How to Get Published in High

Impact Journals

Azman Hassan
Faculty of Engineering

organised by
Postgraduate Students Society
School of Chemical Engineering
19th May 2020
With my students in 2012

2
Google Scholar Profile
November 2018 May 2020
 Publications and Supervisions
No of Scopus Indexed Papers 247

Scopus h-index 33
No of Scopus Citations 4478

Google Scholar h-index 40

No of Google Scholar Citations 6644

Postgraduates Supervision Graduated

22 PhD & 40 Masters
On-going
10 PhD & 4 Masters
Top Research Scientist Malaysia
2016
 Publication Scenario in UTM

1984 – 2007 No of papers including Conference

International or National

2008 – 2013 Impact Factors

No of papers in Indexed Journals

2014 – present Tier of Journals

H-index
No of citations

Future ???
 Objectives of my presentation

• To share experience on
strategies to publish
papers in high impact
journals.

• To inspire the audience

to be world class
researchers
 Presentation Outline

• Types of research input and output

• Motivation for journal publication
• Types of manuscript
• Process of writing
• Relationship between good research and good paper
• Structure of a good manuscript
• Characteristics of academic writing
• Selection of the right journal.
• Submission and reviewing process
• Techniques for addressing reviewer comments
• Reasons for papers rejection
• Conclusions: Strategies on high impact publications
• Final words: Strategies on increasing h-index and
citations
 The success of a research is measured from
the inputs and outputs

11
 Research Inputs

Research Grant
• Amount
• Principal Investigator or member
• Government or Private
• National or International

12
 Research Outputs

• Scholarly Publications
• Citations
• H-index
• Other publications
• Number of Phds/Masters
• New/improved products/software/process
• Research and innovation awards
• Networking
• Services/training programmes
• Intellectual properties

13
What is meant by scholarly publications ?

✓Journal Papers
✓Research books
✓ Academic textbooks
✓ Book Chapters
 Why publish papers ?
• To share/disseminate knowledge
• To create in impact to the society
• To be recognized as an excellent researcher
• To fulfill our yearly KPIs as a lecturer/researcher
• Requirement for graduation.
• Requirement for promotion
• To get award/reward
• To fulfill the KPIs of our research grant
• To fulfill the objectives of our institutions
 If your research is not
published in a journal it does
not exist.

It must be possible to find it !!

Prof Gustaf Olsson

Editor-in-Chief
Water Science & Technology
 Writing journal papers is like running a marathon;
training, planning, learning specific skills, endurance,
perseverance and daily practice!
 How many papers are you
expected to publish during your
PhD/masters ?
 Types of Journal Papers

✓ Research Papers
✓ Review Articles
✓ Short Communications
• Bad research will not produce high quality papers
• Good research will not necessarily produce high
quality papers
 A quality paper starts with a good research
topic
A good research topic should be:

• Feasible (can be done)

• Interesting (passionate, up-to-date,
wider audience)
• Novel
• Ethical
• Relevant (impactful)
 Criteria for judging quality of research?

• Are the experiments well-designed and properly

conducted ?
• Are the data and their interpretations consistent ?
• Do the experimental data support the conclusions of
the research study ?
• Do the experiments answer the research questions?
• Will the research extend the frontier of knowledge ?
How and When to Start ?
✓ Start writing as early as possible
✓ Do not wait until the research is
completed.
 The process of writing
Some people recommend that you begin with the
Introduction and continue in order through each section of
the paper to help ensure flow.

Others suggest that you begin with the easiest sections,

which are usually the Methods and Results, followed by the
Discussion, Conclusion, Introduction, References and Title,
leaving the Abstract until the end.
 The process of writing

References and
Acknowledgement

Title & Abstract

Conclusion Introduction

Methods Results Discussion

Figures/Tables (your data)

 The process of writing

Finalizing The Manuscript

Title & Abstract Conclusion References

Introduction Results & Discussion Method

Introduction Figures/Tables (your data)

Introduction Title Method References

So, what should you do?

The main thing is to begin writing and begin filling up

the blank screen or piece of paper.
 Structure of a Manuscript

(i) Titles
(ii) Abstract
(iii) Introduction
(iv) Materials and Methods
(v) Results and Discussion
(vi) Conclusions
(v) Acknowledgement
(vi) Reference
 Title

What your paper is all about. It should be:

• Concise, accurate, meaningful and highlight the

significant issue of the manuscript.
• Interesting and attract attention.
• Different from other papers
• Avoid abbreviations
• Not too short
• Not too long - Less than 15 words
 Examples of Good Title

• Modification of Poly Lactic acid using Itaconic Anhydride by

Reactive Extrusion.

• Effect of Carbon Black on the Dynamic Mechanical

Properties of Magnetorheological Elastomers.

• Comparison of Dynamic Mechanical Properties of

Magnetorheological Elastomers with existing Antivibration
Rubbers.
 Examples of Less Effective Title

A comprehensive Experimental Study using DOE Approach on

Surface Integrity of Ti Particles”.
Comments:
The titles contains unnecessary words “A Comprehensive
Experimental Study” and lesser known abbreviations, DOE and Ti.

Properties of Hybrid Natural-Fiber Composites”

Comments:
The title is too short and uses words which are too broad and it
does not tell the reader what is being studied.
 Examples of Less Effective Title

Preparation and Dynamic Mechanical and Physical Properties

of Novel Smart Polymeric Materials Made of Dynamically
Aligned Rare Earth Super Magnetrostrictive Particles
Reinforced Ethylene Propylene Diene Rubber.

Comments:
A lengthy title may take the reader’s attention away from the
important point. The author should avoid words or phrases that
do not help the reader understand the purpose of the article
such as “novel” and “super”.
 Title - some examples

Original Title Revised Remarks

Preliminary observation Effect of Zn on Long title distract
on the effect of Zn anticorrosion of zinc readers.
element on anticorrosion plating layer Remove all redundancies
of zinc plating layer such as “observations on”,
“the nature of”, etc.
Action of antibiotics on Inhibition of growth of Title should be specific.
bacteria mycobacterium Think to yourself “How will
tuberculosis by I search for this piece of
streptomycin information?” when you
design the title.
Development of hybrid Enhanced Ductility and More interesting and
montmorillonite/cellulose Tensile Properties of attractive.
nanowhiskers reinforced Hybrid Significant improvement
polylactic acid Montmorillonite/Cellulose in ductility.
nanocomposites Nanowhiskers Reinforced
Polylactic Acid
Nanocomposites
 Example of original and revised title

Original
Enhancement of Corrosion Resistance and Flame Retardancy
of Epoxy Coating.

