HOW TO WRITE A WORLD CLASS
METHODOLOGY PAPER
TIPS, TRAPS AND TRAVESTIES
Title Presenter Name,
Degree(s)
Elsevier Author Workshop
Date
Outline
To publish or not to publish
Writing a quality manuscript
Preparations
Article construction
Language
Technical details
Revisions and response to reviewers
Ethical issues
Conclusions: getting accepted
To publish or not to
publish
Why publish?
Scientists publish to share with the research
community findings that advance knowledge and
understanding
To present new, original results or methods
To rationalize published results
To present a review of the field or to summarize a
particular topic
Publish or perish
Funding
Bodies
Scientists /
Clinicians
Grant
Writing
Journal
Publication
Publishers do not want zero-cited articles
Editors now regularly analyze citations per article
The statistic that 27% of our papers were not cited in
5 years was disconcerting. It certainly indicates that it is
important to maintain high standards when
accepting papers... nothing would have been lost
except the CV's of those authors would have been
shorter
Marv Bauer, Editor, Remote Sensing of Environment
Publishers do want quality
WANTED
Originality
Significant advances
in field
Appropriate methods,
case studies and
conclusions
Readability
Studies that meet
ethical standards
NOT WANTED
Duplications
Reports of no scientific
interest
Work out of date
Inappropriate/incomplete
methods or conclusions
Studies with insufficient
data
Just because it has not been done before is
no justification for doing it now.
Peter Attiwill, Editor-in-Chief, Forest
Ecology and Management
Can I publish this?
Have you done something new and interesting?
Have you checked the latest results in the field?
Have the findings been verified by appropriate analysis
and their significance verified?
Are the methods/measurements valid and reliable?
Can you describe the scope and limitations of the methods?
Do your findings tell a nice story or is the story incomplete?
Is the work directly related to a current hot topic?
Have you provided solutions to any difficult problems?
If all answers are yes, then start preparing your
manuscript.
Writing a quality manuscript
Preparations
What type of manuscript?
Full Length Methodology Research
Letters / Rapid Communications / Short Communications
Case Studies
Review Papers
Self-evaluate your work: Is it sufficient for a full article? Or are your
results so thrilling that they need to be revealed as soon as possible?
Ask your supervisor and colleagues for advice on manuscript type.
Sometimes outsiders may see things more clearly than you.
Who is the audience?
Do you want to reach specialists,
multidisciplinary researchers, or a general
audience? You will need to adjust information
and writing style accordingly
Journals, even in similar subjects, reach readers
with different backgrounds
Each journal has its own style; read other
articles to get an idea of what is accepted
Is the readership worldwide or local?
Which journal?
Consider:
Aims and scope (check journal websites and
recent articles)
Types of articles
Readership
Current hot topics (go through recent
abstracts)
Asking colleagues for advice
Sometimes it is necessary to lower ones sights
or return to the lab/clinic to obtain more data
DO NOT gamble by scattering your
manuscript to many journals
Only submit once!
International ethics standards
prohibit multiple simultaneous
submissions, and editors DO find
out!
Format
Consult and apply the list of guidelines in the
Guide for Authors
Ensure that you use the correct:
Layout
Section lengths (stick to word limits)
Nomenclature, abbreviations and spellings (British vs.
