1. Publishing articles

2. Who has published in an international journal?
How did you choose the journal to publish in?

3. Choosing the journal Criteria for choosing a journal
Indexing (e.g. is the journal in Scopus?)
Check for Q1 at
Academic level of the journal
Style of the journal
Interests of the journal
Difficulty of getting published (publication rates vary from 2% to 50%)
Professionalism and length of time till publication
Publisher of journal (e.g. Elsevier, Taylor & Francis, John Benjamins, Cambridge, Sage)
Choose journal you cite? Choose journal you like reading?

4. Some horror stories! The black hole!
Waiting for reviewer comments for more than one year
Publication without notification
Acceptance, then rejection on changing the editor
Acceptance, and told to wait 3 years for publication

5. Choosing journals Types of journals
International journals in major databases (e.g. Scopus) published by major publishing houses (e.g. Elsevier, Sage, Springer) with restricted access (e.g. through ScienceDirect) and a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process.
International journals in major databases which are open-access (e.g. Language Learning & Technology, CALL-EJ). These have a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process but do NOT charge for publication.
International journals in major databases published by major publishing houses which are open- access and charge for publication. These have a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process.
International journals not in major databases published by little-known publishing houses which are open-access and charge for publication. These do not have rigorous refereeing (e.g. they often promise referees’ reports within 2 or 3 days). They often cover a very wide range of subject areas.
National journals in the TCI database. These are refereed but not usually rigorous.
Journals/magazines for teachers (e.g. MET, HLT)

6. Choosing journals Types of journals
International journals in major databases (e.g. Scopus) published by major publishing houses (e.g. Elsevier, Sage, Springer) with restricted access (e.g. through ScienceDirect) and a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process.
International journals in major databases which are open-access (e.g. Language Learning & Technology, CALL-EJ). These have a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process but do NOT charge for publication.
International journals in major databases published by major publishing houses which are open- access and charge for publication. These have a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process.
International journals not in major databases published by little-known publishing houses which are open-access and charge for publication. These do not have rigorous refereeing (e.g. they often promise referees’ reports within 2 or 3 days). They often cover a very wide range of subject areas.
National journals in the TCI database. These are refereed but not usually rigorous.
Journals/magazines for teachers (e.g. MET, HLT)

7. Identifying scam journals
The publisher is on Beall’s list
Beall’s list has disappeared, but San has a copy of the last version of the list
Publishing fee (normally in Author guidelines or Submission)
Wide range of articles accepted
Journal description the same as other journals

9. The publisher is on Beall’s list

10. Publishing fee

11. Wide range of articles accepted

12. Journal description the same as other journals

13. Journal description the same as other journals

14. Example 1

15. This paper was accepted by 17 different journals

16. Example 2

18. Choosing conferences Types of conferences
Genuine conferences that publish proceedings. These are usually run by well-known organisations (e.g. TESOL, BAAL) or by educational institutions (e.g. universities) [Note: Some conferences are hosted by, but not run by, universities. It is the organiser, not the host, that is crucial.]
Genuine conferences that do not publish proceedings (similar to A).
Conferences that are held to make money (tourism conferences), not as academic fora. These are businesses similar to scam journals (and are often associated with Type D journals).
Conferences that do not exist! A recent type of spam is invitations to conferences (often in fields that are of no relevance to the recipient). The goal is to get you to pay the registration fee, but there is actually no conference, only a website. Often these refer to conferences in China, but a few years ago a teacher at SWU paid for and travelled to a ‘conference’ in Italy that didn’t exist!
Use the SoLA conference list at arts.kmutt.ac.th/crs/index.php?p=/Research_Regulations/journal_conference_lists

19. Choosing conferences Types of conferences
Genuine conferences that publish proceedings. These are usually run by well-known organisations (e.g. TESOL, BAAL) or by educational institutions (e.g. universities) [Note: Some conferences are hosted by, but not run by, universities. It is the organiser, not the host, that is crucial.]
Genuine conferences that do not publish proceedings (similar to A).
Conferences that are held to make money (tourism conferences), not as academic fora. These are businesses similar to scam journals (and are often associated with Type D journals).
Conferences that do not exist! A recent type of spam is invitations to conferences (often in fields that are of no relevance to the recipient). The goal is to get you to pay the registration fee, but there is actually no conference, only a website. Often these refer to conferences in China, but a few years ago a teacher at SWU paid for and travelled to a ‘conference’ in Italy that didn’t exist!