Revised
Corrosion Barrier and Flame Retardancy Properties of Epoxy
Coating Modified with Nanofillers .
Dear Dr Hassan,
I hope I find you and your family well in amongst this worldwide crisis?
It’s been a long time since we communicated. I see our papers continue to get
well-cited. I have since moved to Bristol (as you see below), but still working on
cellulose. We just published a review article in Nature Reviews Materials – see
attached.
All the best and stay in touch,
Steve
Professor Stephen Eichhorn FRSC FIMMM FInstP CEng
CDT Director
EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Composites Science, Engineering and
Manufacturing
Professor of Materials Science & Engineering
 Abstract
• The abstract should be short and precise
• Selling point of the paper.
• It is summary of the work:
✓ Introduction
✓ Objective
✓ Method
✓ Results
✓ Conclusion
• No figure, table and reference.

• Abstracts are often presented as stand-alone text

 Abstract

Composing Letters with a Simulated Listening Typewriter

With a listening typewriter, what an author says would be automatically

recognized and displayed in front of him or her. However, speech
recognition is not yet advanced enough to provide people with a
reliable listening typewriter. An aim of our experiments was to
determine if an imperfect listening typewriter would be useful for
composing letters. Participants dictated letters, either in isolated words
or in consecutive word speech. They did this with simulations of
listening typewriters that recognized either a limited vocabulary (1000
or 5000 words) or an unlimited vocabulary. Results suggest that some
versions, even upon first using them, could be at least as good as
traditional methods of handwriting and dictating. Isolated word speech
with large vocabularies may provide the basis for a useful listening
typewriter.
 Difficulties of Standard Arabic Phonemes Spoken by Non-Arab
Primary School Children based on Formant Frequencies.

The study of Malaysian Arabic phoneme is rarely found which make the references
work difficult. Specific guideline on Malaysian subject is not found even though a lot
of acoustic and phonetics research has been done on other languages such as
English, French and Chinese. This study discussed about the correct and simplest
way of Arabic phonemes pronunciation in Malay accent. The International Phonetic
Alphabet of Arabic chart was considered as the reference of every recorded speech
samples using Malaysian children for their sound localization (makhraj point) of every
alphabet. The recorded sound was analysed to determine the origin of each alphabet
data by measuring its format frequencies. The consonants of Standard Arabic (SA)
phonemes were studied and the appropriate place articulation of every phoneme was
measured through its format. Only seven out of 25 consonants of SA phonemes
of the children’s samples did not give the appropriate formants value. The
formants are / kof/, /zo/, /kho/, /gheyn/, /ha/, /ain/, /ha/, which consider as the
difficult SA to utter among Malaysian children. The values obtained are used as
the reference of the database for our recognition system.
 Keywords

• The keywords should reflect the subject matter of

the manuscript in the same way the title of the
manuscript should.

• Most of the keywords may already be present in the

title
• The number of keywords should not be more than
five
• Use only established abbreviations (i.e. DNA)
 Introduction

• Serves as an orientation for readers, giving them the:

✓ perspective they need to understand the detailed
✓ information coming in later sections.

• Contains review of up-to-date literature.

• Explains the novelty of the work.

• Discuss the objective and significance of the work.

 Introduction

▪First Stage: general statements

about field of research General
▪ Second Stage: More specific
statements about the aspects of the
problem
▪ Third Stage: Statements that
indicate the need for more
investigation.
▪ Fourth Stage: Very specific Specific
statements giving the objectives
▪Fifth Stage: Optional statements
that give values or justification.
 Identify the five stages of Introduction

During the past 40 years, the United States has experienced the
integration of the computer into society. Progress has been made to the
point that small, inexpensive computers with expanded capabilities are
available for innumerable uses. Many schools have purchased and are
purchasing microcomputers for infusion into their directed learning
programs.
Most individuals seem to agree that the microcomputer will continue to
hold an important role in education. Gubser (1980) and Hinton (1980)
suggested phenomenal increases in the numbers of computers both in
the school and the home in the near future. Schmidt (1982) identified
three types of microcomputer use in classrooms: the object of a course,
a support tool, and a means of providing instruction. Foster and Kleene
(1982) cite four uses of microcomputers in vocational agriculture: drill
and practice, tutorial, simulation and problem solving.
 Identify the five stages of Introduction

The findings of studies examining the use of various forms of computer-

assisted instruction (CAI) have been mixed. Studies by Hickey (1968) and
Honeycutt (1974) indicated superior results with CAI while studies by Ellis
(1978), Coldwell (1980) and Belzer (1976) indicated little or no significant
effect. Although much work has been done to date, more studies need to
be conducted to ascertain the effects of microcomputer-assisted instruction
in teaching various subjects in a variety of leaning situations.

The purpose of this study was to ascertain the effect of using

microcomputer-assisted instruction as compared to a lecture-discussion
techniques in teaching principles and methods of cost recovery and
investment credit on agricultural assets to graduate students in agricultural
education. This topic was identified as being of importance to teachers
in providing them the necessary background to teach lessons in farm
records .
 Examples of 3rd Stage Introduction
Statements that indicate the need for more
investigation - Missing Information/Gap of Knowledge
• However, few studies have reported on the effects of
computer assisted instruction.
• But there is little information available on the air flow
rates on simple flat plate solar collectors.

The authors need to do

a thorough literature
review to establish the
knowledge gap.
Imagine a circle that contains all of
human knowledge
This is the status of your knowledge when you embark with
your PhD.
Reading research papers takes you to the edge of human
knowledge
You push the boundary for a few years
And, that dent you have made is a PhD
To confirm the gap of knowledge, do a thorough literature.

✓ Start with Google search tools and Google Scholar

✓ Use proprietary databases Scopus

Google Scholar Profile
Top Researchers in Flame Retardancy
 3rd Stage Introduction: Statements that
indicate the need for more investigation
Furthermore, the effect of the presence of the wood particles on the
heterogeneous nucleation polymer matrix is strongly dependent on
rheological parameters such as melt flow index (MFI). It has been
found that in composites, the half-time of crystallisation of iPP is
shorter, the degree of crystal conversion is higher and related
exothermic peaks shift to higher temperatures when the MFI of
polypropylene matrix is lower [14].
On the basis of the above mentioned facts, it may be concluded that it
is worth studying the influence of rheological properties of polymeric
matrix on the supermolecular structure and mechanical properties
obtained in polypropylene/wood composites. Until now, investigations
of the influence of polypropylene matrix MFI on the flammability
characteristic of the composites with lignocellulosic materials have not
been carried out.
 4th Stage Introduction: very specific statements
giving the objectives of the study

Even though a lot of work has been reported on the

flammability of polymers, very little work has been
reported on the flammability of the composites. The
objective of this paper is to study the effects of Mg(OH)2
on the flammability and mechanical properties of
wood/natural fibre composites.
High-resolution Solid-State Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (SS-NMR)
spectroscopy has become a powerful tool in studying the structure of
natural aluminosilicates [9], [10]. In particular, 29Si and 27Al Magic-
Angle-Spinning (MAS) NMR have provided important information on
the Si and Al distribution in tetrahedral and octahedral sites, the
sequences of charged sheets, and the structural distortions for variety
of clay minerals [11]-[13]. Nonetheless, much less attention has been
devoted to NMR studies of chemically stabilized soils.

