How to publish research papers in high impact journals

I thought it said the five minutes that I spoke about has passed okay first of all I would like to thank you all for your attendance and I would like to thank the Kiley and his team for inviting me to give this talk about how to publish papers in high-impact journals actually when I was first approached by the College of Graduate Studies to give such a talk and they said we want you to tell students how to publish in high-impact journals my first answer was I wish I knew because actually it's not an easy task

and definitely I'm humbled to stand beside you before you today and speak about this because it is indeed something of high impact and I don't know if I'm the right person to say god I'm grateful for the invitation my name is lamanna's hare I'm from the Department of Chemical Engineering and so if I move ahead now universities are concerned about two things teaching and research mainly beside conveying of well-developed knowledge in classes they also are concerned with developing their own knowledge now the challenge of conveying already developed knowledge and knowledge which has been developed over

years and books and texts have been written about it the level of challenge in that regard is much much lower than the challenge of developing your own knowledge and for that reason because the challenge is much higher it is a bigger achievement it's a higher achievement it's more significant and therefore people look at it differently so if you are given the time and the resources you can't teach whatever you want but give me the time and resources and tell me published in nature I may not be able to do that it's that it's a it's

a challenge on a different level and that's why the reputations of the faculty members and the Institute's where they belonged to depend solely on the publications and the quality of the publications that they produce I'm not don't get me wrong I'm not undermining the significance of teaching and its importance but still the achievements and the reputation of a university depends strongly and the reputation of a faculty member or or a researcher or a committee a condition which is mainly most of you going to end up doing the reputation is mainly depending on the research publications

and the records that they have so beside that it's a record that speaks on your behalf you don't have to go around and tell people I'm good teacher I'm a student likes me this record is a documented record about the quality of the work you do you don't have to defend your work your publication speaks on your behalf for all that reasons the research publications is something that everyone should take really seriously and put their heart and soul into it because at the end of the day their career and the reputation of the place they

work in and their own reputation depends solely on it so besides explaining well-developed science university is also involved in discovering and developing new knowledge after you discover and develop the knowledge you have to dissipate it you have to show it to people and that's where the reputation come the summation of these new findings plays a major role in the advancement of Sciences so beside your own benefit it benefits the humankind altogether because science definitely is meant to improve the life of people so beside the benefit for yourself and your reputation and reputation of your institution

still it is an Transplant of humankind all together has reputation of university depends strongly on the quality and quantity of the research it produces now when it comes to research and the development of science publication in journals is the name of the game everything else comes after that the most significant factor in the research productivity is the publication in journals journals are the place where you publish your work it is reviewed and when you publish something in a reputed journals the facts that you are stating there carries credibility conferences are should not be mixed with

journals conferences are not places to publish you don't publish enjoy in conferences you go for conferences for a different reason altogether people think that conferences are places where I send my low quality work actually should not do well low quality period whether for conferences or for Jonah's low quality work should be out of your scope and conferences is not a place to dump your bad work because definitely the review process is much less severe and significant when it comes to conferences they they are not that the idea with compresses if you if you are writing

something within the scope of the conference then it is acceptable because that's the the scope of that conference even wrong results they will accept that come and say it and you'll hear the feedback from people about your work so the conference's are places where you go and discuss your what immature work you can go and present that in conference ideas that you want to work on you can go and present it in conferences but you cannot publish immature work or premature work you cannot publish an idea that you yet do just thinking about the conference's

as I as I mentioned is a place a forum where you go and discuss and speak to people and you can promote your own work which I'm going to speak about this is a major part of your task as a researcher after you publish is to promote your work and conferences is the ideal place to promote your work so don't mix between the two don't think of conferences as a place where I can publish nobody regards conference publication at least I've heard three people in IT saying different but at least from my background conferences are

not regarded as journals so if anybody from IT they may disagree with me because I had such a discussion with people in IT and it seems that their conferences are more significant than Jonas for one reason or another so journal publications is the main component in research productivity and as I mentioned before it is the guy in the name of the game the conference's are not made probable occasions and conferences are rather forum for discussion and exchanging of ideas I've just put some of the major publishing houses it's always good that you select journals from

those publishing houses because that confirms the continuation of the journal you don't want to publish in a journal that after a year or two you don't find it these publishing houses they first of all they the assess or monitor the quality of the journals they include in their database and they confirm their continuous production I'll come to that okay so I'm speaking now for the young researchers who are starting their career as researchers as academicians and I would like at this stage to just give you a few advices from a person who been in this

business for a long time on how you build your career how you build your portfolio don't there are many things that people do wrongly thinking that it's right there I think to do and if they don't hear the advice they're gonna learn it the bad way and I'm one standing in front of you who has done those mistakes before because nobody told me that this is not the right way to do it at one stage of my life I said anything I've produced I'm gonna publish well anywhere but as long as I produce something I

don't want to stay in my laptop I'm gonna publish it with time and with the experience if it if times go back I will have never done so I would not have never put my name on a paper of that quality so the first thing is quality versus quantity it is always better to publish one paper which is good that to publish ten papers which are not good and you can see the gold is much more valuable than several balls of silver now the the reason for that because if you published one work which is

very good it will shout that's your work but if it is among other ten or twenty papers which are bad then you dilute that good work people will not see it it's it's one of those papers so you have one but you have ten will Chabad so have the one and I'm not saying that you go with low numbers but always target the best don't accept a lower quality always go for the best quality publications the best quality journals and let them be only those so low numbers of very good papers will shout your quality

and if you have only let's say six papers which are all in top journals and another guy has 60 papers among those 60 papers there are six which are high quality people will not notice them they are among those so say this guy is a publishing garbage all around so but there are the six is there but they are not obvious unlike if you had only the six which are the good journals in addition try to avoid publishing here and there I'm gonna publish today in this tomorrow I'm gonna work with something else then you

must have a focus in your research you must be known for something you must have something that distinguishes you from others in research so something unique about your work a clear direction so when I speak about X person oh he's that he works in that but if you're gonna jump from one topic to another today you're gonna work with that guy he's working something tomorrow you're gonna work with another guy who's publishing is something else and when someone looks at your portfolio and telling you people will look thoroughly at your portfolio in your CB or

in your now the nobody looks at the CV anymore your portfolio is in front of everyone they can open it and see it so your portfolio when if people look at it they will analyze those things does he have a focus is there something unique about his work is there something significant of what he's doing or he's jumping here and there and there is no clear direction about what he's doing so if someone comes and say let's work together publish together if it is something that you do not have a contribution it's not within your

scope of work it's better to avoid it even if it's you end up another paper in your CV it doesn't add I just the the message that I want to put here is that so much of papers is not the issue you don't want just to accumulate papers and that's it you need to have a very clear plan for your career I have a target I want from in five years I want to be a well-known scientist in that year to do that I need to build a portfolio for myself so people can know me

in that theater but if I'm gonna go around I'm gonna lose it and nobody will ever notice what I'm doing people with big sigh scientists in certain field people will be waiting for their publications to come and when they see them say when your next paper will come out they will be anticipating it and once it is out everyone start oh he has already published and that's where you should target your career is not just compiled pile up some papers that lets increase the numbers and that's it this is not where you want to end

up in your career now visibility and citation is something really important because when you are doing some good work you need some kind of recognition of that work you need people to know about it and the quality of your work is directly related to the number of citations you are receiving because if you are doing a work that nobody is interested in then you'll get low citations in those work even if they are let's say good usually good work will be psyched a tiny but if you believe that the work is good but nobody is

receiving it positively nobody is mentioning it then it's not significant people consider that work as something insignificant and it will go but if the citations are high then that's a clear indication that that work is worth looking at and it's a good quality work so your work should stand out because for you to get the attention of people to read your paper and cite your paper there are tons of papers and tons of journals so how could you identify your work and make it visible in front of people say I'm going to cite that but