American)
Reference format
Number/type of figures and tables
Statistics
Consulting the Guide for Authors will
save your time and the editors
All editors hate wasting time on poorly
prepared manuscripts
It is a sign of disrespect
Writing a quality manuscript
Article construction
Article structure
Title
Authors
Abstract
Keywords
Need to be accurate and informative for
effective indexing and searching
Main text
Introduction
Methodology
Case Studies/Results
Discussion/Conclusions
Acknowledgements
References
Supplementary material
Each has a distinct function
Title
A good title should contain the fewest possible words
that adequately describe the contents of a paper
DO
Convey main findings of
research
Be specific
Be concise
Be complete
Attract readers
DONT
Use unnecessary jargon
Use uncommon
abbreviations
Use ambiguous terms
Use unnecessary detail
Focus on part of the
content only
Title
Two methodologies (reduced species list index
and quality of rocky bottoms index) to evaluate
the quality of algae populations in the presence
of varying pollution gradients
Comparison of two methods for quality assessment
of algae populations under varying pollution
gradients
Authors and affiliations
Be consistent with spelling, full versus short
names, full versus short addresses
Surnames: Prez-Garca / Prez / Garca
Middle Initial: Use consistently or not at all
First Names: Dave / David
Affiliation: Faculty of Medicine / Faculty of Medical and
Health Sciences
Abstract
Types:
Indicative (descriptive) abstracts outline the topics
covered in a piece of writing so the reader can decide
whether or not to read on. Often used in review articles and
conference reports
Informative abstracts summarize the article based on the
paper structure (problem, methods, case studies,
conclusions), but without section headings
Structured abstracts follow headings required by the
journal. Often used in Medical journals
Check carefully which type fits the journal of your choice
Abstract
The quality of an abstract will strongly influence
the editors decision
A good abstract:
Is precise and honest
Can stand alone
Uses no technical jargon
Is brief and specific
Minimizes the use of abbreviations
Cites no references
Use the abstract to sell your article
Traps to Avoid in an Abstract
Example:
This paper presents an innovative set of tools developed
to support a methodology to design and upgrade
wastewater treatment systems (WTS). Previous work by
Grey (2004), Lacey (2001) and others This paper
illustrates the merits of these tools to make the
innovative methodology of interest to everyone involved
in WTS and will become the new design standard
worldwide.
Better to avoid:
Abbreviations, references (save for the introduction), and
exaggerated conclusions
Keywords
Keywords are important for indexing: they
enable your manuscript to be more easily
identified and cited
Check the Guide for Authors for journal
requirements
Keywords should be specific
Avoid uncommon abbreviations and general
terms
Keywords
Title: A Methodology for Extreme Groundwater Surge
Predetermination in Carbonate Aquifers: Groundwater Flood
Frequency Analysis
K. Najib, H. Jourde, S. Pistre
Journal of Hydrology (2008) 352, 1-15
Keywords: Groundwater flooding, frequency analysis, fractured aquifer,
rainfall event, hydraulic head
Bad keywords: methodology, predetermination, aquifer, flood, analysis
Introduction
Provide the necessary background
information to put your work into context
The introduction should provide:
Review of the problems that will be addressed
through the methodology
General definition or overview of the approach and
whether it has been used before or is novel
Description of how the data will be collected and
analyzed
In brief terms, what was achieved
Introduction
DO
Consult the Guide to Authors for word limit
Set the scene
Outline the problem and hypotheses
Ensure that the literature cited is balanced, up
to date and relevant
Define any non-standard abbreviations and
jargon
Introduction
DONT
Write an extensive review of the field
Cite disproportionately your own work, work of
colleagues or work that supports your findings
while ignoring contradictory studies or work by
competitors
Describe methods, results or conclusions other
than to outline what was done and achieved in
the final paragraph
Overuse terms like novel and for the first time
Introduction
In theory, elastin should be an easy protein to purify: simply expose a tissue to high
heat and extreme conditions of pH and the residue that remains is elastin. While
most proteins elastin survives because of its unique chemical composition and
highly cross-linked nature... We now know, however, that the hot alkali product is
highly fragmented and lacks important sequences found in the intact protein
Elastin is the protein that imparts elasticity to the fiber and are thought to help
structure the elastic fiber during tissue growth and maturation [13] As detailed
below, relatively harsh techniques are required to remove microfibrils from elastin,
most likely due to covalent interactions between the two [6]...
Methodology
The Methodology section should be the bulk of the paper and
it must provide sufficient information so that a
knowledgeable reader can reproduce the experiment
Methods can include statistical, historical, sampling and/or theoretical
Where appropriate, actual examples of the use of the methodology should
be included (case studies)
Equations, algorithms, flow charts and figures/tables are often included in
the methodology section for descriptive purposes
Unless the Guide for Authors states otherwise, use present tense for
methodology-type papers
Methodology
The methodology section can be generally divided into
several specific parts
1. Define the population and the methods of sampling
2. Describe the instrumentation
3. Describe the procedures and if relevant, the time frame
4. Describe the analysis plan
5. Describe any approaches to ensure validity and reliability
6. State any assumptions
7. Describe the scope and limitations of the methodology
Results/Case Study
Often consists of applying the methodology to
a case study
DO
DONT
Use figures and tables to
summarize data
Duplicate data among
tables, figures and text
Show the results of
statistical analysis
Use graphics to illustrate
data that can easily be
summarized with text
Confirm that the method is
reliable
Justify the choice of
methods
Define the limitations of the
method
Graphics
Readers often look at the graphics first and many
times go no further. Therefore, the reviewer should
be particularly sensitive to inclusion of clear and
informative graphics.