In this paper, in order to understand the main mechanisms that

contributed to the improvement of phosphoric acid stabilized bentonite
and lateritic soils, the time-dependent changes occurring in the
molecular structure of treated soils were investigated.
Very recently, a comprehensive and general review article dealing with
study on various aspects of cellulosic biofibers and biocomposite
materials was published [19]. The overview on biocomposite science and
technology, its environmental issues and market potential were found in
the literature [8]. In year 2000 and 2004, a review article [20] about
structural discussion on certain biofibers, biodegradable polymers, and
biocomposites, and an overview article [21] on pineapple leaf and sisal
fiber and their biocomposite reinforced with thermoset and thermoplastic
polymers was published, respectively. Nevertheless, a specific review
article on OPEFB fiber polymer composite materials including both
thermoplastic and thermosets polymers have not been published so far
to our knowledge. Indeed, it becomes essential to assess the previous
and ongoing research for OPEFB fiber polymer composite materials. This
will surely enable the researchers, materialist, industrialists, scientist, and
upcoming experts to establish the lag in till date research work and find
approach for futuristic development for OPEFB fiber polymer composite
materials. This might even open room for development of other natural
fiber polymeric composite materials.
 Introduction
In recent years, biodegradable polymers produced from renewable
resources have become attractive for practical applications such as
medical devices and food packaging [1]. Polylactic acid (PLA) is a
biodegradable thermoplastic polyester produced from lactic acid and is
derived by chemical synthesis or through the fermentation of sugar feed
stocks, such as corn starch [2]. PLA is a ‘‘green polymer’’ because it can
be finally degraded into CO2 and H2O [3]. PLA offers a potential
alternative to petrochemical plastics in many applications, in part
because of its high strength and stiffness and processability [4].
However, it has drawbacks such as low toughness, high production
cost, brittleness, poor water vapour/gas barrier properties and
undesirable thermal stability, making this bioplastic unsuitable for certain
applications [5, 6]. Hence, many approaches have been adopted to
overcome these inherent limitations, such as blending with other
biodegradable polymers and also the development of composites and
nanocomposites containing high aspect ratio organic and inorganic
fillers [6, 7].
 Introduction
Polymer/clay nanocomposites have received significant attention compared to
conventional composites because they often exhibit considerable improvement in
mechanical, thermal, optical, physical properties and fire retardancy at low filler
contents [8]. PLA/layered silicate nanocomposites have been shown to exhibit
improved tensile strength and Young’s modulus compared to neat PLA [9].
Montmorillonite (MMT) has been the most commonly used layered silicate in this
respect. Due to its hydrophilic character, MMT does not interact strongly with
hydrophobic polymers such as PLA. For this reason, MMT must be modified by an
organic reagent before it is used, which can strengthen the chemical interaction
between PLA and MMT and also induces the formation of layered or exfoliated
organic/inorganic nanocomposites [9]. MMT reinforced PLA nanocomposites can be
prepared by two different methods; namely melt processing and solution casting
techniques [9]. Based on previous studies, there is no clear optimum content for
MMT-based nanocomposites. Thellen et al. [10] reported that an optimum tensile
strength was achieved at a 5 wt.% MMT content, while He et al. [11] and Chang et al.
[12] showed this occurred at 3 wt.% and 4 wt.% contents respectively. Young’s
modulus has also been shown to increase gradually with an increase in the MMT
content. However, these property enhancements are usually accompanied by a
severe decrease in ductility. Therefore, there is a need to investigate ways to produce
PLA nanocomposites with both high strength/stiffness and ductility.
 Introduction

To the best of our knowledge, limited studies have been conducted on

the use of MMT/CNW hybrid fillers in PLA polymer. Hong and Kim [8]
showed that the simultaneous use of CNW and nanoclay as nanofillers
improved the tensile strength and glass transition temperature of PLA
using melt mixing. In the current study, the effects of CNW on
mechanical and morphological properties of PLA/MMT/CNW hybrid
nanocomposites prepared by solution casting have been investigated.
The main reason for incorporation CNW into PLA/MMT
nanocomposites is to increase ductility and Young's modulus of the
nanocomposites which are important properties of packaging
materials.
 Materials and Methods

✓ The description should be detail enough for others

to repeat the experiment.

✓ The equipment and materials must be adequately

described.

✓ The measurements must clearly described.

✓ Must be written in the past tense and in a passive

voice.

✓ Previously published methods should be shown in a

reference; describe relevant modifications.
 Results & Discussion

• This section is the most important part of the manuscript in

which critical analysis of the results are done.
• Sufficient number of Figures and Tables with good quality.
• Every result included MUST have a method set out in the
methods section. Check back to make sure that you have
included all the relevant methods.
• Every method should also have some results. If certain
experiments are excluded from the results, make sure the
method is removed as well.
• The tables and figures should be complementary, not
repeat the same information.
 Results & Discussion

• Every table or figure should be referred in the text. Any

table or figure not referred should be removed.
• There must be a statement that locates the figure/table
where the results can be found.
• Summarise your results in the text, drawing on the figures
and tables to illustrate your points.
• Explain possible reasons for the results. Any unexpected
result should be highlighted and explained.
• Compare the results with previous studies.
 Why this table is faulty ?

Effect of aeration on growth of

Streptomyces coelicolor

Temp (˚C) No. of expt Aeration of Growth

growth
medium
24 5 +b 78a

24 5 - 0

a as determined by optical density (Klett units)

b Symbol + 500ml Erlenmeyer Flask were aerated; Symbol
– No aeration
 Why this table is faulty ?

