The Book of Writing a Scientific Paper_clone

14.2.4. Literature Review Reviewing literature is a continuous activity. Mention the major contributions, any controversy and what is left to be done in this section. A critical review requires a couple of sentences for each reference to describe the salient features of the previous work and its limitations. When several articles touch on the same subject in a similar manner, they can be referenced simultaneously. As many as 20 pertinent references are sufficient. Most scientific articles ignore patents and vice versa. In fact, patent literature can be an enormous source of inspiration. 14.2.5. Experimental Methods Considering what Pulitzer said, the Experimental Methods and materials section must be stated concisely, clearly and accurately so that others may replicate the results. Include only professional images that demonstrate the experimental apparatus. Include schematic diagrams and describe major pieces of equipment individually as well as the experimental sequence chronologically. Describe the sampling procedure, if any. Use tables to summarize the experimental conditions. State the invariant factors in the body or in the captions to keep tables manageable. List all materials and reagents as well as their purity. Indicate if the reagents were further pureed or were synthesized as part of the study. Reference the synthesis steps where appropriate rather than repeating them. Provide the brand and the model of the analytical instruments as well as the conditions. Highlight data that helped design the experiments described in the results section. 101

14.2.6. Results and Discussion This section constitutes the bulk of auteur's paper. It substantiates what they say in the abstract and conclusions. Summarize the data in graphs and tables and discuss the obvious trends in the body of the text. Interpret the data. Include literature references to corroborate the results. If the results are inconsistent with literature, highlight the differences. Explain all the results and be critical. 14.2.7. Conclusions People often read the conclusions directly after the abstract. Do not repeat the abstract. In fact, some journals skip the conclusions section. Avoid restating the problem and the context of the work but highlight the most significant endings. Consider mentioning the limitations of the work or issues that remain. Address the implications of the work in a context relevant to other systems, scale-up 102

Chapter 15 Writing an Effective Academic CV 15.0. Effective Academic CV A CV allows you to showcase yourself and your academic and professional achievements in a concise, effective way. You want to have a compelling CV that is well-organized and easy to read, yet accurately represents your highest accomplishments. Don't be shy about your achievements, but also remember to be honest about them. Do not exaggerate or lie! Academic CVs differ from the CVs typically used by non-academics in industry, because you need to present your research, your various publications and awarded funding, in addition to the various other items contained in a non-academic CV. The intention of this informative guide is to provide academics with advice and tips on how best to write a CV for the academic field. The advice and tips provided here are organized into categories as could be used to structure a CV as well. You do not need to follow the format used here, but it is advised to address the categories covered here somewhere in your CV. To start with some general advice first, you should consider length, structure and formatting of your CV. 15.1. Length: Since academic CVs must present so much information with regard to research and publications, it is generally acceptable if CVs are more than 2 pages long.2 it is best not to exceed 4 pages maximum. 15.2. Structure: Choose a structure for your CV with the main headings and subheadings you will use. There are several sources and CV samples available and links are provided to these sources at the end of this document. In general, however, you should start with providing some brief personal details, then a brief career summary. Your education, publications and research should follow and be the focus for the first section of your CV. Other important categories to address include: funding, awards and prizes, teaching roles, administrative experience, technical and professional skills and qualifications, any professional affiliations or memberships, conference and seminar attendances and a list of references. 15.3. Formatting: Your CV should be clear and easy to read. Use legible font types in a normal size (font size 11 or 12) with normal sized margins (such as 1 inch or 2.5 cm margins). Use bullet points to highlight important items and to concisely present your credentials. Keep a consistent style for headings and subheadings and main text – do not use more than 2 font types in your CV. Make smart, but sparing use of bold, italics and underlining. Be aware of spelling and grammar and ensure it is perfect. Re-read a few times after writing the CV to ensure there are no errors and the CV is indeed. 15.4. Personal Details Personal details include your name, address of residence, phone number(s) and professional e-mail address. You may also include your visa status, as relevant. 15.5. Career Summary The career summary is not a statement of your ambitions or objectives. It is a brief summary of approximately 5 -7 sentences summarizing your expertise in your discipline(s), years of expertise in the area(s), noteworthy research findings, key achievements and publications. 103