I'm going to read that paper I'm going to see that result and I'm going to say that result not any other if you publish something at the same moment you published it there are hundreds of papers published all around so why people will go and read your paper so you need to do things that will make you stand out from the rest the international collaboration is extremely important because international collaboration and it's it's well documented that international collaboration is cited much higher than regional collaboration so try to reach out to people and with people from

all around the globe because when you have international collaboration people from every region will look at that work and recited and it's as I mentioned its if I'm not mistaken is the ratio is one to eight four I mean statistically the region of publications compared to international collaboration it's eight times more citations you get if you have international collaboration by again don't just put names from people all around the world just to increase the do real collaborative work with people from around the world this is will expand the the the scope of the work on

one hand and understand the attention of the world last thing is let people know about your work shout out about your work let people see it if they don't you tell them that there is this is my work have a look at okay so the the representation will go through the following four steps what do you do before our article preparation during article preparation and during the article publishing and after you published so I'm going to go through those four steps one anytime so before article preparation you need and that's a very important question do

I have enough work to publish and usually people whenever they've done a work they will they will come and ask is this work publishable or even they ask examiner's is this work publish of course this is the most significant question is it good enough to be published or not so before I start preparing a paper and writing it and forging it I should ask myself is this work worth publishing or not so have you got something worth publishing does the work add enough to existing knowledge and is it of interest to others in the field

so there are this balance here that determines whether you're going to go into parting the preparation of writing the paper or not so if it is outdated work things which are already old and nobody's interested in anymore there are incorrect conclusions there are the application of published work it's already been published elsewhere so this definitely I know even if you've done it even if you spent time it's you just keep it as an experience for yourself but you don't publish on the other hand original results or methods significant enhancement to published work and up-to-date reviews

are all in favor of going to the publish and do you balance this and then you say ok I'm going to invest in our time and effort into writing a paper and eventually publishing it so there is always a comparison or compromise between novelty and originality and what's the difference between the two novelty is and you think is is something that has never been done before something which adds to the science and that's the ultimate goal here is to achieve a novel idea to achieve a novel work on the other hand there is something called

originality and that refers to doing something nobody has done before but there is no addition to science I put an example here if a test has been done on X material you've done the same test on Y material there is no published work on Y material before so this is original work there is nowhere pub anyone has done the similar study on why everyone studied X this is not novel this is original work but there is no novelty because you did not add to science unless by doing it on Y you achieve something that nobody

has discovered before but if it is just the same thing that was done I've tested X and I found that increasing the temperature results and increasing the rate with that amount okay I'm making it now on Y and find that the rate is a little bit high a little bit low but it's the same thing but I'm repeating it for another one a material that has not been done before or any a new work that has never been done but there is no addition to science this is called original work some papers some journals they

clearly say that they accept original work and you can publish original work in those journals and they are clearly mentioning it in their statement I'm giving an example scientific report which is a nature journal it clearly says that we accept original work for publication so the question now is that what you want to do or not I think at one stage of your life you should be publishing original work is not always novel novel novel because you will have one or two now if you manage to get one or two novel work that's an achievement

but try to target more the novel work that goes into the high quality journal and try to bid again I don't want to sound that I am idealistic we have to be practical here and if you manage to publish a good work in a good journal even if it is not noble but original work I don't think there is anything bad about it but you don't want to build your career around that work you want to base it to you get something novel at the end and that's where you're going to be proud of you

should always and you if you look at your record of publication say these are my major ones you can these are where my real work is these are the novel work that I have the others are around it but there should always be those papers which you are very proud of and you want to show them to everyone and so I'm caught asking here is this what you want it's it's the answer is yours if you want to publish original work there are venues to get that and it's not bad Jonas they're good journals and

I've given example of nature Zola that does that however it's a decision you want to make about your career and where you want ahead with your career whether you want to go with novel ideas and I was just mentioning this to dr. Muhammad today I've attended the talk a couple of weeks ago and a guy was speaking about significance of science and one of the things that he has shown is the paper published for the DNA double helix when they discovered it so the guy who discovered that double helix he showed the paper it was

in nature which is the top of the top journals so he published the nature it was one page one page only there's no methodology there's no experiment there's all what I'm going to speak about how to write the paper is not there it's one paper one page explaining the idea and it makes sense to the scientific community and it was published in Nature one page and it's in nature and excited millions of the Ibis chili the entire science of genetics was built on it so this is definitely another work and this is where if this

guy did only that that's enough I've heard once they were discussing about the sorry I'm going again a little bit away but they were they were discussing with the composer about a famous Egyptian composer Hamada bluehub and they said that he used to take some bits and pieces from known what they call the musical yeah so what he said what he answered he said that's fine but the overall is a piece of art but then he added a very nice statement he said there's one of his major music was untimely so he said if he

has done only an tombery that's enough for him he has done that everything else is forgiven he has done that and that's what you wanna aim for is that breakthrough that people to say oh that that is the thing and then you don't need someone like me to stand before you and tell you how to publish everyone will be begging you to publish so so if you have to bring the summary of all this if you wanna publish in high-impact journal do something novel and I don't need to go through the presentation okay so I've

decided to go into preparing the paper I have enough work novel or original and it is I'm convinced that I need to go to the next stage and start preparing my article so I need to ask myself what would the editor look for when he receives your submission because the editors may reject the paper immediately will not send that to review and actually that one of the major bottlenecks for your publication is to get it through the editor himself so the the editor will look at a good story a good story means it is it

well written it is there a logical sequence and what you are saying is it a clear and useful existing exciting message that you are given a very important thing that he will look at is it will it be cited he will look at that because he won an ad because as an editor he want to promote his journal so it doesn't want to add papers to his journal that may not be cited and then the impact factor of his journal will drop so when he chooses your work he must be convinced that if he publishes

your work the citation that you're going to receive is high and then he will be in favor of passing it so even if the work is good but he doesn't see that the work is exciting to the public then he would reject it they were saying no it's okay he would give you he may be clear and say that that's the reason but he may give you any other out of scope any other reason until rejected but the actual reason for rejection is because he didn't see any hope of seeing this paper cited highly the

logical sequence of the ideas so if he sees that you are jumping from one topic to another there is no clear vision people read an article or read a book or read review paper as a story they must be excited to flip the page and go to the next page and see what happens you want them to beg for the next step to happen to say ok just say it and then you show it to them so he is already his mind is tuned that you're going to say this next and then you say it

you throw it at it but if you're gonna jump from here and there in few seconds he will leave the paper I don't know what this guy is talking about but have this logical sequence so it's a skill but this skill is something that you could acquire any skill in the world is something that you can get by practice the more you read the more you practice the better your writing skills are and righted as I mentioned as a story let the ideas flow smoothly don't interrupt the ideas while you are going with the sequence

of the topic all these kinds of things the editors will look at before they even send it to reviewing they will look at the novelty and the significance definitely if there's no novelty they said there is no novelty in this work and well-planned and well-executed study so it's sound experimental work you are doing it in a logical sequence well plant you are doing this for that reason so you don't do experiment for the sake of doing experiments you do experiments for a reason I'm doing that experiment so the reader should know that you are doing

