การเขียนบทความวิจัยอย่างไรให้ได้รับการตีพิมพ์

DISCUSSION v It is important not to extend your conclusions beyond what is directly supported by your results. v It is advisable to suggest practical applications of your results and outline what would be the next steps in your study.

CONCLUSION To summarize, make sure that: v your results directly support your conclusions v you use specific expressions and quantitative descriptions – ‘12 degrees higher’ instead of ‘a higher temperature’ v you only discuss what you defined early in the paper – don’t introduce the reader to a whole new vocabulary. If you missed an important term, go back to the introduction and insert it v all interpretations and speculations are based on fact, not imagination

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v This section should be brief and include individuals who have assisted with your study, including financial supporters! proofreaders, typists, and suppliers who provided materials free of charge, etc.

REFERENCES v Whenever you draw on previously published work!\"you must acknowledge the source#\"Any information not from your experiment and not considered $common knowledge%\"should be recognized by a citation#\" v How citations are presented varies considerably from discipline to discipline, and you should refer to notes for authors for the specific journal#\" v Quotes that appear in the paper!\"if long!\"should have their own indented paragraph&\"otherwise!\"if they are incorporated in the natural flow of the article!\"they should be set within quotation marks#

REFERENCES v Avoid references that are difficult to find and/or refer to papers not written in the language of the journal to which you are submitting your paper. v The References section needs to include all references cited in your paper.



The process

The process v Start early … very early § Hastily-written papers get rejected. § Papers are like wine: they need time to mature v Collaborate

Getting help Get your paper read by as many friendly guinea pigs as possible v Experts are good v Non-experts are also very good v Each reader can only read your paper for the first time once! So use them carefully v Explain carefully what you want (“I got lost here” is much more important than “Research is mis-spelt”.)

Getting expert help v A good plan: when you think you are done, send the draft to the competition saying “could you help me ensure that I describe your work fairly?”. v Often they will respond with helpful critique (they are interested in the area) v They are likely to be your referees anyway, so getting their comments or criticism up front is Jolly Good.

Style House style gives individual publications their identity and can count when it comes to having papers accepted ² The longer the sentence, the greater likelihood of confusion ² Never use a long word when a short one will do ² Avoid idioms or jargon words ² Use abbreviations with care ² Passive constructions should be used sparingly because they can be very dull ² Prepositions are better than strings of nouns (noun salads)

Basic stuff v Submit by the deadline v Keep to the length restrictions § Do not narrow the margins § Do not use 6pt font § On occasion, supply supporting evidence (e.g. experimental data, or a written-out proof) in an appendix v Always use a spell checker

Visual structure v Give strong visual structure to your paper using § sections and sub-sections § bullets § italics § laid-out code v Find out how to draw pictures, and use them

Visual structure

Grammar Use past tense to describe procedures, observations and data of your work. Use present tense for general conclusions, conclusions of previous researchers, and generally accepted facts.

Thus, most of the Abstracts, Materials and Methods and Results will be in the past tense, and most of the Introduction and some of the Discussion will be in the present tense. “Smith (2004) demonstrated that ABC cells grow at pH 6.8” “On the other hand, in this study ABC cells failed to grow at pH 6.8 (Figure 1)”.

Use simple, direct language NO YES The object under study was The ball moved sideways displaced horizontally Yearly On an annual basis Find out Endeavour to ascertain It could be considered that the The garbage collector was really speed of storage reclamation slow left something to be desired

Use the active voice As a rule of thumb, choose the active voice whenever possible. Choose the passive voice when there is good reason to do so. Consider passive voice when: § The agent is unknown, unimportant, or obvious to the reader § The agent is less important than the action of the sentence § The agent is less important than the topic of the sentence § One topic (among several) has greater importance Active voice: “Scientists once classified slime molds as fungi, but they no longer classify them as part of that particular kingdom.” Passive voice: “Slime molds were once classified as fungi but are no longer considered to be part of that particular kingdom.”

Scientific Writing: A Verb Tense Review Source: https://wordvice.com/which-verb-tense-to-use-in-a-research-paper/



Article submission v Once the paper is completed it needs to be submitted to a journal. v The advice here is to follow the guidelines in the journal’s author guide and follow them implicitly. v Many journals now offer an electronic submission option that allows efficient and timely submission and initiates the peer review process in an online environment.

Peer review v Once submitted the paper will go through the journal’s peer review system. v The process varies, but for most journals, the journal editor(s) will make an initial decision on a paper – deciding whether to send it out for review or to reject the paper, at this stage papers are rejected either because they are out of the journal’s scope or represent faulty science. v Most editors appoint at least two reviewers who will make recommendations.

Peer review

Peer review v The editor makes the final decision, and you should receive a decision of § Rejected without review (desk rejection / fast rejection) § Accept § Minor Revision § Major Revision § Reject v If your paper is rejected most editors will write to you explaining their decision. v It is very rare that a paper is accepted without some revision, so expect to make some changes. v Hopefully, after revision your paper will be accepted for publication in the journal.