20. Genuine quality conferences
Organised by major academic organisation or university
Specific area of interest
Well-published plenary speakers

21. Tourism conferences Very broad areas of interest
Emphasis on social events or tourism
Conference description the same as other conferences
Publications in scam journals

22. Very broad areas of interest Emphasis on social events or tourism
We invite proposals in all academic disciplines: Humanities and Social sciences, Education, Science and Technology, Business and Economics

23. Conference description the same as other conferences

24. Conference description the same as other conferences

25. Identifying scam conferences
The organiser is ‘World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology’
“ICFLTAL 2015 has teamed up with the Special Journal Issue on Advances in Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics”, but the journal doesn’t exist (check on Google)
Clicking on ‘Conference proceedings’ leads to a page of WASET journals (all Type D), none of which is related to applied linguistics.

26. Publications in scam journals

27. Identifying scam conferences
The organiser is ‘World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology’
“ICFLTAL 2015 has teamed up with the Special Journal Issue on Advances in Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics”, but the journal doesn’t exist (check on Google)
Clicking on ‘Conference proceedings’ leads to a page of WASET journals (all Type D), none of which is related to applied linguistics.
Clicking on ‘Conference committee’ gives a long list of people from Malaysia, Iran, Libya etc. None are from the UK where the conference is to be held.

28. Fake conferences Advertised by spam e-mail
Offer scholarships to cover travel costs
Lots of different fees (e.g. charge for visa)
Non-existent hotel (check from Google Streetview):

29. Fake invitations Invitation to run an academic workshop
Request to pay visa costs
Request for a refundable downpayment guaranteeing attendance
Notification of receipt of an award
Request to pay registration fee to be eligible for the award

30. Publishing in a quality journal
Preparing the article
Choose the journal before writing
Check the guidelines for contributors
Read 2 or 3 articles in the journal
Note: If rejected by one journal and you decide to submit to another, you need to rewrite the article

31. How to write articles
Pay special attention to the points which are common problems

32. Common problems with research articles
Article does not match the journal
Different interest
Different academic level
Article tries to prove something
Be open-minded
Failure is more interesting than success
Data chosen to fit predetermined finding
Especially a problem with some research methodologies
Double/triple subjectivity in research
No theoretical framework to research
Unprincipled research methodology
Stated framework not implemented
Key unstated assumptions
Unstated assumptions invalidate findings
Unstated assumptions show lack of awareness of issues
Problems of identifying own assumptions
Confusing organisation
General rule: follow standard research article genre template (introduction - literature review - research purpose - methodology - findings - implications/discussion - conclusion)
No clearly stated research questions
Problems with literature review
Missing key literature
Vague undefined terms
Literature review as a list, not an argument
Problems with research methodology
No justifications for methodological decisions
Mismatch between data collection/analysis procedures and research purpose
Problems with findings
Inappropriate statistics
Unfounded qualitative data presentation

33. Common problems with research articles
Problems with implications/discussion
Repetition of literature review
Lack of implications
Mismatch with findings
Wild claims on little evidence
Lack of relevance to journal (e.g. no implications for the classroom)
Language problems
Some errors OK (most applied linguistics journal editors are sympathetic to non-native speakers) BUT may lead to unconscious bias in reviewers
Opaque or super-formal language
Differences between international and Thai articles
Level of coherence of literature review
Level of informativeness of literature review
Level of reflection in literature review
Level of strength of literature review as research foundation
Level of strength of research justification
Level of strength of discussion
Level of reflection of discussion

34. How to write articles
Pay special attention to the points which are common problems
Always ask someone to read and comment on your article before sending it off
And ask them to be as mean and critical as possible!