that experiment because you want to achieve that but just doing experiment because you've done it I've attempted a lot of defenses for PhD and masters and when I asked him why did you do that test one of the answers they say nobody has done it before yeah but why did you do it I mean nobody has done it because maybe it's not important and that's why nobody's doing it but there should be a reason for you to do it other than nobody has done it or it's a part of the analysis why why do I

need to analyze that or its characterization okay I got that characterization what is the significance of this why do I need to characterize but nobody will spend time in the lab and using equipment just for the sake of using it and adding figures there should be a reason and the reader should read it and understand that why are you doing those so those will all be looked at before they even the paper goes for reviewing and the paper could be rejected because of that so you should choose what do you want to publish it the

the normal thing is to publish a full research paper which is complete comprehensive research complete from the beginning with with what is the objective what you want to do every angle of the research is covered there is nothing missing because it may be returned back or rejected because you did missed a part so it should be complete with complete conclusion and you've completed the world that's a full research work however sometimes you have made something very interesting and you don't want someone else to catch you for it because research is a race everyone is what

you are thinking of there are many people thinking similarly so you found something you want to you want to prove that this is your own you want to take the right for that idea so you can send it in a short letter for example I don't know why but short letters for example in ranking are not when you are writing a university the short notes are not considered among the publication's in the credit of the of the University which I don't see why I mean actually those short notes are usually these very interesting ideas but

what they lack is a thorough study maybe just idea and that's it and they just put it out and they get published again as I mentioned they are generally looked at not as significant as a journal paper but still it's if you have something exciting that you want to say you can send it as a long review show that it's a it's a short version of a paper so you just write it does not complete the work you've just done some tests to prove an idea you can put it in a short note and send

it and some donors will accept such I think as a short note so you choose it you choose that I'm submitting as a short note sometimes you think that it's a complete paper you send it to the journal and the editor has said that say this work is not complete it should be a short note a short note usually is just an exciting idea that you have somehow proven a concept and you want to send it not a complete study like a research paper where you have a complete and thorough study it's a like a

letter to the editor yes so sometimes they call it short communication sometimes they call it letter to editor it depends on the journal and what they call it no it could contain results I mean if but not thorough study I mean you did not reach a full conclusion I mean you just tested something you found something interested you showed it could be preliminary work I mean something that you find that I don't wait until I complete all the studies study all the parameters get the whole idea you may not even understand what's happening at it

can go a short letter but when it comes to research paper you must thoroughly understand that to investigate what is the reason behind it so you have the complete picture is clear then you publish it as a research article letters or short communications could be just an idea that you tested it makes sense and you say now we open it for real research but at least you reserve the right for the idea because it's a race as I mentioned so if you have the time you who should have spent more time and publish it as

a full research paper but people sometimes they don't want to wait they want to immediately get it and this is usually it's a faster it gets republished faster usually for short communications as I mentioned there is no clear conclusion when if you publish for the paper to be novel you must add to size so there is no addition yet to sign it's just an idea but what's happening why is there where is the addition to science alders are missing so definitely what happens is that you are giving other people the chance to publish the word

yeah so but still you you are fine that you the idea was yours if you are satisfied with that then it's fine so that's that's why not many people will go into this but sometimes there is something that you want immediately now I got it let's get it out and then we'll think about the rest but it's a yes but it's a it's something that you should be careful about because you will lose the you could yourself catch it but you are opening the door wide for other people so even anybody missed it before now

they don't I don't know it was a paper it was a paper it's complete paper the last one is a review paper Arkansas and the review paper is usually there is no new things it's not your work it's basically a compilation of the work of people in that particular field however the noble part of it or the new part of it is that nobody has done this review before that's the only thing yeah you have to address a topic completely from all angles but I can't find another review that has been done in the same

thing so that's where the new thing about the but there is nothing a new work that you have done and that's called review but it has to be thorough it has different things I mean I won't go to review paper and what you should include the newspaper I will concentrate here more on actual research papers okay who should be with you as a co-author now the most important thing here is that the ethics should be governed here because people are playing all sorts of games to get their citation numbers higher and their number of papers

higher I put your name on my next publication you put my name in your next publication these at the end it will be shown I mean it will appear it you may fake it here and there but eventually it will appear that this is the game that you are playing so if you've done it once or twice I'm not saying do it at all but if you've done it one or twice you may escape with it but if it is a normal trend for you to keep on publishing with people and people publishing with you

then definitely it will show in your portfolio another thing that you should pay attention to is the large number of authors diminishes the significance of your contribution that paper so if you have this paper has 20 in the other one has 50 in this paper has 30 then where is your contribution so all those papers that you have put your effort in are lost because your contribution is not clear you are one of those them so you should be very careful on who you choose to be with you as a co-author in the in the

paper now on one hand you don't want to deprive people from their credit but to choose who should be the authors and what's the sequence of the authors in the journal something should be very carefully agreed upon among all researchers the most important thing is that they should have enough contribution in the paper and some journals now they ask for the contribution of each donor to be specified and the general rule is that their contribution should be in two aspects not only one so if they are just contributing and reviewing the paper that's not enough

if they are not just contributing in developing methodology that's not enough if they are just contributing and discussing the ideas does not enough they must have at least two of those in order to qualify and that's clearly mentioned in many journals now where they say put the contribution there are keywords for what are the contribution of each one and they clearly say that co-author should at least have to which is I have interpreted the data and I've developed the methodology I done the review and I have written the original paper some two things but at

the end of the day these all are not there's no clear cut at the end of the day you as a main researcher or you as a part of the team you need to decide who is qualified to be in the in the document because at the end of the day this document is a credit and people will share that credit and you cannot add someone who doesn't deserve to be on this paper and you cannot not include someone who deserves to be now there are some people who have done some contribution for example you

went to a lab and you used an equipment of someone in a lab you he can be in the acknowledgement or she can be in the acknowledgment I acknowledge that person who allowed that to use the equipment in his lab but we are co-author because you he allowed you or she allowed you to use an equipment that's definitely not accepted where is the contribution to the world you don't do the idea you did not contribute to the discussion you did not do anything in the methodology you I could have sent that somewhere and paid money

and get the results is that justify adding those people as co-authors so this is actually is a causing a lot of debate and and the ethics of publishing should be clearly monitored when it comes to the choice of the authors and I repeat again it all reflects on your portfolio don't be very generous and say oh he's my friend I'll put him on my paper with me who knows maybe in the future he will put me or even I don't want them to put me I just hope my friends and put their names all those

will reflect that on your portfolio so try to be very careful the first corresponding author who is the first and whose corresponding author I've heard faculty members saying oh I like to help my students and I put them first author you don't help anyone it's his right to be the first author because he has done the work if he did not do the work he doesn't deserve to be the first author there's no favors here you you don't have the right because you are the supervisor to put yourself and because you are kind enough you

allowed him to be the first no it's his right he earned it fair and square there is no favours here he has done the work he has spent the hours in the lab he has written the paper he should be the first author and that's it you as a adviser and manager of the program and helping whatever you should be the corresponding author the corresponding author is the owner of the idea is the manager of the work that the corresponding author but I repeat again if you're gonna be the first author and that's what I

