1. Getting published
Frances Gardner

2. Getting your work published- outline
Getting motivated (is this necessary…?)
Choosing a journal
Submitting to a journal
Getting feedback
Impact – publicising it after- who to?
Sources of learning - classes, youtube, books, co-authors, peers….

3. Who needs motivating?
why?
What are the motivators?

4. Motivators: Your research is worth doing, so let people know about it
Unethical to conduct research and not communicate results
Essential for an academic career; often very important for other careers – applied research, policy, NGOs etc.
Quality of paper, quality of journal matter- for academic esteem; affects if others take notice of it, even outside academia.
Can be fun !?
Learn a lot from doing it & from the reviewing process

5. Barriers?
What barriers?

6. Barriers? Fear- the last one admitted, but can be powerful (of what?)
I cant write / concentrate
They’ll dismiss my work
Perfectionism
I’m too busy (not as busy as most prolific writers!)
I ought to focus on my DPhil (maybe yes..)
(later….. depression/ helplessness at long list of tricky revisions needed !)

7. Getting started What is your paper saying?
Be clear what is key message for paper; repeat it in different sections, make sure its not buried
Ensure logical progression of story behind the message
Practice it to people, tell a friend
Put yourself in the reader’s – and editor’s- shoes- how to catch their interest; make message & contribution to field clear from a 2 min read; Title can make a difference
Put yourself in reviewers’ shoes- all the above- what is it telling me? is it believable?

8. Getting started
Scientific paper is v concise, compared to the years of work you put in- stripped down to its minimum
Get advice- supervisor, peers, internet, courses
Tactics for doing it – block days, (make them accountable?), put in headings and subheadings, approx word lengths for each, set a target of words for the day; edit later so as not to lose flow
Write soon and often! SOOOON- not after you’ve left!

9. Choosing a journal
What type of publication- journal article, other types?
Who are your co-authors and what order? Consult them..
Plan target journal before you write.. usually? Affects length, style, focus, message, spelling, everything
Who is your audience?
What are your career goals? And timing needs…
Aim as high as you & your co-authors feel you can, given the paper, & depending on your goals- & theirs (may align …or not)

10. Choosing a journal Aiming high:
What are the top journals in your field? How to find out?
Spectrum of specialisation from niche to generalist, often correlated with increasing impact factor
Niche may sound like a better audience, but chances are it will be less well read and cited. Trade off here.
Where do the people you cite publish?
Check it’s a good match: what the journal says it wants; read contents pages, read articles

11. Choosing a journal Consider also What is the rejection rate?
How long do you have. How slow are they?
Top journals of course worse on rejection, but can be better on speed

12. Take care: Invitations - predatory journals
Invitations for book chapters, think carefully re trade offs. Books..
Invitations to journal special issues- again, think v carefully about: timing, deadlines, prestige of journal, ease, rejection rate, collegiality, flattery etc all come into it (egs Stockholm; Jacobs, KnowViolence)

13. Journal impact factor
Correlated with how well your article is likely to be cited, but imperfectly
Useful metric for people judging your work when you go for a job- saves them reading your paper or knowing anything about it

14. Impact factor of journal
Clinical psychology 03&type=all
social work is upside down! 3
Child psychology: 4

15. Journal Citation Reports
Find a Journal's Impact Factor by searching Journal Citation Reports. The higher the impact factor the more influential the journal is considered to be.
Eigenfactor.org Find a Journal's Eigenfactor Score and Article Influence Score by searching Eigenfactor.org. These scores measure a journal's importance to the scientific community and the impact of its articles using Journal Citation Reports data.

16. submitting get all the rules right, for style. Eg APA
Check carefully or creates really bad impression. Signals quality of work, science is precise Need to do it over and over…
These things sound obvious but you’d be surprised…

17. Responding to feedback
Expect really long horrid heart-sink reviews… they are completely normal
Read some successful responses – v useful
Some difference of opinion re how OCD to be.

18. Respond directly (and calmly) to reviewer comments
When resubmitting a paper following revisions, include detailed document summarising all the changes suggested by the reviewers, and
how you have changed your manuscript in light of them.
Stick to the facts, don’t rant.
Don’t respond to reviewer feedback as soon as you get it. Read it, think about it for several days, discuss it with others, and then draft a response.

19. It is acceptable to challenge reviewers, with good justification
Its Ok to decline a reviewer’s suggestion to change a component of your article if you have good justification, or can (politely) argue why the reviewer is wrong.
A rational explanation will be accepted by editors, especially if it is clear you have considered all the feedback received and accepted some of it.

20. Associate editors perspective (hum..?)
Justify your paper in the light of the previous research, incl systematic reviews
Use CONSORT even if journal doesn’t ask for it(etc)
Its more of a sellers market than I realised!
Its hard to get reviewers! And- they are not rigourous enough!
Editors and reviewers are very busy… attend to clear messages, spelling etc,
Do some reviewing!
Consider Prevention Science IF 2.9, a CEBI journal!

21. Publish publish!
What help would you like?

22. e li

23. e li

24. e li

25. e li