How to Publish in Top Journals

1
How to Publish in Top Journals?

• Professor Ben Martin
• SPRU Science Technology Policy Research
• University of Sussex
• B.Martin_at_sussex.ac.uk
• Invited talk at PRIME PhD and Early Career
  Researcher Conference on Challenges in Research
  and Innovation Policy Studies, University of
  Manchester, 2 July 2009

2
Contents

• Background
• Choosing research topic
• Embedding your topic
• Research
• Writing up
• What do journal editors look for?
• Conclusions

3
Background

• Some textbooks and articles on writing
• C Sörensen, This is not an article Just some
  thoughts on how to write one
• 5 questions
• What is the problem domain?
• What is the specific problem?
• What is the research approach?
• What have others done?
• What are the research results?
• Make sure abstract/intro outlines answers
• Learn from very successful exemplars
• Keep it simple
• Start with catchy title and work top-down
• Polish packaging and content
• Review your own paper critically, then rewrite

4
Background

• But many publications on this not very useful?
• Personal experience
• Own publications
• Colleagues
• gt20 DPhil students
• Referee
• Editor of Research Policy
• A lot of tacit knowledge involved
• Tried to identify distil
• Highly personal!

5
Choosing research topic

• What is
• hot in top journals?
• exciting interest and debate at conferences?
• a problem confronting managers/policy makers on
  which you could cast some light?
• What is your comparative advantage?
• Disciplinary background
• Professional experience?
• Empirical study based on your country/sector?
  (but still need to offer something new)
• Possible journals for eventual publication?

6
Embedding your topic

• Topic needs
• to be embedded in prior body/bodies of literature
• to make a significant contribution to that
  literature
• As STI studies developed, number of such bodies
  of literature increased and each become more
  specific
• You cant engage with all of them!

7
Research

• Research questions
• should emerge logically from literature review
  (e.g. from a gap or an unsolved problem)
  study well motivated
• Research design and methodology
• appropriate
• rigorous
• reproducible
• Pilot?
• Main fieldwork/data collection
• Analysis
• rigorous
• systematic
• Conclusions
• fully substantiated
• original and interesting
• wider implications

8
Writing up

• Identify target journals
• Where do top researchers publish?
• What topics covered in last 2-3 years?
• JIF? (Go for quality, not quantity)
• Read related papers
• Get feel for structure, content, style
• Check carefully instructions to authors etc.
• Topics
• Length
• References
• Then follow instructions very closely!

9
What do journal editors look for?

• Evidence that author done homework first
• e.g. checked website for scope of journal,
  instructions to authors etc.
• Then Ed asks 3 questions
• 1. Topic within scope?
• Refers to (recent) papers on same topic in
  journal?
• Appropriate orientation for journal and its
  readers?
• Arrives at conclusions of interest to readers?
• If Yes, then move to Qu. 2
• If No, desk-rejection

10
What do journal editors look for?

• 2. High quality?
• Important topic embedded in relevant literature?
• Original reader learns something new and
  perhaps unexpected?
• see MS Davis, Thats interesting, Phil. Soc.
  Sci. 1 (1971), 309-44
• Rigorous (and appropriate) methodology?
• Clear, significant, original, interesting
  conclusions?
• Logical argument, substantiated assertions?
• Well written, good English?
• If Yes, then move to Qu. 3
• If No, desk-rejection

11
What do journal editors look for?

• 3. Who to referee?
• Hard to find reliable, conscientious referees
• Dont want to bother unless article good enough
• References
• Standing on the shoulder of giants
• Chance to influence choice of referees
• Chance to show potential referees that you have
  appreciated and understood their work
• Think who editors might ask to referee
• Cited authors make sure that cited correctly
• Advisory editors look at list
• Experts on that topic make sure you cite!

12
Response from editor

• If RR
• Read referees comments very carefully
• Decide which points you can respond to
• Revise paper
• Prepare accompanying note to each referee
  explaining exactly how and where you responded to
  each of his/her points
• Be prepared to RR more than once!
• If rejected
• Learn from critical comments
• Dont contest! Revise, improve try another
  journal
• (When you referee a paper, remember what you look
  for and what you criticise)

13
Conclusions

• Identify an important topic
• Embed it in the literature
• Well designed and well executed research
• Identify appropriate journal
• Write first draft, edit, show to colleagues, give
  as seminar, revise, and keep improving
• Bear in mind what journal editors (and referees)
  look for
• Keep practising and improving!