Characteristics of antibiotic-producing Streptomyces

Determination S. fluoricolor S. griseus S. coelicolor S. nocolor

Optimal -10 24 28 92
growth temp
(˚C)

Color of Tan Gray Red Purple

mycelium
Antibiotic Fluoricil- Strepto-mycin Rhol-monde- Nomycin
produced linmycin lay

Yield of 4,108 78 2 0
antibiotic
(mg/ml)
 Characteristics of antibiotic-producing Streptomyces

Organism Optimal growth Color of Antibiotic Yield of antibiotic

temp (˚C) mycelium produced (mg/ml)
S. fluoricolor -10 Tan Fluoricillinmycin 4,108
S. griseus 24 Gray Streptomycin 78
S. coelicolor 28 Red Rholmondelay 2
S. nocolor 92 Purple Nomycin 0
 Induction of creatinine deiminase in C. neoformans
and C. bacillisporus

C. neoformans C. bacillisporus
NIH 12 NIH 191
N source Total Sp act Total Sp act
enzyme (U/mg of enzyme (U/mg of
protein) protein)
Ammonia 0.58 0.32 0.50 0.28
Glutamic acid 5.36 1.48 2.18 0.61
Aspartic acid 2.72 0.15 1.47 0.06
Arginine 3.58 2.18 3.28 2.19
Creatinine 97.30 58.40 104.00 58.30
Can this just be replaced
by a sentence ?

Among the test group of

56 patients who are
hospitalized for an
average of 14 days, 6
acquired infections

Incidence of hospital-acquired
 Should the results be presented as table or
figure ?

Effect of streptomycin (O), isoniazid (Δ),

and streptomycin plus isoniazid (□) on
Mycobacterium tuberculosis
1. Lettering was large
enough
2. Easy to estimate values
on the right side
3. The scribe marks point
inward

Effect of spermidine on the transformation of B. subtillis

BR 151
 Conclusions

✓ A reference to the main purpose of the study

✓ A review of the most important findings. It should
reinforce the originality and the significance of the
work presented.
✓ Should be consistent with the objectives –
highlight the achievements.
✓ Refers to only work done in the present study
✓ Discuss the applications and future experiments.
✓ Highlight the limitations of study
 Conclusions
LBPAA composite hydrogels modified with OrgMMT were
prepared successfully. The swelling properties were found to
strongly depend on the pore of hydrogels and composition of
lignin grafted MBAm. The swelling and de-swelling rate
constants of LBPAA/OrgMMT (PAA 53.35/43.65 LM) were higher
than those of PAA. The water absorbency of LBPAA (PAA
53.35/43.65 LM, 285.3 g g−1) was higher than PAA/OrgMMT
(89.9 g g−1) when the concentration of KCl solution is 0.09 mM.
LBPAA/OrgMMT composites showed rapid adsorption
performance over 60 min. The Pb2+ adsorption capacity of
LBPAA/OrgMMT (PAA 48.50/48.50 LM) was 1.08 mmol g−1,
higher than others.
 Conclusions

This study has taken a step in the direction of defining the

relationship between age, experience, and productivity within
one particular industry. It is possible, of course, that other
industries with a different complex of speed jobs and skill jobs
may produce entirely different results In addition, it is important
to emphasize the methodological problems inherent in the
research design that limit our interpretations.
The approach outlined in this study, amplified by appropriate
longitudinal measures, should be replicated in other garment
manufacturing plants, as well as in other occupational areas in
light, medium, and heavy industries in order to construct a
typology of older worker performance in a variety of jobs.
.
 Conclusions
The fitted pseudo-second order adsorption kinetics indicated the
existence of chemical bonding of Pb2+ to the LBPAA/OrgMMT
composites, which was later confirmed by XPS analysis, proving
the involvement of hydroxyl groups and carboxyl groups of
LBPAA/OrgMMT composites in the adsorption process to form
Pb…O bond. The adsorption mechanism of LBPAA/OrgMMT
composites was a multilayer adsorption following Freundlich
isotherm. The grafting of lignin and OrgMMT not only helped to
form holes, but also filled and supported the composite
hydrogels. The LBPAA/OrgMMT composites have potential
applications for fast and feasible and rapid removal of Pb2+
ions from polluted water with good salt tolerance and low
cost.
 Conclusions
PLA/NR blend, PLA/CNT and PLA/NR/CNT nanocomposites
were prepared by melt blending method using counter-rotating
twin-screw extruder. PLA/NR blend exhibited significant increase
in impact strength and elongation at break compared to neat
PLA (approximately 35 and 400 %, respectively). The tensile
strength and Young’s modulus of PLA/CNT nanocomposites
increased approximately 29 and 4% by incorporation of CNT,
respectively. In addition, flexural strength, flexural modulus and
thermal stability of PLA/CNT increased, whereas the impact
strength decreased compared to neat PLA. The toughness of
PLA/CNT improved significantly by incorporation of NR. The
highest impact strength and elongation at break of PLA/NR/CNT
was observed at 20 wt% NR content which showed
approximately 200 and 840 % increment compared to PLA/CNT
nanocomposites, respectively.
However, tensile strength, tensile modulus and flexural
properties of PLA/CNT decreased with the addition of NR.
Based on the mechanical testing of the obtained
nanocomposites, PLA/NR(10)/CNT nanocomposites can be
suggested as an optimum formulation with balanced
mechanical properties compared to other formulations.
FESEM and TEM analyses revealed that the NR particles are
homogeneously dispersed in PLA/NR/CNT nanocomposites
while the CNT preferentially reside in the NR phase rather than
in the PLA matrix. TGA analysis showed that the addition of NR
into PLA/CNT nanocomposites decreased the thermal stability of
the nanocomposites. In addition, PLA/NR/CNT exhibited lower
Tg and degree of crystallinity compared to neat PLA/CNT
nanocomposites.
 Acknowledgments

• Give credit to funding authorities, collaborators or other

colleagues whose names do not appear as co-authors
but had made some contribution in producing the
material for the manuscript.
 Reference

Author, year style (Harvard)

Adrian, R.J., Particle-imaging techniques for experimental fluid

mechanics. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 1991. 23: p. 261-304.

Alapati, A., Kang, S., Suh, Y.K., 3D lattice Boltzmann simulation of

droplet formation in a cross-junction microchannel, in Proc. 3rd
IASME/WSEAS Intl. Conf. Cont. Mech. 2008.

Breyiannis, G.V., Lattice kinetic simulations in three-dimensional

magneto hydrodynamics. Phys. Rev. , 2004. E 69: p. 065702/1-
065702/4.

Cercignani, The Boltzmann equation and its application in applied

mathematical sciences. Springer, 1988.
 Reference

Numbering style
[1] Couette, M., 1890. Etudes sur le frottement des liquides. Ann. Chim.
Phys., 21: 433.

[2] Taylor, G.I., 1923. Stability of a viscous fluid contained between two
rotating cylinders. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 233: 289.