15.6. Education Provide an overview of your education starting from your first academic degree to the most recent degree obtained (reverse chronological order). Include the names of the institutions, thesis or dissertation topics and type of degree obtained. 15.7. Publications The listing of publications is a key part of an academic’s CV. It is advisable to list your most reputed publications in ranking of type, such as books, book chapters, peer-reviewed journal articles, non-peer-reviewed articles, articles presented as prestigious conferences, forthcoming publications, reports, patents, and so forth. Consider making an exhaustive list of all publications in an appendix. 15.8. Research As an academic, your research experiences, your findings, the methods you use and your general research interests, are critical to present in the first part of your CV. Highlight key research findings and accomplishments. 15.9. Honors and Recognitions Here is a section where you can allow yourself to shine. Share any prizes, awards, honors or other recognitions for your research and work with the year it occurred and by who/which body the award was granted. 15.10. Funding the funding you have attracted for your research and work is recognition of the value of your research and efforts. If applying for positions, institutions also like to see what kind of funding you can attract. As with the honors and recognitions, be forthcoming with what you have obtained in terms of grants, scholarships and funds. 15.11. Teaching This section is straightforward. List your teaching experiences, including the institutions, the years you taught, as well as the subject matters you taught and the level of the course(s). 15.12. Administrative Experience Any administrative experience within a faculty or research institute should be noted on your CV. Do you facilitate (or have you in the past) a newsletter, an event(s), or anything else at your respective institution? If so, and particularly if relevant to your discipline, include it in your CV. 15.13. Professional Experience If you have been employed in industry and it is relatively recent (approximately within the last 5-10 years) and relevant to your academic work, it is important to include it. If relevant, professional experience can explain any gap fills in your academic work and demonstrate the diversity in your capabilities.5 15.14. Other Skills and Qualifications As on every CV, academics should highlight key skills and qualifications relevant to your research and academic work. Technical and practical skills, certifications, languages, and more, are relevant to mention in this section. 15.15. Professional Affiliations and Memberships If you belong to any professional group or network related to your areas of expertise, you should mention them in this section. Only list affiliations or memberships with which you are active (within last 5 years, for example). This should not be a lengthy section. 15.16. Attendance at Conferences and Seminars List the most relevant conferences or seminars where you presented or participated in a panel within the last 5-7 years. In an appendix, you can add an exhaustive list of conferences and seminars where you participated by giving a speech, presented a paper or research, or participated in a discussion panel. 15.17. References It is advised to list at least three contact persons who can provide a reference for your research, work and character. Provide their names and complete contact information. Clearly, they should all be academics and all people you have worked with. 15.18. Appendices As referenced already in some of the preceding categories, it is ok to include an appendix. Appendices enable you to keep the main content of your CV brief, while still providing relevant detail. Items to list in an appendix can include publications, short research 104

statements or excerpts, conference or seminar participation, or something similar and relevant which you would like to provide more details about. 15.19. CVs are not only for Job-Searching As a presentation by Wendy Perry of the University of Virginia clearly indicates, CVs are not just for job-searching. This is important to keep in mind when preparing CV. You will regularly need to update your CV and to adapt it for the various purposes. In Perry’s presentation, she highlighted the other frequent uses of an academic CV, including: 1. Awards, fellowships 2. References 3. Publishing 4. Grant applications 5. Public speaking 6. Consulting 7. Leadership 8. Merit/tenure review 15.20. Outline Examples of Academic CVs http://www.prospects.ac.uk/downloads/documents/prospects/IDD/Special% 20Interests%20Series/CVs/2005/YourPhDexample%20CV.pdf http://www.open.ac.uk/careers/cvs-for-PhD-researchers.php http://www.vitae.ac.uk/researchers/1373/Academic%20CVs.html Sample CVs http://www.prospects.ac.uk/downloads/documents/prospects/IDD/Special% 20Interests%20Series/CVs/2005/Your%20PhD%20Science%20Academic% 20CV.pdf http://www.careers.utoronto.ca/myCareer/resumeInterview/cv.aspx Also, if you are applying for a position with an academic institution, they may have their own preferred CV outline. Inquire to see if the institution does have a preference and use it. Also, if you are applying for a position with an academic institution, 105