always tell my students I will definitely going to be the first author but provided that you have done enough work to justify being a first author it's not favors I'm not helping you or anything it's your work you don't have to thank me for putting you the first author this is your your earned right there is no favors here but you earn it by the work that you've done not by my kindness and my sweetheart I will put your first author there's not this is these are rights and these are credits nobody should play with

them as they wish you take it because you you deserve it you don't take it because you don't deserve it period so I'm saying usually is the student who's the first author usually unless if the student did not do I mean if I have a student who doesn't know what he's doing I just said okay just do those those though go to the lab send me the results and I'll do everything definitely one should not be a first or whether he's you know not student but if he's just going and doing even if he's spending

hours in the lab but it he is but if he has done text the experiment that's actually part of the supervision you should not as a supervisor I mean again I'm speaking students here but the supervisor should not be the person who just poured the ideas into the student and students are passively waiting for the instructions to be done the it should be when some when a student come and tell me I got this results why say you tell me why I'm not gonna say why you should be able to come up with the answer

and what I'm gonna do is that I'm joking I'm gonna challenge your explanation so you're gonna explain it I'm gonna disagree and I want you to convince me that your explanation is correct so that's part of the supervision but if he's gonna bring the data and that there oh yeah this is because of that go and write it and come back then definitely it doesn't deserve but this is the entire process is not correct but if it's done correctly then the student should be the first author but if your supervisor doesn't agree I did not

say anything you can't hear but that's what I think is right I mean he may or she may have a different I by everything I'm saying here by the way it just to clarify is opinions I mean I'm not saying these are facts because you may hear someone else may have a different opinion but what I'm trying to say is what I believe in and what I stand by beside that people may have another opinion say no I'm the first author I'm the one who came up with the idea so they made but I don't

do it and I think that's what is correct but I repeat again there is no right and wrong here it's opinions of people and how they perceive the thing but at the end of the day the order of the who's who's the co-authors and the order is a major part that you should think about twice before putting the names the first author is the main researcher and looked at as the person who has done majority of the work the corresponding author is the manager of the project and the owner of the idea usually that's how

it look that so if it's if you are a corresponding author that means you have come up with the idea you have managed the research until it reaches the final stage but the actual person who has done the work is the first author so if you have done it if then you deserve to be the first author it doesn't have to be student the co-authors are as I mentioned contributors not just Free Riders they should be contributors they should have real work done in this paper okay so the main blocks of the paper structure is

divided into three sections the title of the abstract and the key word and those to advertise for your work people before they go and read the paper that's what will catch their attention the title the keywords and the abstract so it must must be catchy and attractive so don't try to have titles which are I'll speak about those in details are just going to go through them and then I'll give you some hints about each one of them introduction methods and results and discussions that's the full story that you want to tell and it must

be clear and of logic logical sequence the logical sequence is the key here and that's where most of the people luck they have the ideas but they are jumping from one topic to another it should be smooth from one topic to another the conclusion acknowledgement references and supporting material the context and they makes readers feel the benefit of reading the articles so after I read it that's the conclusion out of all this I what did I get out of reading this article that's what you should get from the last part you build your paper from

downward upward the first thing is you get your figures and tables because that is the deciding factor whether you want to go into writing the paper or not if you remember when we started saying should I go to write it or not it comes from the results that you have and the analysis of the results you have so the first thing is you prepare your figures and tables and then only you go into investing into the paper you write the methods and the results and the discussion first the method first and then the results and

the discussions that you have acquired or obtained you move after that into the conclusion and the introduction and the last stage is you write your abstract and key words once you've done so although the abstract appear as the first element or first chapter or first section in the paper is the last to be written once everything is done and you have completed it then only you write the abstract and you should be very careful about writing the abstract because as I mentioned that's the front page of your paper that what people will see and whether

this that will be the sighting factor whether your paper will be read and cited or not so let's start with the items and I'll just speak wotty first of all the title try to have a catchy title try to use a title which is not very descriptive and clear I don't want to have to see a title that I read that I understand the paper from it did the study of the effect of that and that on this and this I mean I can I don't want to understand the paper from the title I need

that title that catches my attention and forced me to read it if I can understand the paper from the title no need to read the paper I already understood what this work is all about but if you put the title that will make people say oh let's see what's happening there so for example let me give you an example but biodiesel will it work or not so someone get that so people say let's see what's happening there let's look into it but the test of the divided easel for use in engines ok I know that

this is already what you are doing so try to be short again long titles may stop the people completing it interesting and catchy titles that's the key word you must have the people be attracted to the article that you are writing by the title the keywords the keywords goes to a system of search so use buzzwords that can be easily noticed so if anybody's searching your paper will appear so those keywords they go into the search engines and whenever you write a keyword your paper should appear so don't use very very specific words that nobody

will be writing them or searching for them choose the words carefully and it used for indexing and abstracting services should be specific and try to use both words which would increase the chances of finding your paper so when someone is searching they will look into the keywords in order to get your paper so let your paper appear when anybody is writing about searching about a topic relevant to yours then you write the abstract the abstract is an advertisement for your work people will decide whether they this work worth reading or not is from the abstract

the abstract should give a clear I'd actually it will decide whether they weren't excited or not from the abstract abstract should get a clear picture of the entire work and it should attract readers again it you should make it clear and easy to read what is in you and the paper and what is important what why this work is important and what is the new in this work this these things both should be absolutely clear in the abstract so I've just put some examples of what you should include you're right one sentence to explain the

problem what is the problem that you are addressing one to two-sentence of the objectives and the significance why this problem is significant and important that was the objective of the work one to two sentences about the methodology that you're going to follow to in order to achieve the objectives one two sentence of the main findings that you got and finally one or two sentences on the conclusions that comes out from that so this is a general description but please when we come to writing an abstract pay full attention to this it has to because sighs

although are written so many sentences but it should not be long but it should be of strong impact into the reader and the person who reads the abstract should understand the paper completely what this has been done how it has been done what is the final conclusion out of it the introduction section is to engage the reader into the topic excite the reader about what you are doing this work is is of interest for them to read explain the problem why the work is important state the aim of the study mention existing solutions and their

limitations that's a very important part that you should put in your introduction what people has done have done and why they failed what is the limitation of their work and then that opens the room for what you want to do so when you explain the problem this important problem is important because it's important people are doing this and this and this however people are facing this on this problem and there where I appear so the reader will directly say oh yeah this makes sense this guy is is going into filling the gaps which are found

in the literature so they let should explain where the science has stopped because nobody needs you to reinvent the wheel we have reached here what did you build on it and why I mean the the conventional method used did this and this and this some people try to solve it by doing that but they end up with another problem so I'm proposing this which will solve the problem basically that and that should be in the introduction so experi clearly explained the royalty and the significant of all you should say what clearly shouted in front of

the people what I'm doing is novel because of that so that's people can see what is the because if you've done something novel you should say that it's novel it should show to people that it's novel when it comes to method the method has to be as detailed as possible because people need to read the methodology and be able to repeat it and get the same results if anything vague in the methodology they will say that this is not completeness or the methodology must be 100% clear so that people can repeat it and exactly get

their results and people do that and they were sent back to you or today I've done your experiment I got similar results or I done your experiment I could not understand what you are doing or how you got that or worse I've done your experiment I get different results so so it should be if you clearly so if we got evey if he or she is getting different or is that there is a reason which means your explanation is not cleared so he done it differently but if he done it exactly the same he should

