1. How To Write A World-Class Paper DR. ISMAEL N. TALILI Professor of Language and Communication Mindanao University of Science and Technology Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines Consultant for Publications IAMURE Multidisciplinary Research Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines

2. PART 1 – Writing a World-class Paper  Why do scientists publish?  What is a good manuscript?  How to write a good manuscript?  Preparations before starting  Construction of an article  Some technical details that need special attention  Language  Revision and response to reviewers  Conclusion: what leads to ACCEPTANCE? PART 2 – IAMURE Online Submission Protocol

3. Why PUBLISH an article?

4. …??? Get promoted? Get funding? PhD degree?

5. Why do scientists publish

6. To share with the science COMMUNITY something that advances (i.e. not repeats) knowledge understanding in a certain field.

7. A study is meaningful only if…  it is clearly described;  it arouses other scientists’ interest; and  it allows others to reproduce the results.

8. Journal Editors + Reviewers + Authors + Readers = A community of scientists Discourse community

9. What is a good manuscript

10.  Content is essential.  Presentation is critical.

11. How to write a good manuscript

12. I Think about WHY you want to publish your work. Think about WHY you want to publish your work.

13. Have you REALLY done something new and interesting? Is the work directly related to a current hot topic?

14. Experts advised…  You must get help from your supervisor or colleagues.  DO NOT gamble by scattering your manuscript to many journals. Submit only ONCE! International ethics standards prohibit multiple / simultaneous submissions, and editors DO find out !

15. Construction of an Article

16.  T itle  Authors  Abstract  Keywords  Main text (IMRAD)  Introduction  Methods  Results  And  Discussion (Conclusions)  Acknowledgements  References  Supplementary material Make them easy for indexing and searching! (informative, attractive, effective) Journal space is precious. Make your article as brief as possible. If clarity can be achieved in n words, never use n+1.

17.  Attract the reader’s attention.  Check whether the title is specific and whether it reflects the content of the manuscript.  Keep it informative and concise.  Avoid technical jargon and abbreviations if possible.

18.  An advertisement of your article  Accurate!  Clear!  Brief!

19. 1. Introduction 2. Chief Purpose 3. Methods 4. Results 5. Conclusion 6. Recommendations (optional)

20.  It is the label of your manuscript.  Only abbreviations firmly established in the field are eligible e.g. DNA  Check the Guide for Authors!

21. 1. Discipline of the Study 2. Concepts 3. Methods and Process 4. Geography

24.  What is the problem?  Are there any existing solutions?  What is its main limitation?  And what do you hope to achieve?

25.  Never use more words than necessary.  Do not forget that you need to give the whole picture at first.  Do not mix introduction with results, discussion, and conclusion.

26.  Include detailed information.  Reviewers will criticize incomplete or incorrect descriptions (and may recommend rejection).

27.  Only salient representative results should be presented.  Do not attempt to “hide” data in the hope of saving it for a later paper.  Use sub-headings to keep results of the same type together.

28.  Generally, tables give the actual experimental results.  Graphs are often used for comparison of experimental results  No illustrations should duplicate the information described elsewhere in the manuscript.

29.  DON’T REPEAT THE ABSTRACT  You should provide a clear scientific justification for your work in this section.  The concluding paragraph might also offer some guidance for action e.g. The time has come to stop the rampant depletion of the manganese supply…

30. Summary, Repetition, or Conclusion As a result… As has been noted… As mentioned earlier… In any event… In conclusion... In other words… In short… On the whole… Therefore… To summarize…

31. Cite the main scientific publications on which your work is based. Do not over-inflate the manuscript with too many references. Avoid self-citations. Avoid excessive citations of publications from the same region. Check correspondence between text and reference list

32. Some Technical Details that need Special Attention Special Attention

33.  Length of the manuscript  Supporting material  Text layout  Abbreviations

34. Language

35. Clarity "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler” (Einstein) Objectivity Philosophy of scientific method - avoid personal pronouns Accuracy Avoid imprecise language (nowadays, good, currently) Brevity Write briefly and to the point using active voice and short sentences

36.  You are encouraged to have an English expert proofreading your manuscript.  Limit the use of unfamiliar words or phrases.  US or UK spelling should be used consistently throughout a paper

37.  There is no noun phrase "a research" nor “researches” for plural form in English.  Avoid contractions.  Authors are authors, not writers.  Write what you mean, mean what you write.