Henry Rapoport, Associate Editor, Journal of
Organic Chemistry
Graphics
Figures and tables are the most effective way
to present results
BUT:
Captions should be able to stand alone, such that
the figures and tables are understandable without
the need to read the entire manuscript
Captions should not contain extensive experimental
details that can be found in the methodology section
The data represented should be easy to interpret
Colour should only be used when necessary
Illustrations should only be
used to present essential data
The information in the table can all be
presented in one sentence:
The surface soils were dark grayish
brown, grading to light olive brown
(woodland), light olive brown
(wetland), and pale olive (grassland)
at 100 cm.
Summarize results in the text where
possible
The figure and table
show the same
information, but the
table is more direct and
clear
ECOLOGICAL GROUP
Station
II
III
IV
75U
75R
200R
500R
1000R
91.3
89.8
69.3
63.0
86.7
5.3
6.1
14.2
29.5
8.5
3.2
3.6
8.6
3.4
4.5
0.2
0.5
6.8
4.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
0.0
Legend is poorly defined
Graph contains too much
data
No trend lines
Legend is well
defined but there is
still too much data
and no trendlines
Legend is clear
Data is better organized
Trend lines are present
Statistics
Indicate the statistical tests used with all relevant
parameters
mean SD
Give numerator and denominators with
percentages
40% (100/250)
Use means and standard deviations to report
normally distributed data
Statistics
Use medians and interpercentile ranges to
report skewed data
Report P values
p=0.0035 rather than p<0.05
The word significant should only be used to
describe statistically significant differences
Discussion
For some methodology journals, the discussion and conclusions
are lumped into one section and are usually brief
Describe
Did the methods address the model?
Were the methods successful?
How did the findings relate to those of other studies?
Were there limitations of the study?
Avoid
Making grand statements that are not supported by the
methods or the results of the case study
Example: This novel treatment will massively reduce the
prevalence of malaria in the third world
Introducing new results or terms
Conclusions
Put your study into CONTEXT
Describe how it represents an advance in the field
Suggest future applications
Suggest areas of future research
BUT
Avoid repetition with other sections
Avoid being overly speculative
Dont over-emphasize the impact of your study
Conclusions
Conclusions
Better to avoid:
Downplaying negative results and deeming them significant
when there is no proof, making statements based on
personal opinion without scientific support
Example:
Although the statistical analysis did not provide a
reasonable level of significance, we believe that the
methodology is a valid approach towards the design of new
wastewater treatment facilities. In fact, we argue that these
methods could be adopted to the design of any treatment
system worldwide.
Acknowledgements
Acknowledge anyone who has helped you with the
study, including:
Researchers who supplied materials, reagents, or computer
programs
Anyone who helped with the writing or English, or offered
critical comments about the content
Anyone who provided technical help
State why people have been acknowledged and
ask their permission
Acknowledge sources of funding, including any
grant or reference numbers
References
Check the Guide for Authors for the correct format
Check
Spelling of author
names
Punctuation
Avoid
Personal communications,
unpublished observations
and submitted manuscripts
not yet accepted
Number of authors to
include before using et
al.
Citing articles published
only in the local language
Reference style
Excessive self-citation and
journal self-citation
References
Check the style and format as required it is not the
editors job to do so for you
Harvard System (alphabetical by author/date):
Berridge, MJ 1998, Neuronal calcium signaling, Neuron vol. 21: pp. 13-26
APA (American Psychological Association) System (alphabetical)
Berridge, M.J. (1998). Neuronal calcium signaling. Neuron 21, 13-26
Vancouver System (numbered in order or citation)
1. Berridge MJ. Neuronal calcium signaling. Neuron. 1998;21:13-26
There are a number of other systems in use and
variations for all systems
Supplementary material
Information related to and supportive of the main text,
but of secondary importance, may be contained in an
appendix
Includes:
Extensive statistical analysis
Supplementary mathematical analysis
Additional data
Video data
Will be available online when the manuscript is published
Writing a quality manuscript
Language
Journal editors, overloaded with quality
manuscripts, may make decisions on
manuscripts based on formal criteria, like
grammar or spelling. Don't get rejected for
avoidable mistakes; make sure your
manuscript looks perfect
Arnout Jacobs, Elsevier Publishing
Thus, both the science and the language need to be sound
The three Cs
Good writing possesses the following three Cs:
Clarity
Conciseness
Correctness (accuracy)
The key is to be as brief and specific as
possible without omitting essential details
Know the enemy
Good writing avoids the following traps:
Repetition
Redundancy
Ambiguity
Exaggeration
These are common annoyances for editors
Repetition and Redundancy
Vary the sentences used when writing the
abstract or describing findings at the end of the
introduction
Dont copy from other sections verbatim!