get the same results anyway E is the same like science everywhere it's not the opinions here this is science and facts and physics so can I ask repeat the question sorry I did not cut it I'm going to ask that if you have a good idea that you want to publish and also you want to be and now you should explain all the process in the people that you are trying to publish how can somebody if you publish the work it's called open literature competent whether you explained it or not if the idea is published

you cannot talk what you can do in this case is that you can find your patent if you have an idea you fight the pattern you don't need to add to science you just do something that nobody has done so I find if I have this mobile and it's found there is apartment where they put three legs understand I say oh if I put forth it will be more stable that that's a puppet but there's no sense I mean try to publish a paper by adding another likelier nobody would publish it for you so there's

no addition the patent doesn't require addition to science is just requires something that works which nobody has done it before without really going to size so you can preserve the right for the pattern by filing your pattern but when it comes to pay and usually that the better sequence is to get that patent and then you can investigate you to science understanding what's happening adding to the knowledge and then you can publish it but us but if you published it is deemed your patents deem rejected because definitely you've covered more and understood more in the

paper than in the patent so the patent is done but just find your idea without explaining by a meal you have just done this business without really knowing what's happening behind it what is the explanation what's the addition of science it's done these results prove that it's done and that's enough then you can't go in to publish it but usually you I mean if you're lucky you'll be able to do both but you most of the time either this or that night and when it comes to scientific and academia buddy's journal publication is regarded much

much higher than patents good for the reason I'm good there is no real addition to science anybody at home can test something and patent it's not it's not a big deal when it comes so the only thing they check when they accept a patent or rejected it has it been done before or not that's it decide that they don't care about what is the addition to size whether the novel cloy but when it comes to journal papers no it goes through thorough reviewing for the content for the explanation for the for the science that you

are developing and which is not there in the pattern so general the perception of the scientific community is higher to a drone of papers compared to patent if you are in business if you are in a company if you say I'm publishing paper they say oh that doesn't matter I want the patent because I'm going to get money out of it but if you are in the business of developing knowledge which is the in research centers and in universities then the papers are regarded much higher if you are in the business of making money then

the patent is more significant who cares if you publish them papers or 20 papers how much money I'm going to get out of it and in this case they would prefer to go to the product so you have to decide but one way of going around that is what I mentioned but it still is it's a tricky thing because if you have the patent out it may affect the novelty of the idea itself and if you don't have the novelty you cannot publish it but you have to be very careful on how you are a

parent it most of the time people decided that they stood up so if the procedure has been explained in the previous literature there is no use of repeating at the game if it's a standard method that you are following say I measured that using this method and cite the reference no need to read write it again write the methods that you are using but the standard method found the literature try to avoid it do not forget to present control samples and reference test that's something that most of the students forget to do whenever you are

testing something it should be with reference to a blank it should be with reference to a reference it cannot be you cannot just present something without referring to a blank or a reference so that's something that you should always explain in your methodology clearly to prove the the idea that you are doing you should or if I'm putting X material to do something okay in absence of X what happens because this could not be because of X so I'm showing that bit without X nothing happens with the X stuff so always try to have those

references for any test that you do you should always have a reference or a black plagiarism plagiarism is a major problem when it comes to writing because you are not suppose to claim what other peoples have done without referring to them and and what I say about plagiarism is that it is easily detected but it can be easily avoided easily detected because all the donors will check it for plagiarism there are software's now that they put your paper once they receive it they put it into the program and they will check whether that how much

the similarity between your work and the open literature and if they find large number of or not percentage of similarity they were rejected but at the same time you can avoid it by giving the rights for the people who have published that society you know of taking information from literature but saying where did you get it from because if you don't cite the fact from where people will assume that you are claiming it yours unless you say I got it from there if you don't say that people will understand that you are claiming that you

found it so increasing the pressure results in increasing the extraction if I don't say who did it that means I'm saying it and if someone else showed that I've said it then you are you are treating and you're claiming thing which is not yours even if it's unintentional there's no room for that so just cite people carefully for every part that you're taking results on discussion this is the most important part of the paper and decision to accept or reject the reviewers will mainly depend on their decision on this forget about the editors and the

interests of the the readers when it comes to the decision from the authors it will be depending on this whether to accept it or to reject it is based on the results of discussions you have so include only main findings use supplementary data for less significant data don't put everything just put the most significant ones and the general rule of thumb is that if you are discussing the results show it if you are not discussing it dojo so if there are some raw data that you use to generate other data you don't show the raw

data because you are not discussing unless you wanna show something and discuss something in the raw data equipment that you use you don't show it unless you're gonna discuss something something there something you want any results if you are not discussing don't put it in the results and discussion put it in somewhere else put it supplementary data appendices whatever and in addition this will give significance they are finding avoid advances the redundancy keep results of same time within subheadings now sometimes people present the results then they present it again then they presented in a different

way don't keep on repeating the same result and the way to avoid this is to have some sections for every topic so the test of temperature or the effect of temperature the effect of pressure they factor put them in subheadings that will make you the will I'd say prevent duplicating the data when you put it in that way because you're already disgusted there so it will not be appearing again figures can't show trends better than tables when you have a figure I can see whether it's going up or going down or going up and down

or how it is but it results in tables they don't show that graphical effect so I it made sure why I need to change them one by one to see that they are increasing than decreasing but graphical presentation have a more visual effect than tables but don't repeat them I mean if you present them in tables don't present them if you don't present them with tables you don't repeat the wreckage so I've seen papers a lot when they say the results are shown in this table and in this beginning why why are shuttling them twice

one of them is enough and when you have an option between tables or figures always try to go with figures provide statistical analysis now nobody will buy results that is not repeatedly tested for reproducibility and showing where are the fluctuation of those results which chosen an error bar nobody will accept a point they say oh and this is the result yeah but what if I repeat it when I get the same results or not so you should always have repeated results and you should always show the statistical fluctuation of your ISM so if the error

bar is not then your results carries large level of uncertainty and may not be regarded as good as the ones with smaller bar the captions of the legend and legend should be self explainer explainatory and enable the figure to stand alone don't write a caption of a figure which is very brief and not clear right everything clearly so that the figure if someone just looks at the figure will understand the right what is shown in the figure and what are the conditions to get those all in the figure clearly explained in the figure if you

have two or more figures of same axis then use the same scale so if I'm testing at this temperature and then I'm testing at this temperature then they're testing at this temperature use the same scale for all of them so that people can compare between them but if here I'm having a scale of one here I'm having a scale of 10 then I can't compare between the two so if you have the same access for same x axis have the same y axis for all of them even if they are different figures the figure should

be uncrowded don't put so many lines and people cannot see try to be clear and if you need more figures you can have any more if you have two or more figures of the same register choose the right chart type so sometimes you prefer to do it in bar chart sometimes you have lines choose it the way that it will make better impact now when you present the result you don't suddenly show it without guiding the reader to what you want to preserve so first you give a reduction to what you want to present so