[3] Di Prima, R. C., Swinney, H. L. 1981. Instabilities and transition in

flow between concentric rotating cylinders, in: Hydrodynamic instabilities
and transition to turbulence (Swinney, It. L., Gollub, J. P., eds.), p. 139.
Springer

[4] Bühler, K., Wimmer, Zierep, M. J., and Coney J. E. R., 1986
Advances in Taylor Vortex Flow: A report on the Fourth Taylor Vortex
Flow Working Party meeting Acta Mechanica, Vol 62(1) pp 47-61
 Decide who are the authors of the paper
• When many scientists work together, determining authorship is not
always easy.
• Make sure that you choose collaborators with whom you can work
well.
• Discuss authorship early, and keep doing so often as a project
evolves.
• When there are disputes, first try to talk it out amicably and
understand the other person's point of view.
• If you must approach your supervisor about an authorship decision
that you don't like, keep the tone inquisitive, not accusatory.
Explain that you want to understand how authorship was decided.
• Be prepared to compromise or share credit.
 Who should be the first author ?

• The first author has done most of the research and written major parts
of the article.

• Authors between first and last author have contributed in one way or
the other to the success of the project. They may be ordered
alphabetically (indicating equality) or in a sequence of decreasing
involvement.

IMPORTANT: Discuss authorship as early as possible.

Who should be the corresponding author?
Academic Writing
 Characteristics of academic writing

• Academic writing is clear, concise, focused, structured

and backed up by evidence.

• It has a formal tone and style, but it is not complex and

does not require the use of long sentences and
complicated vocabulary.
 Grammar rules for scientist

• Proofread your manuscript carefully to be sure you

didn’t any words.

• If you reread your writing you will find that a great

many very repetitious statements can be identified
by rereading and identifying them.
• In formal scientific writing, don’t use contractions
or exclamations points !!
 Samples of transition words

Use transition words to combine your ideas and help you

write in a clearer, more concise way.
Transitions words link sentences together smoothly so that
there are no abrupt jumps or breaks between ideas

Words which lead to more on the same idea: again, likewise, in

addition, also, as well, furthermore, moreover, and
Words which lead to a different idea: conversely, nevertheless, on the
other hand, on the contrary, although, even though, but, yet, while,
however, except
Words which lead to a result: thus, therefore, consequently, as a
result, because, since, as, so, inasmuch as
Words which show sequence: first/second/third, a/b/c, lastly, next,
then, finally, after that, until
 It is often believed that academic writing is factual.
However it is now recognised that an important feature of
academic writing is the concept of cautious language, often
called hedging.

• Escherichia coli , when found in conjunction with urethritis,

often indicate infection higher in the uro-genital tract.
• There is experimental work to show that a week or ten days
may not be long enough and a fortnight to three weeks is
probably the best theoretical period.
• One possibility is that generalized latent inhibition is likely
to be weaker than that produced by pre-exposure to the CS
itself and thus is more likely to be susceptible to the effect of
the long interval.
Selection of Journals
 Where to Publish?

Indexed Journal

Non-indexed Journal

Conference
 What is an Indexed Journal?

• A journal is Indexed when its

bibliographic and citation information
is included by the citation data
supplier.

• For “Research University” the citation

data supplier is Scopus & Web of
Science.
 What is ISI Indexed Journals ?

The Institute for Scientific

Information (ISI) was founded by
Eugene Garfield in 1960. It was
acquired by Thomson Scientific &
Healthcare in 1992, became known as
Thomson ISI and now is part of the
Intellectual Property & Science
business of Thomson Reuters.
 Why submit to an ISI Journal?

ISI Indexed
Journals
Scopus indexed
Journals

✓If published: better visibility, higher credibility, good

incentive
✓If rejected: valuable experience with free useful
reviews.
✓If your paper is of high quality but submitted to a non-
ISI journal, an opportunity has been wasted.
 What is an impact factor ?
A journal’s “impact factor” is an annual measure of the
extent to which articles in that journal are cited.

The 2014 impact factor of a journal would be calculated as

follows:
A = the number of times articles published in 2012 and
2013 were cited by ISI indexed journals during 2014.
B = the total number of "citable items" published by that
journal in 2012 and 2013.
2014 impact factor = A/B.
 Journal Selection Process

• Begin thinking about your target journal early in

the writing process.
• Be clear in the objectives of writing the paper.
• Select between three to five possible journals
based on journal selection criteria.
Why Selecting Appropriate Journals is
Important?

• To minimize papers being rejected

• To maximize benefit of the papers – can be read
and built on by other researchers
• To fulfill the objectives in publishing papers
 Factors to Consider in Journal Selection

• Scope of the journal

• Quality of paper
• Publisher
• Country
• Journal Indexing database
• Impact factors and ranking
• Journal categories
• Publication frequency
• Members of editorial board
• Specialised or generic journal
 Factors to consider in journal selection
• Peer review and editorial decision making process
• Rejection rate
• Reference in our manuscript
• Recent papers published in the journals
• Authors’ profile
• Journals we have published.
• Open access and processing fee
• Journals availability - subscription
• Instruction to authors – words limit
• Specialised journal for review articles
 International Journal of
Polymeric Materials
Now covered in Thomson Reuter's Web of Science, and Science Citation
Index Expanded!

2010 Impact Factor: 0.458 (©2011 Thomson Reuters, 2010 Journal Citation
Reports®)

Published By: Taylor & Francis

Volume Number: 60
Frequency: 14 issues per year
Print ISSN: 0091-4037
Online ISSN: 1563-535X

Abstracting & Indexing

The International Journal of Polymeric Materials is abstracted and/or
indexed in: Chemistry Citation Index; CSA Corrosion Abstracts; CSA
Engineered Materials Abstracts; CSA Metals Abstracts/METADEX; Journal
Citations Report/Science Edition; Materials Science Citation Index; Polymer
Library; and Science Citation Index
 Using online indexes to select
Journal

Scopus
http://www.scopus.com/home.url

Edanz
https://www. Edanzediting/journal-selector

Springer
https://journalsuggester.springer.com

Elsevier Journal Finder

http://journalfinder.elsevier.com
 Using Scopus to select Journal

1
2

1. Type “PVC Composites”

2. Click Search
 3

3. Click Analyze Results

 4

4. Click Source Title

 5

Name of journals
5. Click Author name
 6

Ex : Hassan, A.

Name of authors

6. Click Affiliation name

Ex : UTM

Affiliation
 Submitting the paper

• Traditional submission (by mail)

• As e-mail attachment
• Via a journal online submission
 Cover Letter

• Title and author(s) of paper

• Type of submission (full length article/review paper)
• Fact that paper is new and not being submitted
elsewhere
• Why the paper is important
• Some possible peer reviewers (some journal request
that)
Dear Editor,

On behalf of all the authors, I would like to submit our manuscript entitled “Development of hybrid
montmorillonite/cellulose nanowhiskers reinforced polylactic acid nanocomposites”, and I would be
grateful if you would consider our manuscript for publication in Carbohydrate Polymers.