Avoid words with the same meaning
In addition, a systematic analysis of the data was also
presented
After statistical analysis of the data, the methods were then
modified
Avoid using the same descriptive word twice in one
sentence
In this paper, a simple methodology for classifying simple
composite wastes has been proposed.
Repetition and Redundancy
Avoid circular sentences
In order to compare the differences in the two
analytical methods, the dependent variable was
set to concentration, in order to determine if
changes had occurred.
The reason for the experiment is described twice, in
slightly different terms
Ambiguity
Ensure correct use of which, commas and
hyphens
Calcium regulated transcription has a different meaning
from
Calcium-regulated transcription
In To identify biomarkers of prostate cancer, we performed
microarray analysis, using custom cDNA arrays
The second comma should be deleted
Ambiguity
Ensure correct use of which, commas and
hyphens
In Data were normalised to the internal reference
housekeeping gene actin, which showed
The which is used incorrectly, referring to actin rather
than to the normalisation of data
Data were normalised to the internal reference
housekeeping gene actin, revealing that is correct
Ambiguity
Semi-colons are used in place of periods to separate two
parallel sentences. They do not take the place of a
comma or colon.
The data and information were grouped into four broad classes
mainly based on the constituent chemicals in the waste stream,
namely; the physiochemical properties, toxicity effects, exposure
potency and waste quantity.
The data and information were grouped into four broad classes
mainly based on the constituent chemicals in the waste stream.
The classes included the physiochemical properties, toxicity
effects, exposure potency and waste quantity.
Exaggeration
Effect of p.o. administration of tea and caffeine on
tumor number
Tumor number
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Water
Green Tea
Black Tea
Caffeine
Treatment
There was a massive decrease in the number of
tumors following p.o. administration of green tea
Beware of exaggeration but do indicate significance
Other common traps
Inconsistent tense dont mix tenses in the same
sentence
Before tumors were microdissected, epithelial cells
are
Inconsistent use of plural or singular
In eight patients, a biopsy from the affected sites of
the head and neck was performed
In eight patients, biopsies from the affected sites of
the head and neck were performed
Other common traps
Unbalanced sentences make sure the clauses
either side of compared with match up
Expression levels of p53 in smokers were compared
with non-smokers
Expression levels of p53 in smokers were compared
with those in non-smokers
Other common traps
Incorrect use of respectively two corresponding
lists are required
The proportions of various monocyte surface
markers were 45%, 63% and 70%, respectively
The proportions of monocytes positive for CD163, CD7
and CD11a were 45%, 63% and 70%, respectively
Other common traps
Incorrect use of etc. / and so on
The two groups of data were compared using a
variety of statistical methods including a t-test,
chi squared analysis, etc.
It is important here to define the tests used as they
are particular to the paper, not part of a natural
series and not obvious to the reader.
Other common traps
Overuse of etc / and so on
By comparison with results found in the literature,
such as those presented by MacDonald et al.
(2003), Smith (2005), Burns (2006), and so on,
the consequences presented here show a
similar trend.