Peer review v Only a small proportion, 5 to 10 percent, are accepted the first time they are submitted, and usually they are only accepted subject to revision. * Accept: \"Which almost nobody gets.\" * Accept with revision: \"Just make some minor changes.\" * Revise and resubmit: \"They're still interested in you!\" * Reject and resubmit: Though not as good as revise and resubmit, \"they still want the paper!“ Read every criticism as a positive suggestion for something you could explain more clearly

Listening to your reviewers Treat every review like gold dust Be (truly) grateful for criticism as well as praise This is really, really, really hard But it’s really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really important

Letter from the editor: Example ACCEPT: I am pleased to confirm that your paper “………………………\" has been accepted for publication in Carbohydrate Polymers. REJECT: Thank you for submitting your manuscript to Carbohydrate Polymers. The above manuscript has been considered for publication in this journal. Regretfully I must inform you that the paper is not acceptable for publication, as advised by the referees of the paper. Please find below the referees' comments on your paper.

Letter from the editor: Example Your manuscript, AAPSPT-D-10-00xxx “……………\" has been peer reviewed and evaluated editorially; MAJOR revisions have been recommended. If you can address all issues raised by the Reviewers, I invite you to resubmit a thoroughly revised manuscript in the next 45 days. If after 45 days you have not resubmitted your revised paper or contacted the editor for an extension of the deadline, your paper will be removed from the Editorial Manager system and you will be required to submit a new manuscript. Please provide a point-by-point reply that indicates how you have revised your manuscript to address each of the Reviewers' comments, and to my detailed commentary below.

Why manuscripts are rejected 1. Poor experimental design and/or inadequate investigation 2. Failure to conform to the targeted journal 3. Poor English grammar, style, and syntax 4. Insufficient problem statement 5. Methods not described in detail 6. Overinterpretation of results 7. Inappropriate or incomplete statistics 8. Unsatisfactory or confusing presentation of data in tables or figures 9. Conclusions not supported by data 10. Incomplete, inaccurate, or outdated review of the literature 11. Author unwilling to revise the manuscript to address reviewer’s suggestions

How to reply to the editor

How to reply to the editor

How to reply to the editor v Read every criticism as a positive suggestion for something you could explain more clearly v DO NOT respond “you stupid person, I meant X”. Fix the paper so that X is apparent even to the stupidest reader. v Thank them warmly. They have given up their time for you.

How to reply to the editor v Consider this as an appeal process. v The reply is considered by the Editor, and is rarely sent back to the referees for another evaluation. v If you need to do further experiments, and it is still possible, do them. v Reply point by point. Write out the criticism/comment and then reply to it. v Indicate clearly in the revised manuscript where you have made changes.

Essential information to include: v Title and authors of the manuscript v A brief “thank you” note addressed to the editor and reviewers stating your gratitude for the review. v Write responses to the comments in separate sections according to the first reviewer, second reviewer, and so forth. v Distinguish the reviewers’ comments from your own responses by using either bold or italicized versus normal text or using different fonts for specific sections. v Be sure to answer each and every comment made by the reviewers.

How to reply to the editor Pay close attention to the structure of the response of the reviewer’s comment considering the font, line spacing, tone, and how we have addressed the reviewer’s main concerns. Example:

How to reply to the editor

How to reply to the editor

How to reply to the editor

How to reply to the editor

How to reply to the editor

How to reply to the editor



Retention of rights for scholarly purposes v I understand that I retain or am hereby granted (without the need to obtain further permission) the Retained Rights, and that no rights in patents, trademarks or other intellectual property rights are transferred to Elsevier Ltd. v The Retained Rights include the right to use the Preprint, Accepted Manuscript and the Published Journal Article for Personal Use, Internal Institutional Use and for Scholarly Sharing. v In the case of the Accepted Manuscript and the Published Journal Article the Retained Rights exclude Commercial Use (unless expressly agreed in writing by Elsevier Ltd), other than use by the author in a subsequent compilation of the author's works or to extend the Article to book length form or re-use by the author of portions or excerpts in other works (with full acknowledgment of the original publication of the Article).

The research work has little value if it cannot be published! Frank J. Gonzalez



Publication ethics

Publication ethics

Publication ethics

Plagiarism “Taking over the ideas, methods, or written words of another, without acknowledgment and with the intention that they be taken as the work of the deceiver.\" American Association of University Professors (September/October, 1989). Source: http://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/roig_st_johns/

Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices 1. An ethical writer ALWAYS acknowledges the contributions of others and the source of his/her ideas. 2. Any verbatim text taken from another author must be enclosed in quotation marks. 3. We must always acknowledge every source that we use in our writing; whether we paraphrase it, summarize it, or enclose it quotations. Source: http://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/roig_st_johns/