This study investigated the mechanical properties and morphological characteristics of polylactic
acid/montmorillonite (PLA/MMT) nanocomposites and polylactic acid/montmorillonite/cellulose
nanowhiskers (PLA/MMT/CNW) hybrid nanocomposites. Based on our knowledge, limited research work
has been reported on the use of MMT/CNW hybrid fillers to further enhance the mechanical and
biodegradability of PLA nanocomposites. We feel that findings from this study will be of special interest to
the readers of Carbohydrate Polymers.

With the submission of this manuscript I would like to undertake that:

All authors of this research paper have directly participated in the planning, execution, or analysis of this
study;
All authors of this paper have read and approved the final version submitted;
The contents of this manuscript have not been copyrighted or published previously;
The contents of this manuscript are not now under consideration for publication elsewhere;
The contents of this manuscript will not be copyrighted, submitted, or published elsewhere, while
acceptance by the Journal is under consideration;

I have uploaded the manuscript (including figure captions) at the website.

We look forward to your positive response.

Yours sincerely,
Prof. Azman Hassan
Subject: SUBMISSION OF A MANUSCRIPT FOR EVALUATION
I and the co-authors would like to submit the attached manuscript entitled XXXX for consideration
for possible publication in Polymer Science and Engineering.

The following experts are the possible reviewers for this manuscript:

(i) Prof Dr Zainal Ariffin Mohd Ishak

School of Materials Eng, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia
Email: zarifin@eng.usm.my

(ii) Dr Abdirahman Yussuf

Petroleum Research Center, Kuwait Institute for Scietific Research, Kuwait.
Email: aayussuf@gmail.com

With the submission of this manuscript I would like to undertake that the above mentioned
manuscript has not been published elsewhere, accepted for publication elsewhere or under
editorial review for publication elsewhere.

Thank you

Prof Dr Azman Hassan

Department of Polymer Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
 Cover Letter

Dear Azman Hassan,

I have the honour to submitted my paper to publication in" Malaysian
Polymer Journal" , my submitted paper is :
Curing of Phenol – Formaldehyde Resin : rheological study by XXX
A. S.* , TTTT K. I. ,and CCCC A. Shenta
please inform me when my paper is reached to you . Thank you very
much for your interest in letter with my all the best wishes to you .
Yours sincerely
Mawar A.S.
Polymer research center
University of VVVV
What happens after you have submitted your
manuscript to the journal?
The Peer Review Process
Difference between managing editors and editors ?

Managing Editor: involve in clerical and administrative

detail in the review process.
Makes some preliminary decisions
Responsible for the later events that convert accepted
manuscript into published papers.

Editor: a scientist, often of preeminent standing

Select the peer reviewers
Makes the final accept and reject decisions
 Initial screening by the Editorial Office

• Language.
• For compliance with ‘Instruction to Authors’.
• For appropriateness/relevancy of subject matter.
• For overall quality: anything new?
 What do the authors expect from the editors ?

I expect the editors to act professionally, and to appoint

experts who are unbiased to review my papers.
I also expect the editors to make a fair decision based on
the comments from the reviewers.
Dr XXX

I expect the editors to accept my papers, accept them as

they are submitted and publish them promptly.
I also expect him to scrutinize all other papers with utmost
care, especially those of my competitors.
Dr YYY
 Peer Review
Purpose:

• To help the editor decide whether to publish the paper

• To help the authors improve the paper, whether or not the

journal accepts it.

Ways peer reviewers are identified:

References, literature searching, editors’ knowledge,
databases, authors’ suggestions
 Review Process

• Reviewing process may takes from 1hr to 6 months

• One to four reviewers along with editorial comments

• Decision from Editor: Accept/reject/revise

• Proof preparation for checking by authors

• In press/queue/article in press

• Completion (vol, issue, page number, year)

 The editors and reviewers need to make
recommendation whether your paper is acceptable:

• In its present form

• After a minor revision
• After a major revision
• Rejection with recommendation for submission.
• Rejection
 Journal of Applied Polymer Science
1. Does the manuscript contain new and significant
information to justify publication?

2. Is the problem significant and concisely stated?

3. Are the experimental and/or theoretical methods

described comprehensively?

4. Are the interpretations and conclusions justified by the

results?

5. Is the summary (abstract) concise?

6. Is the language acceptable?

 European Polymer Journal

Assessment
• Originality
• Important Contribution
• Reliability of Results
• Critical Discussion
• Adequate References
 Reviewer Recommendation

• Overall Review Manuscript Rating : (1-100)

• To what extent does the article meet this criterion?

✓ Fails by a large amount
✓ Fails by small amount
✓ Succeeds by a small amount
✓ Succeeds by a large amount
 Reviewer Recommendation

• The subject addressed in this article is worthy of

investigation.
• The information presented was new.
• The conclusions were supported by the data.
• Is there any financial or other conflict of interest between
your work and that of the authors?
• Please give a frank account of the strengths and
weaknesses of the article
• Comments to Author
 Decision: Acceptance

Dear Prof. Hassan,

Thank you for submitting your revised manuscript entitled
"Heatsealability of Laminated Films with LLDPE and LDPE
as sealant Materials in Bar Sealing Application" to the
Journal of Applied Polymer Science. It is a pleasure to
accept your manuscript in its current form for
publication.
May I take this opportunity to thank you for contributing
your work to our Journal.
Sincerely,
Prof. Eric Baer
Editor-in-Chief
Journal of Applied Polymer Science
 Decision: Rejection

The manuscript apparently seems to correspond to the

standard of scientific papers; however, a closer scrutiny
reveals numerous deficiencies, which make it
unacceptable for publication.

Apart from publishing another paper, I do not see the

philosophy of the work, the message sent or any new
information offered, which could be used by the scientific
community or anyone in industrial practice.
 Decision: Revision and Resubmission

Dear Prof. Hassan,

Your manuscript # APP-2009-03-0676 entitled "MECHANICAL,

THERMAL AND MORPHOLOGICAL PROPERTIES OF POLYLACTIC
ACID/LINEAR LOW DENSITY POLYETHYLENE BLENDS" which you
submitted to the Journal of Applied Polymer Science, has been
reviewed. I am sorry to inform you that based on the reviewers'
comments, I must ask you to revise and resubmit this manuscript
before I can reach an editorial decision. The comments from
reviewers are included at the bottom of this letter.