The use of etc. and and so on should be minimized in a
manuscript and, whenever possible, a full series of
examples should be provided, particularly when
referencing the literature
Language Editing Services
Your manuscript is precious, invest in it
Specialist scientific and medical editing services are
commercially available to polish the language in your
manuscript prior to journal submission
Rates start from $8 per page
More information can be found on the Elsevier website at:
[Link]
Language Editing Services
Recommended companies include:
- Edanz Editing
- Liwen Bianji
- International Science Editing
- Asia Science Editing
- SPI Publisher Services
- Diacritech Language Editing Service
Use of an English-language editing service listed here is
not mandatory, and will not guarantee acceptance for
publication in Elsevier journals
Writing a quality manuscript
Technical details
Layout
Keep line spacing, font and font size consistent throughout
double-spaced 12-point Times New Roman is preferred
Use consistent heading styles throughout and no more
than three levels of headings
Number the pages
Number lines if journal requires check the Guide for
Authors
Order and title sections as instructed in the Guide for
Authors Figure and Table sections are normally together
following References
Length
25-30 pages is the ideal length for a submitted
manuscript, including ESSENTIAL data only
Julian Eastoe, Co-editor, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science
Consult the Guide for Authors for word and graphic limits
Letters or short communications have stricter limits on the
length. For example, 3000 words with no more than five
illustrations
Abbreviations
Define non-standard abbreviations on first use in both
the abstract and the main text
Check the Guide for Authors for a list of standard
abbreviations that dont need defining
Dont abbreviate terms used only once or twice in the
entire manuscript spell these out in full
Acronyms: capitals not required in the definition unless
a proper noun or start of a sentence
ubiquitin proteasome system (UPS)
NOT
Ubiquitin Proteasome System (UPS)
Cover letter
This is your chance to speak to the editor
directly
Keep it brief, but convey the particular
importance of your manuscript to the journal
Suggest potential reviewers
This is your opportunity to convince the journal
editor that they should publish your study, so it
is worth investing time at this stage
Cover letter
Include:
Editor name Address to journal editor, not generic
First sentence provide title, author list and journal
name
Briefly describe:
your research area and track record
the main findings of your research
the significance of your research
Confirm the originality of the submission
Confirm that there are no competing financial interests
Revisions and
Response to Reviewers
Final checks
Revision before submission can prevent early rejection
What can I do to ensure my paper is in the best
possible state prior to submission?
Ask colleagues to take a look and be critical
Check that everything meets the requirements set out in
the Guide for Authors again!
Check that the scope of the paper is appropriate for the
selected journal change journal rather than submit
inappropriately
Final checks
Revision before submission can prevent early rejection
What can I do to ensure my paper is in the best
possible state prior to submission?
If necessary, get a colleague or approved editing
service to improve the language and ensure that the
manuscript possesses the three Cs
Ensure that the literature cited is balanced and that the
aims and purpose of the study, and the significance of
the results, are clear
Use a spellchecker
Post-referee revision
Carefully study the reviewers comments and prepare a
detailed letter of response
Respond to all points; even if you disagree with a
reviewer, provide a polite, scientifically solid rebuttal rather
than ignore their comment
Provide page and line numbers when referring to
revisions made in the manuscript
Perform additional calculations, computations, or
experiments if required; these usually serve to make the
final paper stronger
Post-referee revision
The reviewer is clearly ignorant of the work of
Bonifaci et al. (2008) showing that the electric field
strength in the ionization zone of the burned corona is
less than the space charge free field before the
corona onset.
Thank you for your comment. However, we feel that
the assumption in our model is supported by recent
work by Bonifaci et al. (2008), who showed that the
electric field strength in the ionization zone of the
burned corona is less than the space charge free field
before the corona onset.
Post-referee revision
State specifically what changes you have made to
address the reviewers comments, mentioning the page
and line numbers where changes have been made
Avoid repeating the same response over and over; if a
similar comment is made by multiple people explain your
position once and refer back to your earlier response in
responses to other reviewers or the editor
Post-referee revision
Clearly differentiate responses from reviewers
comments by using a different font style
Reviewers Comments: It would also be good to acknowledge that
geographic routing as you describe it is not a complete routing
solution for wireless networks, except for applications that address a
region rather than a particular node. Routing between nodes
requires further machinery, which detracts from the benefits of
geographic routing, and which I don't believe you have made
practical.
Authors reply: We agree and will add an appropriate caveat. Note
that for data-centric storage (name-based exact-match and range
queries for sensed events), the storage and query processing
mechanisms "natively" address packets geographically without a
"node-to-location" database.
Dr. Ramesh Govindan,
Professor, Computer Science Department, University of Southern California
Accepting rejection
Dont take it personally!
Try to understand why the paper has been rejected
Evaluate honestly will your paper meet the journals
requirements with the addition of more data or is another
journal more appropriate?
Dont resubmit elsewhere without significant revisions
addressing the reasons for rejection and checking the new
Guide for Authors
Accepting rejection
Suggested strategy for submitting elsewhere:
In your cover letter, declare that the paper was
rejected and name the journal
Include the referees reports and show how each
comment has been addressed
Explain why you are submitting the paper to this
journal; is it a more appropriate journal?