35. Anonymising your article
Under the double-blind refereeing system, referees should not be able to identify authors
Change all self-citations to e.g. Author (2015)
Only include Author (2015) in bibliography with no details
Avoid including other information that may allow identification (e.g. use ‘a Thai university’, not the specific university)

36. Annoying details in preparing articles
Formatting references
Following reference systems (e.g. need to include full first names of authors?)
Including DOIs:
Strange requirements
Elsevier journals require research highlights
“Highlights are three to five result-oriented points that provide readers with an at-a- glance overview of the main findings of your article. Think of them as a quick snippet of the results—short and sweet. Each Highlight must be 85 characters or fewer, including spaces, and the Highlights together must clearly convey only the results of the study.”
The opacity of words in context can be measured.
Opaque words are usually high-frequency polysemous words with unusual meanings.
An opaque word list can help teachers choose which words to teach.

37. SEND TO ONE JOURNAL ONLY
Sending the article
SEND TO ONE JOURNAL ONLY

38. Online submission Stages in Elsevier online process
Register as an author
Type title of article
Enter name of authors
Enter abstract
Enter keywords
Select article classification (sub-discipline)
Attach files (Title page, Highlights, Article manuscript, Biodata)
Attach separate table and figure files if needed

39. The cover letter
For those journals which still accept submissions through , you need a cover message:
Attached is an article for your consideration for publication in Text and Talk. I declare that it is original work and has not been submitted for publication elsewhere. It is slightly over the normal word limit, please let me know if this is a problem.

40. Journal communications
Acknowledgement of receipt of article
EITHER rejection by editor OR notification of sending to reviewers with expected time
Types of reviewer recommendation
Acceptance with minor changes (unlikely)
Acceptance with major changes
Revise and resubmit
Rejection (hopefully with reasons)
If rejected, need to decide: give up OR submit elsewhere

41. Reviewers’ comments Typical format of comments
Overview of paper including recommendation
General major content points needing revision
Specific language/format points needing revision

42. Sample reviewer comments
The literature section is surprisingly short. While this in itself is not necessarily a problem, some areas which appear to be relevant (e.g. teacher beliefs, teacher interactive decision making) are not covered. References which may be worth following up in these areas include Richards, J. C. (1998) Beyond Training, CUP; Johnson, K. E. (1992) Instructional actions and decisions of pre-service ESL teachers. TESOL Quarterly 26/3; Woods (1996) could also be cited in far more depth. Adding issues such as these would frame the research to give it stronger theoretical foundations and wider implications.

43. Sample reviewer comments
It is unclear what the research question is. A hypothesis is mentioned twice but is not clearly linked with the data (since no data concerning the difficulty of avoiding problems is collected). A clearly stated research question is needed.

44. Sample reviewer comments
The procedures are unclear at several points. It is especially unclear how the experimental group operated. Were wikis used in the classroom or outside (thus extending learning time)? Was the planning stage conducted face-to-face? What is the difference between the revising and editing stages? It is unclear how collaboration was implemented in both groups or whether the only real difference was the tool used. In addition, the screenshots are not helpful in illustrating the procedures.

45. Sample reviewer comments
In the first paragraph of the Results, the keyword lists are interpreted as showing “significant lexico-grammatical variation”, yet a keyword analysis will always show differences as this is the purpose of the analysis. The existence of keywords is an artifact of the method and not worthy of interpretation. Whether the keywords illustrate different aspects of texts for the two corpora is the important issue, and this is left till the discussion.

46. Sample reviewer comments
The findings and discussion take an overly simplistic view of the relationship between the producers and the audience. Nearly all of the arguments are made on the assumption that there is a one-way influence from producers to the audience in how ELT is perceived. Yet, adverts are designed to meet customer needs – a point made in the second to last paragraph – and thus audience expectations also influence what information producers include in adverts. The article has a general feel that the general public is a tabula rasa waiting for information from adverts to generate beliefs, whereas the reality is that producers and audience engage interactively in the production of beliefs about ELT.

47. Dealing with reviewers’ comments
Check comments against the article
Addend comments to the article
Make sure you understand the reasons for the comments
Edit following the comments
Justify points where revisions are not made
Keep track of all revisions made for each comment
Produce the revised article
Produce a list of revisions made

48. Dealing with proofs Journal sends (or provides link to) article proofs
Includes a short list of queries
Sign and submit copyright transfer if necessary