I'm gonna show that figure or this thing has been tested then you show the figure so this thing have been tested wherever and the results are shown in Figure one or figure two Arabic then you show the figure after you show the figure on the table you first think you explained the trend just say what we see it can be seen that increasingly the pressure results in increasing it then it dropped the Tresa Maxima bleah just tell us what you see so you explained the trend to people and then after you explain the trend you

explain why is this trend happening so what is the reason behind it and you compare your results to previous literature so if you have that tested this and you get that much while the others who does something else get less or get more so you compare between what you get at what others have obtained so that you can confirm your idea so as I mentioned you introduced the figure or the table don't suddenly show it you introduce the reader to what you want to show you put it you explain the trend and then you justify

what is this explanation and compared to that you must confirm the reproducibility or the data I just mentioned about the error bars discuss the significance and implications of the results now avoid statements that go beyond what the results can show so don't speculate reviewers hate speculated results if the result doesn't show that you don't go and say if there is a proven said but you say yeah this is it might be because of this and that it might be proven the first thing the reviewers say okay go and group for me whether it might be

if we say this might be because of byproducts measure the my product and show me that it's because of the I products or something else so although speculative things if the result doesn't show it avoid saying it because if you say it actually their reviewers may ask you to to say it even without it but at least you don't go and open the door so just show what the results are showing don't go beyond that nonspecific expression and speculations are to be avoided when you come to results on discussion when it comes to conclusion stop

strongly you have a strong impact on the conclusion the objectives were achieved the findings were whatever something which is a strong original statement what does your work add to existing knowledge I mean don't I've seen many conclusions where people start to put the results there and their discussions there don't put that just sure what is the final conclusion out of this the objectives were achieved the findings were significant the the process were optimized whatever the objective you just speak about and what is the significance of this this will have we have a large impact on

the industry whatever where is the significance of what we're doing do not include results or copy from the abstract discuss the significance and suggest future work because you want to open the door for more work to be done so you can you can pave the way for other people's to continue what you are doing and references do not include too many references the those I've seen people who measure a good quality paper by number of drawer of references or I've written a paper with 150 reference so what I mean is that the measure of the

quality of the I've written a people with 200 references and a further I mean I'm telling you stories that happened to me I've heard that but I can't instead what's the objective of having 200 references put the references that refers to what you're working on I don't wanna see and that's not a measure of quality if you need the 200 put them but don't put the 200 so that the quality will better it doesn't mean that the quality is better actually doesn't mean what better or worse it means nothing but try to keep the references

that you have this is a reported one I put it in red Xs avoid excessive self citations don't keep on cycling yourself because any or record again which I'm going to speak about now in your record it shows how self-citations you have so if your sub citations is very high that means you are the only one who's citing yourself you are only one who reads your papers try to avoid it as much as sometimes you are writing methodology which you've right done before show you refer to it fine sometimes it it's inevitable but don't keep

on doing it because it increases my citation it doesn't increase your site it's a click and scope is it's a click exclude sub citations nobody you look at so you will see a time but it's a click and you don't see it so if my citations in is ten thousand I click it with n 1000 that's about depression but if it was one one thousand one hundred and became one thousand dot five so the nine thousand that you have are useless actually it it reflects bad on your portfolio which you are from the beginning result

you gotta build your portfolio as early as possible and this early stage of your life you should plan how I'm gonna build my portfolio follow the joiners guidelines because sometimes they reject your paper if the inferences are not written in the format of the tournament that's from the editor himself try to use references manager such as endnote that helps a lot because if you gotta move things around the these kinds of programs helps a lot in correcting the sequence of the references and the format okay you have written the paper you got to publish the

paper i need to move a little bit faster because okay where should I publish the I want to look at the quality of the journals these are the major indices that people look at when they choose a journal I'll just go a little bit fast because I'm running out of time so I can finish anyway the most important one is the impact factor of the journal again it doesn't I don't I'm not saying that it's the most comprehensive or the best but it's the most commonly used the impact factor is the number of citations received

in a year of an article published during the preceding two years divided by the total number of article published during the preceding two years so they will look at the journal how many papers cited in that year divided by the total number that's called the impact factor there are many others the side score is a company of many factors there so the it's already record that you can't have the cover you can just search it you find all those handy sees and what are their significance so however what I want to say is that these

are important and people look at when they determine the quality of the journal but at the end of the day the quality of the journal is the reputation of the jungle because the impact factor or the site score oh they do not really reflect the quality of the journal so these are how many people cited works in that journal it is an indication but it's not the only indication I from my opinion the reputation of the journal the reputations of the editors in the journal the reputations of the author's publishing in the journal that's found

much more significance compared and people in your field believe me they know the good Jonas do you don't have to tell them the impact factor they know what are the good ones but again I'm not saying that the impact factor is doc look at it but it is not the only one the you have to choose the topic of the donor carefully so you wanna publish where people because people usually do not read all donors they read specific dermis so if your publishing is something you have to tackle that community who reads that so you'll

be able to get cited they're the most appropriate leadership again which has come from the topic of the journal the length of the time of submission I'll show you that now the journal quality and reputation that's the most important one here and avoid paying for publications now sometimes you will end up paying for publication for open access or whatever but paying for publication always raises our concern about the conflict of interest I mean you are paying people to publish your work you can argue that it is not it is whatever but why would you put

yourself in that position where you have to explain oh no no those people they get paid but they are for why would you do that standards you should actually have an author you should be paid because this is a work that we are giving to Jonas to publish but nobody is asking to be paid but definitely you know go and pay now I repeat again that there are some good journals that require payment and you can do that but as much as possible try to avoid it because it would always you what I'm trying to

do to say is that I don't want you to stand and explain yourself to people I want your record to speak on your behalf you don't want to go around and say oh no no but they are and they they are decide that you want a strong record then your journal should be not patrons because the page or not everyone say you paid for them definitely they will publish for you they need the money even if they are not but try to avoid it as much as possible now for for choosing a donor Elsevier provides

this service which is called journal finder so it is joiner finder that Elsevier calm and it looks something like this so what you do here is that you put the title you put the abstract you put the keywords and the research field actually you don't have to put all of them and you find the job you click on does it something like this appears and then you can arrange those journals that appear in front of you according to a drop list the best match jordan name site score impact factor so they will arrange them for

you according to what are you targeting in that john and what you can see here is some interesting things let's see here the site score the impact factor the acceptance rate the time for first decision and time for publications deeds are something that you should look at because if the time for publications and time for first revision is lengthy you may avoid going to that these donors take one year to get the first division why would i go for them unless if you that's the one you want but anyway you compromise between those and make

a decision but the the journal finder service by Elsevier helps for me for example before I publish I I do that and it helps a lot because it gives me a summary of all the possible journals that and I make a decision am I in rush to publish or I want the high-impact journal and I don't care about the time there's acceptance rate where is it acceptance rate it shows is this a very strict Joan of that human the reviewers that they choose are very difficult to satisfy or they go with reviewers which are lenient

and I may get my paper through so this has 23 percent this has 16 this has 12 so I better avoid this I your decision at the end but it's a service that people that yeah because you put here ah no no I know what you're saying no no it doesn't you have to check it but no it they did chooses the journal space because what they are is trying to match the topic of the journal and the topic of the paper so at the end if you choose the journal what the file is trying

to say is that the journals are classified according to scope as according to fields so you may end up publishing in a journal which is not undr if let's say you're from chemically Deanery it turns out that it's not under Chemical Engineering so for you as a researcher doesn't matter it's your paper but for the Department of Chemical Engineering if they want to be ranked then they will look at how many papers have been published in chemical j-john so you are not helping your department in this case you'll be having the institution because it's published

under the name of the institution but your department will not benefit unless you publish in a journal which is in the field of your department so if you want to make that as a decision is not given indeed because that's not the concern of them but for you as an individual working in institution that you want to help your department then you must take that as another factor in your selection I want to choose the journal in the field of chemical engineering I don't want to publish a journal in medicine even if I'm publishing something