Chapter 16 Creating a simple and effective academic Personal website 16.0. Creating a simple and effective academic Personal website 16.1. Introduction Creating an academic website goes hand-in-hand with creating your CV and presenting who you are to your academic and professional peers. Creating and maintaining your website is an essential tool in disseminating your research and publications. Use your academic personal website to highlight your personality, profile, research findings, publications, achievements, affiliations and more. In addition, by using some of the many social media tools available, you can further amplify the information contained in your website. An academic personal website takes you a step further in terms of increasing your visibility, because it is an ideal place to showcase your complete research profile. You will attract attention to your publications, your name recognition will increase and you will get cited more. Moreover, a website is also useful for networking and collaborating with others, as well as for job searching and application. This guide helps you to take that next step and informs you on how to easily create an effective academic personal website. 16.2. Getting Started - The Technicalities 16.2.1. Registering the Domain Name Think of a few good domain names which you would like to use for your website. Try your name or a combination of initials and last name. The domain name should be simple, preferably without hyphens or numbers, and easy to spell. Registering a domain name is never free, but it is low cost and worth it. Select a domain name with ‘.com’ if it is available. You can check availability of domain names and register them on sites such as: www.godaddy.com, www.register.com, and www.do mainregistry.com. 16.2.2. Getting Hosting for the Website After registering a good domain name, you need to buy hosting, i.e. the virtual location and server where your website is stored and managed. Some of the domain registration companies also offer hosting. See the next section on ‘Creating the Website’ for a list. Among the items offered in most hosting packages, one or more free e-mail addresses at the domain name you registered is included and a certain amount of storage space is also provided. - Some examples of companies where you can get hosting are: www. register.com, www.godaddy.com, www.justhost.com, and www.ipage. com. - For a list of more hosting options, visit http://www.top10bestwebsite hosting.com/ or Google ‘web hosting’. 16.2.3. Creating the Website Once you have registered a domain name and secured web hosting, you can start creating your website. It does not have to take a lot of time or technical knowledge to create a good website today, because there are several easy-to use platforms or Content Management Systems (CMSs) available. 106

Sites where you can create your academic website include: www.jibr. com, www.wordpress.com, www.squarespace.com, www.weebly.com, www.blogger.com, www.yola.com, www.jigsy.com and www.drupal.org. Some website platforms also offer web hosting. Sites such as Jibr, WordPress, Blogger and Yola are among those that do. 16.2.4. Look and Feel of your Website Your academic website should be a clean presentation of you academically and professionally. It should not be too cluttered, but it should also be thorough since it is essentially a detailed CV. - Choose a simple layout offered in the several templates available on the website platform or CMS you have selected. Choose a layout which appears straightforward to edit and is not too colorful. Two or three colors are sufficient. - Chooser a light colored background and a dark font color to ensure the text is easy to read; never the reverse. - Use a legible standard font type and size for your site. It is best to use one, maximum two, font types. Using bold, italics and underlining for emphasis is suitable, but don’t overdo it. Be consistent in the use of these embellishments. - Present the text in a spacious, organized manner. Use ample spacing and bullet points, and do not include numerous lengthy paragraphs of text. 16.2.5. What Information to Include on your Website As your academic website is a reflection of you academically and professionally, you can use the same elements as those on your CV. On the website, you can be more detailed in explaining items. Although, do not write more than a few sentences, or a short paragraph, on each element. Include bullet points and links where possible to save on writing too much text. Items to address on your personal academic website: - Profile and expertise - Links to all types of publications (journal, book, etc.) - Current research and research goals - Honors and achievements - Funding awards - Professional and academic affiliations - Teaching and other relevant professional experiences - Forthcoming speaking appearances - Presentations, videos, photos - Links to your blog, academic social networks and institution - Social media widgets for Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, blog, etc. - Links to your blog, or enable blog posts to appear on your website - Basic contact information - Any other information you deem relevant 16.2.6. Broadcasting your Website Once you have completed your website, you should share include a link to your website in your e-mail signature. Including the URL of your website on your business card is also helpful and links where possible to save on writing too much text. Also, be sure to share the link to your website on all of your online and social media profiles to gain maximum exposure. Share links to your new website on Academia.edu, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and beyond. Most, if not all, website platforms offer social media widgets enabling visitors to click and easily share your post or website link in their social media networks. Be sure to add these widgets to your website and place them ideally at the bottom of the page, in the sidebar, or at the top right. 107