Please note that resubmitting your manuscript does not guarantee

eventual acceptance, and that your resubmission will be subject to re-
review by the reviewers before a decision is rendered.
How to address reviewers’ comments in revised
manuscript?
 Addressing reviewers’ comments in revised manuscript

• Not being out rightly rejected is an achievement.

• Have a realistic look at how the reviewer’s request can met.
• Use the reviewers comments even if your paper is rejected
• Revise and submit promptly.
• Include a letter saying what revisions have been made
• Make a point-by-point response to reviews
• Do not feel obliged to accept everything the reviewer says
• Be helpful and polite – but not over polite
• Highlight the revisions in the revised manuscript
 Addressing reviewers’ comments in revised manuscript

• Make sure you address everything.

• If you are asked to do more experiment, try to do it. If you
cannot, provide a good explanation.
• Do remember that each reviewer sees all comments and
your replies. Be equally respectful to all.
• In the case where more than one referee has raised the
same concern, it is best to cite : see response to point 2
from reviewer 1, for example.
• Never accuse the reviewers of bias and incompetence ..
(Example: Review 2 is lacking of expertise and completely
misses the point)
 Tips for Revising Your Papers

1. Use the reviewer comments even if your paper is

rejected

If it is rejected; at least get some feedback from the reviewers.

Check through the reviewer comments carefully for things you
can do to improve your paper before you send it to the next
journal

2. Be polite - but not over-polite

It is important to address the reviewers in a polite manner,

even if you totally disagree with their comments.
However, you should not be over-polite
3. Don’t feel obliged to accept everything the reviewer says
Responding to reviewer comments is a balance between
pleasing the reviewer and having the paper you want.
If you strongly disagree with something a reviewer says you
should say so, explaining courteously and with good reasoning
why (flat rejection of a comment will not be well received).

4. Make sure you address everything

Before you submit your responses to the reviewer comments
make sure you have addressed E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G! Nothing
annoyed me more as a peer reviewer than authors not
responding to my comments
 Dealing With Reviewer - Response

Dear Professor John Haworth,

We first gratefully thank you for accepting our manuscript (#APP-

2007-02-0609) entitled “Interface and mechanical properties of peroxide
cured silicate nanofiber/rubber composites ", and two reviewers for good
suggestion as well.

Based on two reviewer’s comments, some changes including English

improvements and supplements have been done in the revised
manuscript, in which the fonts were highlighted with red color. Another
twelve references were added. We think it is more understandable and
more explicit, compared with the old manuscript.
 Addressing reviewers’ comments in
revised manuscript

• When you rewrite the paper, please improve the English

expression thoroughly, and follow STRICTLY the format
described in the Instructions to authors of the journals:
• The English has been checked and improved thoroughly.
• The revised manuscript been prepared according to the
journal format.

• A suggestion is to add “the Malaysian” in the title, i.e. END

USE ENERGY ANALYSIS IN “THE MALAYSIAN” INDUSTRIAL
SECTOR
• “THE MALAYSIAN” has been added in revised title of the
manuscript.
 How to Deal with comments you
don’t understand ?

Explain to the reviewer that you don’t understand what they

mean.

At the same time, it is worth writing responses based on

what you suspect the reviewer may be getting at:

I am afraid that I am unclear as to the point you are making.

If you are saying that the sample was too small, I would
respond that [...]. If instead you feel that the outcome
measure was flawed, I would argue that […].
What is the best response to a reviewer’s comments
which you disagree without offending the reviewers?

First of all, one must consider the fact that the reviewer did
it for free. Basically, though he partly did away your work,
analysing your results and trying to help you in improving
them.
The best thing that one can do under the circumstances
mentioned in the above question is first of all to return
thanks to the reviewer, because that person has given a
valuable feedback, although it is negative.
We, as academicians, must learn to receive feedback and
to use it in a wise manner, because feedback means
taking our work into consideration.
Dear Prof. Sergei Nazarenko,

We are very grateful for the review on our revised manuscript entitle
“Influence of Rubber Contents on Mechanical, Thermal and Morphological
Behavior of Natural Rubber Toughened Poly(lactic Acid)/Multi-walled Carbon
Nanotube Nanocomposites” (manuscript # APP-2015-10-3459).

Careful revision was made to our manuscript based on all comments from
both reviewers. All changes and addition of new text made to the previous
manuscript were marked in red coloured fonts. Enclosed are the responses
towards the comments from reviewer.

We hope that this revision meet with reviewers’ approval and to the standard
of your journal.

Thank you and we await your review for our revised manuscript.
Sincerely

Dr Agus Arsad
 Comments from Review 1
1. Comment: The problem is not significant and concisely stated.
Response: In the original manuscript, the problem statement was
mentioned in the last paragraph of the introduction. We have
revisited that paragraph, an improved statement on research gap
was added to better illustrate the problem statement of our work.

2. Comment: The experimental and theoretical methods are not

described comprehensively.
Response: Thank you for this comment. We have gone through the
methodological section, and included few more information and
theories in certain parts of our experimental methods. We hope the
additional explanations are sufficiently improving this particular
section.
3. Comment: The interpretations and conclusions do not
match with the results.

Response: We appreciate this comment. We have

recognized certain ambiguity in the interpretation of the
results, which require further clarification. Some adjustments
were made in the text to for better interpretation and concise
conclusions of our results.

4 . Comment: Paper Size is too long.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment,
however we believe the length of this paper is unavoidable
due to the various investigations carried out in this study. All
of these investigations are interrelated and important
towards achieving the objective of this study.
Highlight the
corrections that we
have made
 Dealing With Reviewer - Response

Dear Professor Roger Moore,

We first gratefully thank you for accepting our manuscript
(#APP-2007-02-0609) entitled “Interface and mechanical
properties of peroxide cured silicate nanofiber/rubber
composites ", and two reviewers for good suggestion as well.
We also feel terribly sorry to submit the revised manuscript so
late.
Based on two reviewer’s comments, some changes including
English improvements and supplements have been done in
the revised manuscript, in which the fonts were highlighted
with red color. Another twelve references were added. We
think it is more understandable and more explicit, compared
with the old manuscript.
 Addressing reviewers’ comments in revised
manuscript
• When you rewrite the paper, please improve the english
expression thoroughly, and follow STRICTLY the format
described in the Instructions to authors of the journals:

The English has been checked and improved thoroughly.

The revised manuscript been prepared according to the
journal format.

• A suggestion is to add “the Malaysian” in the title, i.e. END

USE ENERGY ANALYSIS IN “THE MALAYSIAN”
INDUSTRIAL SECTOR

“THE MALAYSIAN” has been added in revised title of the

manuscript.
 Addressing reviewers’ comments in
revised manuscript

• I suggest, however that the authors consider the following

comments if possible:
It would be good to calculate expected GHG emmisions
reduction in tons for the potential savings in energy using
standard emissions factors.

Emission reductions associated with the energy savings

have been estimated and presented in Table 8. Details of
estimation formulation have been added in Section 2.5.2.
 Addressing reviewers’ comments in
revised manuscript

Explain why these two polymers were selected for the

study. Is there any expected difference between these
two polymers in terms of the effect of phosphor?
• The criterion for choice of polymer type was to have a
readily available and environmentally stable semicrystalline
(LDPE) and an amorphous (PMMA) polymer respectively.
Some semicrystalline polymers are known to undergo
strain-related deformations that are likely to facilitate the
occurrence of phosphorescence, hence the choice of
LDPE, while PMMA was more or less a control parameter.
• The above explanation has been appropriately included in
the Introduction Section.
 ADDRESSING REVIEWER COMMENTS
Reviewer Comment:
“The method/device/paradigm
the authors propose is clearly
wrong”
How NOT to Respond:
X “Yes, we know. We thought
we could still get a paper out
of it. Sorry.”
Correct Response:
√“The viewer raises and
interesting concern. However,
as the focus of the work is
exploratory and not
performance-based, validation
was not found to be of critical
importance to the contribution
of the paper.”
Reviewer Comment: Reviewer Comment:
“The authors fail to reference “This paper is poorly written and
the work of Smith et al., who scientifically unsound. I do not
solved the same problem 20 recommend it for publication.”
years ago”
How NOT to Respond: How NOT to Respond:
X “Huh. We didn’t think anybody X”You #&@*% reviewer! I know
had read that. Actually, their who you are! I’m gonna get you
solution is better than ours.” when it’s my turn to review.”
Correct Response: Correct Response:
√ “The reviewer raises an √”The reviewer raises an
interesting concern. However, interesting concern. However we
our work is based on completely feel the reviewer did not fully
different first principles (we use comprehend the scope of the
different variable names), and work, misjudged the results
has a much more attractive based on incorrect
graphical user interface.” assumptions.”
 1st Reviewer’s comments Our response

1.1 There are a number of obvious outcomes in We agree with the Reviewer and have defined the
this kind of work, and they are implied in main outcomes.
the writing, but the main outcomes (likely The revised paper now reads as follows (page 2,
development of hypertension, 2nd para.): ‘’In particular the study is designed to
development of abnormal albuminuria, prospectively quantify the risks to donors after
development of proteinuria, death) are not living kidney donation such as the development
explicitly defined. of hypertension, albuminuria, renal failure and
psychological diseases and to assist in the
management of individual donors at an early
stage if such complications occur.’’
1.2 Terrific work, raised my awareness of Thank you very much. No reply required.
barriers to live donation in Switzerland, and
an excellent response to a complex medico-
societal problem. Congratulations on the
work so far and a great idea to publish your
protocol. Here are some suggestions for the
manuscript, * marks those that I thought
more important.
1.3 P3 line 21 could you clarify how ‘missed We agree that the term ‘’missed donor’’ is
donor’ is defined in these studies? confusing. We have corrected the sentence which
reads now:
‘’In these studies the percent of donors without
follow up data ranged from 21% 2 3 to 31% 4, to
42% 5 6 up to 77% 7.’’
 A letter from a frustrated author of a
journal paper
Dear Sir, Madame, or Other,

Enclosed is our latest version of Ms. #1996-02-22-RRRR that is re-re-re-

revised revision of our paper. Choke on it.

We have again rewritten the entire manuscript from start to finish. We even
changed the g-d-running head!. Hopefully, we have suffered enough now
to satisfy even you and bloodthirsty reviewers.

I shall skip the usual point-by-point description of every single change we

made in response to the critiques.

After all, it is fairly clear that your anonymous reviewers are less interested
in the details of scientific procedure than in working out their personality
problems and sexual frustrations by seeking some kind of demented glee in
the sadistic and arbitrary exercise of tyrannical power over helpless authors
like ourselves who happen to fall into their clutches..
• We do understand that, in view of misanthropic psychopaths you
have on your editorial board, you need to keep sending them paper,
for it they were not reviewing the manuscripts they would probably be
out mugging little old ladies or clubbing baby seals to death.
• Still, from this batch of reviewer, C was clearly the most hostile,
and we request that you not ask him to review this revision.
• Indeed, we have mailed letter bombs to four or five people we
suspected of being reviewer C, so if you send the manuscript back to
them, the review process could be unduly delayed.
• Some of the reviewer comments we could not do anything about. For
example, if (as C suggested) several of my recent ancestors were
indeed drawn from other species, it is too late to change that.

• Other suggestions were implemented, however, and the paper has

been improved and benefited.

• Plus you suggested that we shorten the manuscript by five pages,

and we were able to accomplish this very effectively by altering the
margin and printing the paper in a different font with a smaller
typeface. We agree with you that the paper is much better this
way
What are the reasons an editor
or the referees reject a
manuscript
 Reasons for Rejection

1. The paper does not fit the scope of the journal.

2. The paper does not contribute to new knowledge.

3. The paper does not meet established ethical standards.

4. The paper has been carelessly prepared.

5. The paper has not been prepared according to journal’s

guidelines for presentation.
 Reasons for Rejection

6. The paper has methodological problems.

7. The number of experiment & amount of data was

inadequate.

8. The statistics are inadequate.

9. The language is poor.

10. The paper is over the journal’s word limit

 Reasons for Rejection

11. The paper cannot compete with the high

quality of other papers submitted to the journal.

12. Publication bias.

13. Wrong choice of reviewers

14. The data have been poorly interpreted

15. The analysis is weak.

16. The Introduction is inadequate

Conclusions
 Strategies to Publish High Impact
Publications

• Title: interesting and new.

• Presents new knowledge (novelty) and original.
• Correct methodology and adequately explained.
• Professional presentation (Graphs and Tables)
• Followed guidelines to authors.
• Right selection of journal.
• Good strategy in revising manuscript
• Good English: clarity and style
• Good teamworking
Final note … increasing citations
 Strategies to Increase Citations

• Use of Professional Social Network such as

Researchgate & Linkedin.
• Publish in top and relevant journals.
• Do research in current interesting area
• Interesting title and relevant keywords.
• Self-citations (but not excessive)
• Presenting papers in Conference
• Personal contact; send PdF of your published
papers
• Write review papers and include your publications
 Thank you for your time

Libyan Macromolecular Institute, Tripoli (2009)