in chemical change but let's say I I developed medicine that can cure cancer and I go and send it in cancer research it's a good journal everything is fine but it doesn't add it's your record you got it and it's yours but it the department is not benefiting from so but here no it just compared between the content of the paper and where the donors that you can publish it once you choose the journal you go to the journal and you go to guide to authors which is the click over here and that gives you

exactly step by step how to write your paper according to the specification of the journal spend time reading the description and what is required and how to prepare the paper according to the guidelines because rejections from the editors usually depends on this they were look at Y I just want you to imagine an editor in her severe or in any one of those big publishing houses will face there are thousands of papers that dropped in front of him and he needs to screen before he sends he contacted all those so there are some cut-offs that

get it out so I don't have the time to look at it one of them is format out and these are tests before even in the peers at the at the editor and from the manager of the German it's out and then he was start to get them then he would start cutting before if you reach the reviewers you already passed so many steps so it's not like before when I first published I used to send five hard copies of my paper with a CD with everything in in a letter understand that by post are

the weight for the head so the editor how many will he receive it so he would look at it carefully and then decide whether you want to send it to review or not but now it's by email or by online submission so there anybody can submit anything and he needs as an editor to cut off all those so please try to pay attention to the guidelines and I'll give you some hints about what the editor will cut off when you prepare a paper and that's I've noticed a lot it's your work not the supervisors work

anybody's work you should be more concerned about the quality of your paper more than anyone else but what I see is that students give me papers which are very poorly written I mean do you accept this do you accept your name to be on this we leave aside and put this character worthy this student keeps on going back and he's returning it back to her and at the end he say I'm sick of reading this just turn it on turn it in and that's what we don't want you should be more concerned about your work

than anyone else not the supervisor not say or hopefully supervise man except hopefully the reviewer will accept hopefully the editor will pass it you don't keep on hopefully hopefully you should be before anyone else satisfied with your work and the quality of your work so to do that revise the paper carefully before submitting submitting it to your supervisor print it out because when you see it on screen you may see things which are not very clear printed on a paper and read it carefully before submitting it no one should be more concerned about the quality

of their work more than yourself use correct English if your English is poor seek help there's nothing wrong with that most of us are not English native speakers so you don't we don't expect it to her to be Shakespeare if you can't write seek the help of someone who can help you with writing English to correct the grammar ask someone outside the field to read that can't someone from outside understand what you say because if you if you give it someone from within the field he already has the knowledge so it may already be there

not because he read your paper but your paper should be understood by a person from outside it does not do under sudden technicality but the logic of your work so spend some time in this at the end it's a paper in your record and we from the beginning I said it's not a small thing so don't rush into it don't do half cook think make it carefully get it done carefully be proud of it and then it will be showing in your record correctly for English yes so the English you can send it to the

library and they can edit the English for you for free absolutely okay useful notes editors of goods owners receive numerous submissions and when have the time to review them all carefully should the editor find anything he or she does not like the paper will be immediately rejected and I've just explained that these are some things that their viewers the editors sorry will look at and will reject the paper because of them you will be asked to suggest reviewers never put a reviewer that you published with before never put a reviewer from from your University and

even from your region if possible region is lucky but less significant but your university person who you published with they have a search engine before it reaches the editor and obtain clearly if you put it it will be rejected immediately so regardless of not being ethical and putting your friend even if you want to be unethical they would catch it but at the end of the day I am saying you always should be proud of your work and say it should stop and against any of you but even if you want to think of it

avoid it it will be rejected immediately because of that select some from the authors of good papers you cited if you cited the paper the the editor will look at who started all of those papers you did not put one of them as a reviewer that would also make a question why are you avoiding all those who are supposedly the main people in your field so him he will have the wrong and then he'll say impression about you not because he doesn't like you but because he went on reject he has tons of things so

it doesn't want to see any flow so he's not accusing your big cheater but if it seems that there is something wrong it's out I don't want to spend time so you put fifteen or twenty research articles supposedly you are reciting them we were working in a few why none of them is in your references so they would reject it because of that said he's trying to avoid the ones who really know about the work and putting for me people who may not know very much in in a chaste escape so try to cite from

your own references try to avoid self citations as much as possible the editor will look at that and he refined so much of self citations in your paper he rejected because of that have at least 70% of your references to be within the last three years if you have so many old references the editor may reject that because he doesn't have the time to read that actually what I understood is that the system does it for him if there are all old old old nothing in you even if if it's fine I mean if someone

reads the paper in fact that it's make sense that it's all old but he would not spend the time reading it so if they're all old you said that this is outdated work there is nothing in you and he will reject it so try to avoid so all those try to pay attention to when you write it to pass the editor you know what we are trying to do now is to convince the editor to send it for review a sight more from the journal you applied to this is a tricky thing I put here

because the editors like that so we try to make him happy the objective here is not just to make him happy but you're supposedly submitting to a journal in your in that field so definitely would find papers speaking about something a little bit from his owner and he would like it because it will increase the impact of his job so it is somehow playing with his mind and say I want this it will help me I'm not saying that the editors will do that but it would have an effect because he would benefit so he

may he may met a group ok I'd follow the guidelines carefully as I mentioned the process progress of publishing goes to this you do our submission it's gets rejected if it doesn't get rejected it goes to referee it goes to reviewers it gets rejected if it doesn't get rejected it sends you some things to revise that correct and then they reject it if they don't it goes to more revision and then it is rejected but either they go to more eject more either from here from the revision directly they accept that or are the more

revisions they direct accepted and then it goes for communication so you can see that you are going through different hurdles and possibilities of rejection but at the end of the day your achievement is is up there the peer reviewer should not be looked at as this I mean people are not cutting and chopping your paper under the you wanna run between them and escape all those no you should start clearly in front of all the reviewers and be able to defend the case the reviewers what they reverse look at are those things importance novelty clarity

and good presentation and they have a graph like this technical quality and novelty if you are in this part it's rejected if you are at this part it's accepted somewhere here it is in between I'm just like to go fast because I'm looking at the time I'm out of time your paper after many revisions would look something like this but you don't want it to be that that's not what I want to say you don't want to satisfy anything that if you're safe put this put that why don't you add this why don't you add

that and you'll end up with something like this and you don't want something like this you want your work to stand the way that you see so always view this as a chance to improve the paper when you receive the reviews all those critiques you don't start to be oh how dare he say this this is he doesn't know what he's talking about look at it positively and approach it with with a positive attitude don't start to be defensive before you receive the reviews do not attempt to respond before discussing with Corbin's every quarter should

read your revision carefully and accept what you are writing at what works pay don't go on send it without the courses knowing about it all we stand with what you think is better for your paper this is what I want to say I'm not saying that disagree with everything the o'the day reviewers say but don't accept anything if you feel that that would harm the quality of your paper you can if you disagree so you do not have to agree with all comments raised by the reviewers however if you do disagree with the reviewers then

clearly and politely explain why don't tell them you know nothing about it or this is absolutely shows the lack of knowledge from your side don't say that just people I and explain why you disagree with the guy no need to show how stupid he is or he doesn't know what he's talking about there is no use of this stand with what you think is right don't comply with anything blindly but at the same time explain it clearly and politely as much as possible now with reviewers comments and revise the paper accordingly if you keep on