16.2.7. Search Engine Optimization (SEO) of your Academic Website You can use certain keywords to increase the number of visitors who find your page through search engine searches. This process of tailoring the words to increase visits is called search engine optimization (SEO). Figure out which keywords are best to use with regard to your academic field using the Google AdWords keyword tool and Google Analytics. You only need to use some of the top searched keywords a few times on your website. Furthermore, simply by keeping your website and publication links up-to-date will increase the SEO of your website. The links on your website which link back to the publications are captured by Google’s algorithmic tools and help to increase the ranking and visibility of your publications and, in turn, the ranking of your academic website. 16.2.8. Tracking the Outreach and Effectiveness of your Website It is important to measure the effectiveness of your website and understand the behavior of your visitors. Google Analytics is one of the tools which enable you to measure the impact of your site. You can see how frequently it is visited, the physical locations of visitors to your site, the most visited pages of your site, and more. Tracking the visitors to your website can help you tailor it to further increase the traffic to your website. 108

Chapter 17 Conference Skills for Researcher 17.0. Conference Skills for Researcher Tips for Early Career Researchers 17.1. Tips for Early Career Researchers 17.1.1. Outline • Why go to a conference? • Core elements for a successful abstract • Preparing for a conference • Presentation content and formatting to effectively tell your scientific story • How to maximize your time at a conference • Tips for interacting with other conference attendees • Key takeaways 17.1.2. Why go to a conference? • To share your work/results (and to get feedback!) • To better place your work in the context of your field • To hear the latest updates in your field • To visit with collaborators (or find new ones) • To network/find a job • To learn about a new field 17.1.3. Which conference to attend? ✓ Traditional/core meetings in your field ✓ Newly established meetings ✓ Meetings of different sizes and formats (large/small, concurrent sessions). ✓ Meetings in a field that is new to you 17.2. Essential elements for a successful abstract 17.2.1. The goal of the abstract is two-fold ✓ Get your work accepted to the meeting ✓ Get people to come see your presentation (poster/talk) 17.2.2. Communicating your scientific results is similar to telling a story. ✓ Logical flow, clear and concise ✓ Keep the reader interested – explain the “so what”? 17.2.3. A general formula to follow ✓ Big Picture Goal: “ ” is of interest because “ ” ; “So what”? ✓ Challenge: What are the barrier(s) to realizing the big picture goal ✓ Project Goal: A smaller goal focused on one of the challenges ✓ Approach: How you will achieve your project goal ✓ Results ✓ Conclusions and Future Directions 109

17.3. Preparing for a conference Apart from your actual presentation, you can prepare in several ways 17.3.1. Read, read, read – do your best to understand the field, the history, the major players, the key breakthroughs (new and old), and challenges. At minimum, read seminal review and high impact papers. ✓ Helpful in framing your work to your audience, answering questions, feeling confident in the questions you are asking others, as well as participating in discussions at the meeting 17.3.2. Prepare/practice your 1-line and 3-5 minute “elevator” speeches ✓ This makes chatting with new people easier ✓ Who are you, what’s your big picture goal, what approach are you taking ✓ Often people meet at meals and the 1st questions are – “what do you do?” or “what are you working on”? ✓ Revisit and evolve this, tailor to different audiences 17.4. Preparing your presentation - Content 17.4.1. Follow the same logical progression as the abstract, only now there is more detail – Big Picture Goal (“so what/why do we care”), Challenge(s), Project Goal, Approach, Results, Conclusions, Future Directions – Acknowledgements – Abstract may be included on a poster, depending on instructions – Balance across headings may vary, depending on state of research 17.4.2. Consider conference format – Will the poster be up at times when you’re not standing there? Then you may need more text/detail to walk people through in your absence – Likewise for slides if they will be made public 17.4.3. Consider being as open as possible in sharing your work – Some people may photograph your presentation without your consent 17.4.4. Preparing your presentation - Format • For posters, split your poster into 3 columns (not rows) • Do not overload your slides – 1 minute/slide is a reasonable guideline • Print out your poster for review in advance/Practice your talk • Practice in front of colleagues/friends at home • Be sure you stick to the time requirements. 17.5. How to maximize your time at a conference • Review the abstract book (or app) and lay out a plan for which talks you’ll attend – critical for meetings with concurrent sessions • Attend as much of the meeting as you possibly can • You will gather overarching themes and trends in the field, which will be good take home messages. • You’ll be able to more easily talk to other attendees if you’ve really listened to the talks and attended the poster sessions. • No working/using a phone/laptop as much as possible during the talks. • Consider going “old school” and take paper notes (bring a notebook!). 110

• Practice writing down at least one question per talk. • A good exercise for staying in the moment of the presentation, encourages you to tie the presentation to your expertise when possible, may lead to an actual question you want to ask at the end of the talk, and may help with talking points if you bump into the person later in the conference. 17.6. Tips for interacting with other conference attendees 17.6.1. Be friendly/make eye contact.  Use observations/questions about the meeting or the person’s work to start conversation.  Use your “elevator” speeches to give brief descriptions of yourself.  Don’t be afraid to ask for a business card or to offer one (do follow up).  Do connect with people on LinkedIn, etc. quickly. 17.6.2. Don’t be afraid to ask your colleagues for introductions if you are nervous about just approaching someone –  But approaching someone new is much easier if you have seen their talk/work and can ask them a question about it. 17.6.3. If you are totally new to a field, don’t be afraid to say so.Often people are happy to discuss their field with a new person.  Having done some reading will help you keep up.  On average, the more open and interested you are, the better your interactions will be. 17.7. Key Takeaways • There are many reasons to go to a conference and oftenseveral types of meetings from which to choose. • Leverage both modern and traditional networking tools (take care with personal social media sites). • Read in advance. • Understand your scientific ‘story’ and practice communicatingit (Abstract, “elevator” speeches, actual presentations) – evolve often. • Attend the whole meeting. • Talking with new people is easier when you have discussion fodder and are comfortable sharing your work. 111

Chapter 18 10 Reasons to Get – and Use – an ORCID (ID) Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) for people, places, and things 18.0. ORCID’S VISION is a world where all who participate in research, scholarship, and innovation are uniquely identified and connected to their contributions and affiliations across time, disciplines, and borders. 18.1. What is ORCID? • ORCID is an open, not-for-profit organization run by and for the research community • ORCID provides you with a unique identifier, your ORCID ID, that reliably and clearly connects you with your research contributions and affiliations • You can use your ID in hundreds of systems – from grant application and manuscript submission to CRIS and other research information management systems, and more! 18.2. Who uses ORCID? • 4m+ researchers like you Academic, government, commercial, other settings • 730+ member organizations across all sectors Associations, funders, libraries, publishers, research institutions, vendor systems • 500+ systems and platforms Grant application, manuscript submission, researcher profile, repositories, research information management, and more 18.2.1 Reliable connections with your works, awards, affiliations  Use your ID when prompted/required: 112

– Signing into your university’s CRIS (current research information system) – Submitting a manuscript – Applying for a grant  Sign in to your ORCID record – Creates accurate connection between you and your information Ensures you have given permission for that connection to be made. 18.2.2. Alleviate mistaken identity  Many researchers share the same, or a similar name – Name changes – Different versions of your name – Transliteration  Having and using your own ORCID iD ensures that you are correctly identified – Make sure you add all variations of your name to your ORCID record 18.2.3. You own and control your ORCID record  Researcher control is a core ORCID principle – Only you can claim an ORCID iD for yourself and set up your record – You choose what information to connect to your iD and whom to share it with  Visibility settings for sharing info – Everyone (publicly available) – Trusted organizations (ORCID member on request) – No one (private) 18.2.4. The systems you use – use ORCID! • All major manuscript submission systems – Editorial Manager, EVISE, OJS, Scholar One… – 7,000+ journals collect IDs, 1,600+ journals require some or all authors to use an ID • Main CRIS systems – Convers, Elements, Faculty 180 RMA, Pure… • Funder systems – Proposal Central, Research Fish, SciENcv… • And many more, Kudos, Mendeley, ProQuest Pivot, Puebloans, Scopus… 18.2.5. Enter once, reuse often 113

• Manage your research and career information using your ID and your ORCID record – Sign up for auto-update (currently Crossref and DataCite). Use your ID when you publish and they’ll update your record automagically! – Authorize your institution to add/update your affiliation – Use your ID during grant application and see it appear in your record when it’s awarded Save time AND benefit from sharing validated information! 18.2.6. Better recognition for you and your research • Create reliable connections between your iD and your research activities – Allow trusted organizations to read and update your record so you can share information about your contributions with them, for example: • Use your ID for peer review, so it can be recognized in your ORCID record and shared with the other organizations you interact with Coming soon: recognition for community service like membership/leadership of a committee 18.2.7. Increase discoverability of your research • Connections make you and your research easier to discover. – Many platforms include ORCID iDs in search functionality • Europe PMC, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science – Institutional repositories are using iDs to make work (including grey literature) more discoverable – Profile systems are using ORCID to identify and/or connect experts Loop, Peer with 18.2.8. It’s free for researchers! • ORCID is, and always will be, free for researchers – Anyone who contributes to research, scholarship, or innovation can register for an ID – We are supported by membership revenues from research organizations worldwide 18.2.9. Registering is as easy as 1, 2, 3 • Registration takes less than a minute! 1. Provide one version of your name, your email address, and a password 2. Confirm that you don’t have an existing record 3. Accept our terms and conditions Visit orcid.org/help for information about creating and using an iD 18.2.10. Your ORCID iD is your lifelong digital name • ORCID is open, international, community- based, and multi-disciplinary • We support multiple languages and character sets • Use your ID in any ORCID-integrated system At every stage of your research career, irrespective of where you go, what you do, how many versions of your name you use 114

REGISTER NOW! http://orcid.org/register 115

Chapter 19 Ethics in Research & Publication 19.0. Welcome to the Ethics Toolkit from Elsevier. As an author whether you are just starting out in your career or are a more seasoned researcher, you are no doubt very much aware of the importance of ethical conduct. Plagiarism, research fraud, undisclosed competing interests... these are just a few of the issues that can threaten not only the integrity of the science, but also one's standing in the scientific community. An understanding of the ethical boundaries and \"rules\" is paramount to ensuring your work and career get off to the best start possible. It is with this in mind that the Ethics in Research & Publication Program was created for early-career researchers by Elsevier and many other journals, an independent panel of experts, well-versed in ethical issues and how to solve them. The program offers resources to help you navigate sensitive and challenging situations, including a rare glimpse into what it's like to be a victim of misconduct, from those who have experienced it first-hand. Ethics Toolkit always contains introductory materials to help you get started, and you can visit the Ethics in Research & Publication website at ethics.elsevier.com e.g. and download the files mentioned in this Toolkit. You can also find Spanish, Japanese and Chinese translations of the factsheets there. We hope you'll find this program useful as you build your own body of work and reputation in the scientific community, and we wish you all best in your endeavors. Sincerely, Catriona Fennell Director of Publishing Services for STM Journals. 19.2. FACTSHEET 19.2.1. Authorship • Naming authors on a scientific paper ensures that the appropriate individuals get credit, and are accountable, for the research. Deliberately misrepresenting a scientist's relationship to their work is considered to be a form of misconduct that undermines confidence in the reporting of the work itself. • While there is no universal definition of authorship, an “author” is generally considered to be an individual who has made a significant intellectual contribution to the study. • According to the guidelines for authorship established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), \"All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed.\" 19.2.2. Four criteria must all be met to be credited as an author: ■ Substantial contribution to the study conception and design, data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation. ■ Drafting or revising the article for intellectual content. ■ Approval of the final version. ■ Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work. 21.2.3. General guidelines, which may vary from field to field: ■ Order of authorship should be \"a joint decision of the coauthors\". ■ Individuals who are involved in a study but don't satisfy the journal's criteria for authorship, should be listed as \"Contributors\" or \"Acknowledged Individuals\". Examples include: 116

assisting the research by providing advice, providing research space, departmental oversight, and obtaining financial support. ■ For large, multi-center trials, the list of clinicians and centers is typically published, along with a statement of the individual contributions made. Some groups list authors alphabetically, sometimes with a note to explain that all authors made equal contributions to the study and the publication. 19.2.4. Three types of authorship are considered unacceptable: ■ \"Ghost\" authors, who contribute substantially but are not acknowledged (often paid by commercial sponsors); ■ \"Guest\" authors, who make no discernible contributions, but are listed to help increase the chances of publication; ■ \"Gift\" authors, whose contribution is based solely on a tenuous affiliation with a study. When not appropriately addressed, authorship issues can lead to dispute. Some disputes are based on misconduct (such as lying about one's role); some stem from questions of interpretation, such as the degree to which a person's contribution can be considered \"substantial,\" and if authorship is justified. 19.2.5. Other potential issues could include: Being involved in a study, but not listed as an author or contributor; someone taking your idea and publishing a paper claiming full authorship; and finding your name on a publication without your permission. If a complaint is filed over a dispute, an investigation may be conducted with the journal editor and author's institution to reach a resolution. Because of the potential for ambiguity and confused expectations, it is strongly advised that before the research begins, a meeting take place to document how each person will be acknowledged. Issues around authorship can be complex and sensitive. Early career researchers who encounter such situations may fear they will jeopardize their reputation and career if they speak up.1 Take the time to fully understand each journal's guidelines for authorship, and industry requirements. If you find yourself in a challenging situation that you are not sure how to handle, consult with a trusted mentor or supervisor. 19.2.6. Guide to Authorship Disputes and How to Prevent Them* Action What is it? Is it unethical? What should you do? Misrepresenting Listing names of people Yes. Review the journal's Instructions a scientist's who took little or no part According to ICMJE: for Authors before submitting a relationship to in the research, omitting \"All persons paper and be forthright about all their work names of people who did designated as authors contributors. take part, or the 'ordering should qualify for This includes \"substantial\" of a byline that indicates a authorship, and all contributions, paid writers, and greater level or those who qualify any others who contributed to the participation in the should be listed.\". study. research than is To avoid disputes, set clear warranted'. Misrepresentation expectations from the outset also includes \"ghost,\" about who is doing what and how This includes submitting \"g1 uest\" and \"gift\" authorship will be handled. a manuscript without the authors. If you feel you have been treated permission of an unfairlyin regards to authorship, author/contributor. seek the counsel of a trusted advisor. Ghost This usually refers to Yes. Professional writers who Authorship professional writers (often Not acknowledging a participated only in drafting of the 117

paid by commercial writer's contribution manuscript and did not have a role sponsors) whose role is is considered in the design or conduct of the not acknowledged. dishonest study or the interpretation of Unattributed contributions results should be identified in the to data analyses may also acknowledgements section along constitute ghost with information about potential authorship.3 conflicts of interest, including . whether they were compensated for the writing assistance and, if Gift and Guest Authorship based on a Yes. so, by which entity(ies).3Consult Authorship tenuous alienation with Guest and gift the authorship guidelines of the the study or solely on an authors make no journal. Consult other helpful expectation that inclusion discernible resources including: ICMJE, of a particular name will contributions.3 World Association of Medical improve the chances that Editors (WAME), European the study will be Medical Writers Association published. (EMWA), and the American Medical Writers Association (AMWA). Any \"gift\" and \"guest\" contributions should be vetted prior to submitting a paper. If in doubt about whether a contribution is acceptable or not, consults the authorship guidelines of the journal and the editor. 19.3. ACTSHEET Competing Interests Transparency and objectivity are essential in scientific research and the peer review process. When an investigator, author, editor, or reviewer has a financial/personal interest or belief that could affect his/her objectivity, or inappropriately influence his/her actions, a potential competing interest exists. Such relationships are also known as dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties 19.3.1. The most obvious competing interests are financial relationships such as: ■ Direct: employment, stock ownership, grants, patents. ■ Indirect: honoraria, consultancies to sponsoring organizations, mutual fund ownership, paid expert testimony Undeclared financial interests may seriously undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and the science itself an example might be an investigator who owns stock in a pharmaceutical company that is commissioning the research. Competing interests can also exist as a result of personal relationships, academic competition, and Intellectual passion 19.3.2. An example might be a researcher who has: ■ A relative who works at the company whose product the researcher is evaluating. ■ A self-serving stake in the research results (e.g. potential promotion/ career advancement based on outcomes). ■ Personal beliefs that are in direct conflict with the topic he/she is researching. ■Not all relationships represent a true competing interest–conflicts can be potential or actual. 118

■Some considerations that should be taken into account include: whether the person's association with the organization interferes with their ability to carry out the research or paper without bias; and whether the relationship, when later revealed, make a reasonable reader feel deceived or misled. ■Full disclosure about a relationship that could constitute a competing interest–even if the person doesn't believe it affects their judgment–should be reported to the institution's ethics group and to the journal editor to which a paper is submitted. ■Most publishers require disclosure in the form of a cover letter and/or footnote in the manuscript. A journal may use disclosures as a basis for editorial decisions and will publish them as they may be important to readers in judging the manuscript. Likewise, the journal may decide not to publish on the basis of the declared conflict. According to the U.S. Office of Research Integrity, having a competing interest is not in itself unethical, and there are some that are unavoidable.1 Full transparency is always the best course of action, and, if in doubt, disclose. 119

19.4. Guide to Declaration of Competing Interests* Action What is it? Is it unethical? What should you do? When submitting a paper, state explicitly whether potential competing interests do or do not 2An undisclosed Neglecting to disclose a Yes. