISHING YOUR FIRST FEW
PAPERS
Dr. Elizabeth Catlos, UT Austin
Dr. Eric Peterson, Illinois State
Univ.
Dr. Michael Wysession,
Washington Univ. in St. Louis
OUTLINE
Pressure to publish
Writing strategies
Preparing manuscripts
Common problems
Our advice
PRESSURE TO PUBLISH
Consider your departmental/university expectations with publishing
 ‘For tenure they say two articles or a book or whatever. I’ve made up my own rules
for what I should do based on what I think I understand of all the expectations. I’ll
have a couple of articles and several conference papers.’
 One the one hand, this faculty member demonstrates autonomy, self-direction,
and personal achievement.
 On the other hand, he could be heading down a road of self-destruction.
(Menges and Associates, 1999)
What is your h-index?
 The h-index is an index that attempts to measure both the productivity and
impact of the published work
 A scientist has index h if h of his/her Np papers have at least h citations each,
and the other (Np − h) papers have no more than h citations each
 How important is your h-index (or other indices) to your department?
 How can you increase your h-index?
 How can you increase the value of your work to others?
http://www.benchfly.com/blog/h-index-what-it-is-and-how-to-find-yours/
PRESSURE TO PUBLISH
Consider having an active academic social networking profile
 Other researchers can follow you/your updates via numerous on-line sites
 Easy for those tasked to evaluate your tenure application
 Easy access to download your publications (important to those who may not
have subscriptions)
 Facebook, Linked-In are standard not as important as
 Google Scholar includes # citations, h-index, i10-index; follows your publishing
career
 Researchgate (www.researchgate.net) can upload all pdfs, keep track of
downloads, compare to colleagues in dept. and university
 Researcherid (www.researcherid.com) Can manage their publication lists, track
their times cited counts and h-index, identify potential collaborators and avoid
author misidentification. Integrates with the Web of Knowledge and is ORCID
compliant.
 Others?
WRITING STRATEGIES
Support your writing
 Be aware of your writing rituals and make them work for you
 Read and study manuscripts in your field regularly
 Set aside a regular time without interruptions. The more you write, the easier it
is
 Refuse frustration and ‘defeatist’ attitudes
 Read books about how to improve your writing
Just write







Record the amount of time spent writing
Start as you collect data
Make use of an outline
Use larger blocks of time to cut the project into manageable pieces
Post key ‘data’ where they are easy to view and write to them
Organize around key sentences
Write, and then continually revise and update
PREPARING MANUSCRIPTS
Write with the journal in mind
 Importance of the impact factor
 Special issue?
 Open access? Contact your librarian if “invited” to submit a paper to
an odd, but reputable sounding journal or issue
 Color figure cost, publication costs, urgency?
Consider breaking up the research
 1 paper? Many papers?
Work on improving your writing
 Read books about scientific writing, how to improve your writing
 Read and try to emulate authors your respect and understand
Write to convince an imagined adversarial
reviewer





Anticipate problems
Cite literature appropriately
Write concisely
Assume no one will read the entire paper
Assume someone will check your references and count the page #s
PREPARING MANUSCRIPTS
Structure your paper like an hourglass
 Introduction/background discuss the big picture then zone into a particular topic
Write the title carefully
 Least number of words to describe what has been done
Write strategically
 Introduction first, then methods/background, then your results
Importance of the abstract
 The abstract is like an expanded title
 Consider abstract like a series of headlines
Make sure all figures/tables/images convey critical information
Write a cover letter to accompany your submission
 Not exceed 2 pages
 Long enough to help the editor see the relevance of your work and choose appropriate
reviewers
COMMON PROBLEMS
Logical flaws or rhetorical leaps in the text
 Problems in the science
 Errors in interpretations or data collection
 Reviewers unconvinced of the value
The manuscript does not fit the content or style of the
journal to which it has been submitted
Poor organization
 New observations, data, or interpretations appear in the Summary
or Conclusion sections
 Critical arguments appear late in the text.
 Figures are cited out of order or are missing.
 Incorrectly cited references or too many references.
Spelling errors or other grammatical mistakes
 Have someone (mentor/student) read before submitting
OUR ADVICE
Seek feedback before submission
Review manuscripts if asked
Suggest possible reviewers
Make the most of your reviews and revise your manuscript if its not
rejected
 Take *all* reviewer’s and editor’s comments into account in revising
 “Reviewers have now commented on your paper. You will see that they are advising that you
revise your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be
pleased to reconsider my decision.”
Communication is the key
 Strive to communicate as clearly as possible in your writing – keep the exposition simple
 Use your cover letter to facilitate communication with the editor.
 Answer each criticism and ‘communicate’ with the editor and reviewers. Indicate in the
letter both the positive comments made about your manuscript and the issues that you have
addressed.
Do not be discouraged if the paper is rejected
REFERENCES
Boice, Robert. (1989). Procrastination, busyness and bingeing. Behavior Research Therapy, 27, 605-611.
Boice, Robert. (2000). Advice for new faculty members: Nihil nimus. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, & Joseph M. Williams. (2003). The craft of research. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Fiske, Donald W., and Louis Fogg. (1990). But the reviewers are making different criticisms of my paper! Diversity
and uniqueness in reviewer comments. American Psychologist, 45, 591-598.
Gopen G. D., and Swan, J. A. (1990). The science of science writing, American Scientist, 78, 550-558.
Gray, Tara (2005). Summary (by the author) of Publish & Flourish: Become a Prolific Scholar, posted on ‘tomorrow’s
professor (see footnote 1) Tue, 6 Sep 2005. Publish & Flourish: Become a Prolific Scholar is available at
http://www.teaching.nmsu.edu/acadbookstore.html
McCloskey, Deirdre. (2000). Economical writing (2nd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
Menges, R.J. (1989) Faculty in New Jobs: A Guide to Settling In, Becoming Established, and Building Institutional
Support. Jossey-Bass, 338pp.
Van Hinsbergen, Douwe, Video lecture on writing papers, available at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvdfKkSvVf4
Williams, Joseph, with Gregory Colomb. (1990). Style: Toward clarity and grace. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.