disagreeing it will be rejected so those which you can even if you don't really agree but you can accept accept because if he keeps reject the ones that you cannot accept your paper with it there's no way I'm going to accept my paper with such a comment but if it is fine I mean you disagree but it will go try to go away at the end the decision is at the reviewers and if he says no it's not going to go so try to go with it even if you not 100% agree so you may

end up with something similar to this but not this again prepare a clear itemized responses to all comments every comment the reviewers say don't skip any write them one by one what your response to that whether it is acceptance rejection whatever you clearly specify out of them do not ignore any point because this is very very severe if you ignored any of those points it will be rejected because you ignored it and be assertive but can I be affirmed be clear of what you are saying and what you are claiming and you don't have to

say okay I thank the reviewer for such a great comment I accept know be very clear about what you are doing be assertive what you're doing but at the same time people are don't at the same time say that he doesn't do ok I have to stop what I want to just say these things if you want to leave I mean I'm end of time here but I'll just go through those because this is important after you got your paper published there is a huge work from your site to show to broadcast that you have

done it because now you start to get the citations and you want people to notice your work and to get that cycle so why to promote the promotion is important you need the increasing volume of research articles make make it more challenging for researchers to keep up with literature therefore you have to make sure your research gets the attention it deserves and it does not fall through the crack you don't want it to be lost among all this large volume of publication people must see your work news conferences you attempt to promote your work speak

about your work and conferences I've done this I've done that let people know and I remember in conferences people come and speak to you about it say did you publish this work somewhere where it's published people decided and then we go and read it and it's a very good publicity for your work use your institution communications channels if the university has a spotlight or it has a place where you can put your findings you can use this and that so people when they enter to the webpage of the university they will find your papers prepare

an audio slide presentation this is by the way a feature that Elsevier gives so if you publish you can put the slides with audio and you can publish it with a paper so that will help a lot keep your profiles up to date with your latest publications if you have a portfolio somewhere in the university and LinkedIn whatever try to keep it updated with your ladies useful you make full use of media such as LinkedIn Twitter put in Facebook I published this to everyone let let the news be spread are you published so you might

celebrate so the search engine optimizer because people when they search you must optimize it in a way that will allow the people to find your work promoting your work should be your mind in your mind even before you publish how I'm gonna promote this work your strong buzz words and abstract that we mentioned before words that are descriptive and specific also in your abstract your strong keywords in captions and figures at tables Elsevier allows you to create a publisher on audio slides which I just mentioned take advantage of that share your audio slide with colleagues

sub them to your colleagues and tell them to send it to other people they know use graphical abstracts again most of the journals now they have graphical abstracts so use it that have a graphical approach abstract is a graphical way of presenting your paper and anime and use it these are the tracking and monitoring and Scopus Pablos or Hiedi all those are as well actually those are active I I wanted to open and show you how we use them but anyway if anybody wanna see what they are I can show them to you the these

are are showing for example if I go to Scopus and I think I put here mine is there as corpuses is where your portfolio all those foods your portfolio the one objection what is your record of publications and people when they want to look at you they were more or less the same but in different different ways some information are different I mean what you get Scopus is the most compressor from my opinion but and even there is a something called siphon in scopus which even gives you more data but there are other web of

science there are many others and many ways you can search by name of Dorothy Mandalay is created by a year of severe as well and it has more information than Scopus but the classical one is accomplice anyway okay in summary you should for for your paper to be published in a good journal have a well-designed original study to write about select an appropriate journal write clearly and make your story interesting be objective and good editors and reviewers will have will be objective about your work highlight the additional sorry the addition to science and the significance

of the results respond carefully and positively to the viewers comments that's a summary of all what we said but at the end of the day most importantly you must have good publication you need good work so if you have good work you don't need all of those as you remember the example of the double helixes it's the work itself starts part so some advisors read as many papers as possible because the more you read papers the more you know how they are and how they are written and learn from the good ones as well as

the bad ones from the good ones you learn how it is done from the bad ones you learn how not to do it improve your English as much as possible by reading by listening learn to accept rejection and criticism and build on them not get disappointed become a reviewer early in your career once as soon as possible start you start to get invitation for reviewing try to review so you get into the loop of reviewing and you understand how things are doing quality not quantity is everything and by that like thank you very much and

good luck with your next publication sorry I took longer than what again this is my opinion yes conferences are not against going to conferences but you go for another reason you don't go to publish and conferences you go for conferences it's very important that every researcher attend I'll give you an example Einstein was invited to millions of conferences did he publish in those conferences he was speak about the same thing actually he attend this conference speaks about this relativity goes to the neck conference speak about relativity so he's attending conferences but he's not publishing in

them his provocation is already done the objective of the conference for him when he went there when he was invited to those conference is not to publish and that's one saying conferences are very important it is a way to look at so many ideas to speak to so many people to discuss your work they will give you the ideas and but it's not a place to publish that's again my opinion but I repeat again the IT people think conferences are and I've heard from them they saying about or peel conferences are more important than journals

just one thing again conferences in general the reviewing process is very linear they will just look at whether it is within the scope or not within the scope that's it so there's no thorough reviewing in all what I've said here is not there in a conference so it's a different quality altogether in terms of the quality of the publication if you want to collaborate collaborate there's nothing cool I'm collaborating with a group and the group all of the group would be under on the authors you are collaborating with individuals you know them by name you

know what they are doing it's not uncle operating with a group and the group will have their name and I got to who are those people so you collaborate and collaboration is very important but it should be collaboration not for the sake of collaboration collaboration for the sake of exchanging knowledge so you know something they don't know they know something you don't know you because in science you need to be very specific and deep in what you know and as they say you need to know everything about something not something about everything so you need

to know everything about your thing but a guy in biology may know things you don't even imagine that it happens and you are you know things that they can't imagine that you can do so by collaboration collaborating with them you can get something much more than your individual work alone but this is a real collaboration and that why both of you deserve to be on the paper but I'm not collaborating with a group and they have the group name with me and who are those people I don't know them I mean I've seen people say

who's that I say oh he's in the good I don't know what did he do I don't know he's in the group so people do that the entire group put their name now I'm just saying that I I don't think this is the right thing to do you should work with people you know your contribution this contribution her contribution is clear the synergy between you is clear you don't just repeat each other each other's work you complement each other in order to get to something clear and that will be cited much much higher than if

you work with your career your clique in your next door or the Turner's oh that has nothing to do with the acceptance I mean you don't have to be known author to be accepted you do your work is the only criteria where they are accepted or rejected is not because you are tired we gotta publish it it's not because of that it doesn't matter nobody will check your track before they but they look at the quality of the world now again I'm speaking about ideal world but in reality those big names nobody can dare to

say no I I know I mean that's happened but they it's wrong it should be the quality so if I say that I am a well-known figure and I sent a journal the journal will be happy that that guy chose my journal and it will go through because he's that guy but that's wrong but at the end of the day nobody will reject your work because you are unknown that's not a factor it should not be a factor and I know that I can see where it come from people say or let's try to put

the name of that guy without seeing his name we'll get through people can do all sorts of things but at the end of the day what do you want you want to be proud of your own work forget about what people are doing and yes I agree some big name it will be intimidating for the editor to reject he can't this guy's is very influential our icon which is wrong if his work is not good but he didn't reach that level by the way without having a very solid work so it it's fine I mean

definitely he's there because his work put him there and it will get to that and you'll get easier review of the like somewhat the task okay thank you very much for your attendance and I hope we see more publications from you in the right Joris [Applause]