Ethical Issues
Unethical behavior can earn rejection and even a
ban from publishing in the journal
Terry M. Phillips, Editor, Journal of Chromatography B
Unethical behavior includes:
Multiple submissions
Redundant publications
Plagiarism
Data fabrication and falsification
Improper use of human subjects and animals in
research
Improper author contribution
Multiple submissions
Multiple submissions save your time but waste editors
The editorial process of your manuscripts will be
completely stopped if the duplicated submissions are
discovered.
It is considered to be unethicalWe have thrown
out a paper when an author was caught doing this.
I believe that the other journal did the same thing
James C. Hower, Editor, International Journal of Coal
Geology
Multiple submissions
Competing journals constantly exchange information
on suspicious papers
You should not send your manuscripts to a second
journal UNTIL you receive the final decision of the first
journal
DONT DO IT!!
Redundant publication
An author should not submit for consideration in
another journal a previously published paper
Published studies do not need to be repeated
unless further confirmation is required
Previous publication of an abstract during the
proceedings of conferences does not preclude
subsequent submission for publication, but full
disclosure should be made at the time of
submission
Redundant publication
Re-publication of a paper in another language is
acceptable, provided that there is full and
prominent disclosure of its original source at the
time of submission
At the time of submission, authors should disclose
details of related papers, even if in a different
language, and similar papers in press
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is the appropriation of another persons
ideas, processes, results, or words without giving
appropriate credit, including those obtained through
confidential review of others research proposals
and manuscripts
Federal Office of Science and Technology Policy,
1999
Plagiarism
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
Bruce Railsback, Professor, Department of Geology,
University of Georgia
For more information on plagiarism and self-plagiarism, please see:
[Link]
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is a serious offence that could lead to
paper rejection, academic charges and
termination of employment. It will seriously affect
your scientific reputation.
DONT DO IT!
Unacceptable paraphrasing, even with correct
citation, is considered plagiarism
Paraphrasing
Original (Gratz, 1982):
Bilateral vagotomy resulted in an increase in tidal
volume but a depression in respiratory frequency
such that total ventilation did not change.
Restatement 1:
Gratz (1982) showed that bilateral vagotomy resulted
in an increase in tidal volume but a depression in
respiratory frequency such that total ventilation did
not change.
Ronald K. Gratz. Using Others Words and Ideas.
Department of Biological Sciences, Michigan Technological University
Paraphrasing
Original (Buchanan, 1996):
What makes intentionally killing a human being a moral
wrong for which the killer is to be condemned is that
the killer did this morally bad thing not inadvertently or
even negligently, but with a conscious purpose with
eyes open and a will directed toward that very object.
Restatement 2:
Buchanan (1996) states that we condemn a person
who intentionally kills a human being because he did a
"morally bad thing" not through negligence or accident
but with open eyes and a direct will to take that life.
Ronald K. Gratz. Using Others Words and Ideas.
Department of Biological Sciences, Michigan Technological University
Data fabrication and falsification
Fabrication is making up data or results, and recording or
reporting them
Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment,
processes; or changing / omitting data or results such that
the research is not accurately represented in the research
record
The most dangerous of all falsehoods is a slightly
distorted truth
G.C. Lichtenberg (17421799)
Unethical research
Experiments on human subjects or animals should follow
related ethical standards, namely, the Helsinki Declaration
of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5)
If doubt exists concerning the compliance of the research
with the Helsinki Declaration, authors must explain the
rationale for their approach and demonstrate approval
from the institutional review body
Improper author contribution
Authorship credit should be based on
1. Substantial contributions to conception and design, or
acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data
2. Drafting the article or revising it critically for important
intellectual content
3. Final approval of the version to be published
Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3. Those who
have participated in certain substantive aspects of the
research project should be acknowledged or listed as
contributors. Check the Guide for Authors and ICMJE
guidelines: [Link]
Conclusion: Getting Accepted
What gets you accepted?
Attention to details
Check and double check your work
Consider the reviews
English must be as good as possible
Presentation is important
Take your time with revision
Acknowledge those who have helped you
New, original and previously unpublished
Critically evaluate your own manuscript
Ethical rules must be obeyed
Nigel John Cook, Editor-in-Chief, Ore Geology Reviews