38. Revision and Response to Reviewers

40. Which procedure do you prefer?  Send out a sloppily prepared manuscript  get rejected after 4-6 months  send out again only a few days later  get rejected again…  sink into despair OR  Take 3-4 months to prepare the manuscript  get the first decision after 4 months  revise carefully within time limitation…accepted

41. Reasons for early rejection  Paper is of limited interest /covers local issues only (sample type, geography, specific product, etc.).  Paper is a routine application of well- known methods.  Paper presents an incremental advance or is limited in scope.  Novelty and significance are not immediately evident or sufficiently well-justified. What should you check?  Does your work have any interest for an international audience?  Have you added any significant values to an exist method or explored remarkable extensions of its application?  Did you provide a perspective consistent with the nature of journal?  Does your work add to the existing body of knowledge?

42. Reasons for early rejection  Failure to meet submission requirements  Incomplete coverage of literature  Unacceptably poor English What should you check?  Read the Guide for Authors again!  Are there too many self-citations, or references that are difficult for the international reader to access?  Correct all the grammatical and spelling mistakes.

43. Revision after submission

45. “ Presenting the data or interpretations of others without crediting them, and thereby gaining for yourself the rewards earned by others, is theft, and it eliminates the motivation of working scientists to generate new data and interpretations.” Professor Bruce Railsback Department of Geology, University of Georgia

46. Plagiarism will hurt your reputation in the scientific community.

47. Paraphrasing is restating someone else's ideas while not copying verbatim.

48. Unacceptable paraphrasing includes any of the following:  using phrases from the original source without enclosing them in quotation marks  emulating sentence structure even when using different wording  emulating paragraph organization even when using different wording or sentence structure – Statement on Plagiarism Department of Biology, Davidson College. www.bio.davidson.edu/dept/plagiarism.html

49.  Make sure that you really understand what the original author means.  Never copy and paste any words that you do not fully understand.  Compare you paraphrasing with the source.

50.  A  Attention to details  C  Check and double check your work  C  Consider the reviewers’ comments  E  English must be as good as possible  P  Presentation is important  T  Take your time with revision  A  Acknowledge those who have helped you  N  New, original and previously unpublished  C  Critically evaluate your own manuscript  E  Ethical rules must be obeyed – Nigel John Cook Editor-in-Chief, Ore Geology Reviews

51. Part 2 IAMURE Online Submission Protocol (Web-based journal publication system)

52. 1. Visit www.iamure.com/publicationwww.iamure.com/publication 2. Register (Administrator activates user account) 3. Log in (username and password)

53. Publication Page Design Features & GUI Interfaces

55. Researcher – Profile Page

56. Researcher – Submit Research Page

57. Web-based Information Management System of TOCS Manage Research – Researcher Page

58. View Research – Researcher Page

59. Inbox – Researcher Page

60. Inbox Content – Researcher Page

61.  Elsevier Authors Workshop (PPT) http://taiwan.elsevier.com/htmlmailings/AuthorWorkshop-SP-PPT-Sep%2009.pdf http://taiwan.elsevier.com/htmlmailings/AuthorWorkshop-SP-PPT-Sep%2009.pdf  Mark Ware Consulting Ltd, Publisin gand Elearning Consultancy. Scientific publishing in transition: an overview of current developments. Sept., 2006. www.stm-assoc.org/storage/Scientific_Publishing_in_Transition_White_Paper.pdf  Guide for Authors of Elsevier journals.  Ethical Guildlines for Journal Publishing, Elsevier. http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/intro.cws_home/ethical_guidelines#Duties%20of%20Authors  International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication. Feb. 2006  http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/guidelines  http://www.icmje.org/index.html#ethic  http://www.onlineethics.org/  http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/  http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~wilkins/writing/index.html  George D. Gopen, Judith A. Swan. The science of Scientific Writing. American Scientist (Nov-Dec 1990), Vol. 78, 550-558.  Michael Derntl. Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing. http://www.pri.univie.ac.at/~derntl/papers/meth-se.pdf  Thomas H Adair. Professor, Physiology & Biophysics Center of Excellence in Cardiovascular-Renal Research, University of Mississippi Medical Center. http://dor.umc.edu/ARCHIVES/WritingandpublishingaresearcharticleAdair.ppt  Bruce Railsback. Professor, Department of Geology, University of Georgia. Some Comments on Ethical issues about research. www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/11111misc/ResearchEthics.html  Peter Young. Writing and Presenting in English. The Rosetta Stone of Science. Elsevier 2006.  Philip Campbell. Editor-in-Chief, Nature. Futures of scientific communication and outreach. June 2007.  Yaoqi ZHOU. Recipe for a quality Scientific Paper: Fulfill Readers’ and Reviewers’ Expectations. http://sparks.informatics.iupui.edu  EDANZ Editing training materials. 2006 http://liwenbianji.com, http://www.edanzediting.com/english.html