dealing with the publication process

Zurich-Basel Plant Science Center

20.05.15

Dealing with the publication process – with a focus on life sciences Dr. Melanie Paschke, [email protected] Managing Director Zurich-Basel Plant Science Center

Trainer in advanced transferable skills

06.05.2014, University of Zurich


20.05.15 Title of the presentation, Author

Outline

–  Can we offer guidance in dealing with the publication process? –  The publication process and its timeline –  Developing a publication strategy

–  How to submit the manuscript

–  Dealing with reviewer’s comments –  Post-Publication Marketing



Can we offer guidance in dealing with the publication process?


20.05.15 Dealing with the Publication Process, Paschke

Publishing has become complicated and puts high demands especially on young scientists •  Environment of over-competition: not in favor of

quality but of quantity

•  Career expectation towards young scientists are enormous

•  Number of journals and scholarly publications has increased – but which of these journals guarantee impact, credibility, visibility?

•  Review processes are in transformation: open review, post-publication review



The publishing market •  28,100 active scholarly peer-

reviewed journals in mid 2012,

•  1.8–1.9 million articles a year.

•  The number of articles published each year: +3% - 3.5% per year

(Source: Ware & Mabe 2012)

Source: SCIMAGO



Especially young scientists need guidance to

•  Develop a publication strategy •  Deal efficiently with the publication process

•  Understand how to get a high-quality publication

•  Deal with the demand of funders, publishers, institutions regarding publication policies: including for example data availability, open access, changing authorship practices, dealing with plagiarism, research ethics



Publish or Perish



However …

•  How much? •  In which quality?

•  What impact?

•  Will be enough for a scientific career in the up-coming decade?



Recent policies that will have an impact on the current publication practices •  DORA Declaration (2012): Declaration on Research

Assessment. Assessment of research on quality and not only on bibliometric measurement

•  European Union (2013): Guideline on Data Management: Data Management Plans (DMPs) detailing what data the project will generate, whether and how it will be exploited or made accessible for verification and re-use, and how it will be curated and preserved.

•  Open Access Declarations



The Publication Process and its Timeline



Peer review is in the center of the publication process: •  to maintain standards of quality, •  improve performance, and

•  provide credibility of research



The timeline of the peer reviewing process

Submission Acceptance Publication

Initial Quality Control

Revise Resubmit

Fast-track

Science

PLOS One

15 days ! !

Peer Review

!

! !

! !

Subject to editing

! ! !

! ! ! !

Senior Editor

!

!

! 100 days

On average: 213 days Standard Journal On average: 9 months

! ! ! ! ! ! !

Sources: Journal webpages and http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2011/10/07/is-plos-one-slowing-down/



The classical editor-based review process – decisions after submission and before peer review •  Manuscript submitted (-> electronically) •  Editor in Chief (EIC) informed and revising the

manuscript for consistency with journal scope, novelty, quality, impact

•  Decision that the EIC has the power to make:

–  Reject without review

–  If necessary ask assistance editor for further review

–  Select and contact external peer reviewers



Decisions of EIC after the peer review

•  Review expert comments (together with Associated editor if necessary):

•  Accept

•  Accept with minor changes

•  Accept with major changes (reviewed again)

•  Reject and encourage to provide more experimental data (resubmission)

•  Reject



Criticism

•  The large role that EIC have in deciding what fits the scope of their journals

•  A tendency in large journals for a decreasing rate of manuscripts sent to peer review

•  The focus on novelty



The open-access review – decisions of AE after peer review – Example PLOS •  Manuscript submitted (-> electronically) •  Manuscripts assigned to academic editors (AE) on base of

content and expertise

•  They can review the paper or find reviewers

•  On average 2.9 reviewers / manuscript •  Accept in principle

•  Minor revision

•  Major revision •  Reject

Source: PLOS



What is PLOS One looking for? •  PLOS ONE will rigorously peer-review your submissions and

publish all papers that are judged to be technically sound.

•  Judgments about the importance are made after publication by the readership.

•  Evaluation criteria:

•  Technical soundness of the work •  Rigor of the analysis

•  Adherence to our data availability policy

•  Clear use of English language

Source: PLOS



Criticism

•  Force much more work on peer reviewers because there is no filter or experience to sort out research work of very low quality at the beginning

•  This might slow down the publication process

•  A danger to produce redundant research

Source: PLOS



Open review: a new way?

•  Advocates indicate that an open review will improve time and resources spent in a review as well as quality (and preliminary studies confirming this)

•  Critics emphasize that open review will prevent many reviewers from giving open criticism



Developing a Publication Strategy



Developing an publication strategy

•  Plan your writing time •  Select journals for publishing early in the

publication process •  Clarify collaboration and authorship early



Submission: Select a journal – criteria for priority setting •  Aim as high as you reasonable can •  Does the journal fit your work? Similar work published?

Similar techniques used? •  How much will it cost?

•  What is the average time needed from submission to publication?

•  What is the rejection rate?

•  Is the journal open access?

•  Have you had good experiences with the journal in the past? Adapted after Jeremy Fox, January 2014: https://dynamicecology.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/advice-how-to-decide-where-to-submit-your-paper/



Submission: Select a journal – criteria for priority setting

Journal Acceptance Rate

Time for Publication

Impact Factor (2013)

Open Access

Science 7% 100 days 31.477 no Plos One 69% 213 days 3.54 yes Ecology not available 29 days to first

decision; 35 days from acceptance to publication; variable time in between

5.431 Optional available

Source: journals’ guidelines 2015



IMPACT FACTOR •  Definition Impact Factor (IF) •  Average number of citations of a journal - calculated on a

three-year period •  Proxy of the importance of a journal to its field

•  A = number of times articles published in 2012 – 2013 were cited in other journals in 2014

•  B = number of articles published 20012 – 2013

•  IF = A/B



Criticism •  Compare a journal in the category of its discipline (e.g.

Ecology with 5.43 is 14th of 136 Ecology journals) •  Different citation practises: In ecology three-year is to low for

determining IF (5-year impact factor preferred)

•  IF should not be misused to predict the importance of an individual publication.

•  A high impact factor can be interpreted as value for the quality standards of the journal

•  It can be manipulated by journals policies



Criticism •  Compare a journal in the category of its discipline (e.g.

Ecology with 5.43 is 14th of 136 Ecology journals) •  Different citation practices: In ecology three-year is to low for

determining IF (5-year impact factor preferred)

•  IF should not be misused to predict the importance of an individual publication.

•  A high impact factor can be interpreted as value for the quality standards of the journal

•  It can be manipulated by journals policies



A difference in the publication strategy? Why are so few women in higher research positions? •  EMBO conducted a study on 3 stages: end of PhD, Post Doc, group leader

•  Evaluators select more male than female applications even if documents are without any hint about the gender of applicants

•  Publication record of woman includes less publications at all stages

•  At post-doc stage the IF and citation rate is significantly lower for women in first-/last-authored publications, later on this is covered

•  Women more often follow partner, devote more time to family care or get involved in teaching duties, therefore, might spent less time on publications especially in the postdoc years

Ledin, Bornmann, Gannon and Wallon (2007)



How to Submit your Manuscript



How to submit your manuscript

•  Read the instructions for submission and follow them exactly •  Data availability clarified?

•  Authorship clarified?

•  Following all necessary ethical standards?

•  No plagiarism

•  Recognition of the funders (and their policies)?



Data Availability Regulations at PLOS (shortened)

•  PLOS journals require authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available

•  When submitting a manuscript online, authors must provide a Data Availability Statement Acceptable data-sharing methods:

•  Data deposition in public repository (strongly recommended) Data in Supporting Information files

•  Data made available to all interested researchers upon request

•  Data available from third party

Source: PLOS



Authorship Regulations at PLOS (shortened)

•  Process. All authors will be contacted by email at submission •  Authorship criteria. All PLOS journals base their criteria for

authorship on those outlined in the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The contributions of all authors must be described.

•  Changes in authorship. PLOS journals follow the COPE guidelines covering changes in authorship. If any changes to the list of authors of a manuscript are necessary after the initial submission of a manuscript to a PLOS journal but before its publication, the corresponding author must first contact the journal staff and provide a clear reason for the change(s). Source: PLOS



Plagiarism is an offence

Plagiarism detection tools are used in most submission processes – 80% of high-impact journals have access to iThenticate



How to convince editors (Examples what our student learn)

•  Editor’s choice below 10 minutes •  An editor will read in the following order:

•  A title that will be remembered

•  An convincing abstract

•  Material & Methods must be detailed enough that results can be reproduced

•  Clear and precise English writing (style and grammar)

•  Brevity



How to Deal with Reviewer’s Comments



Revision (examples of what our students learn)

•  Letter to the Editor •  Acceptance or refusal of reviewer’s advice



Post-Publication Management



Post-publication marketing strategy •  An active marketing of all publications of a researcher

increases visibility and citation rate •  Active marketing can include:

•  Increased access to publications via Preprints in institutional open access repositories will increase visibility

•  Open access repositories are very visible in GoogleScholar •  Use the power of business networks: ResearchGate, Mendeley

•  Use the media offices of your institution to highlight your high-impact publications

•  Create a presence in twitter or the blogosphere to highlight your work (much work!)



Measurement of Impact – CITATION RATE and LIFE TIME CITATIONS AS THE MOST PURE MEASUREMENTS

•  Through Metrics: •  5-year impact factor

•  Eigenfactor

•  H-index

•  Citation Rate / Life Time Citations Total Articles in Publication List: 80 Articles With Citation Data: 74 Sum of the Times Cited: 12235 Average Citations per Article: 165.34 h-index: 42 Last Updated: 05/05/2015 11:45 GMT

NN

Source: Web of Science



Measurement of Impact Our prediction: •  Impact measurement of publication will change in the near

future, e.g. less amount and more quality •  E.g. list you last most-influential publication is implemented

in grant application processes.

•  Independence in the publications is an important criteria

See for example •  DORA Declaration (2012): Declaration on Research Assessment

is now signed by most large funding organisations and publishers, however, implementation will need some time



Other Measurement of Impact that are equally important

•  In/on society: •  e.g. patents built on a certain publication

•  Implementation of scientific results at the science-policy interface, e.g. invitation to join policy networks, evidence-based advise to policies

•  Influential Policy Papers



Courses Dealing with the Publication Process •  Dr. Philipp Mayer, Prof. Dr. Christian Fuhrer, Dr. Melanie

Paschke •  12 & 15 June 2015

•  Organised by Zurich-Basel Plant Science Center for Life Science Zurich Graduate School

•  http://www.lifescience-graduateschool.ch/index.php?id=96

THANK YOUR FOR YOUR ATTENTION!

dealing with the publication process

Education

publication process

publication policies

paschke page

postpublication review

publication strategy

highquality publication

author page

university of zurich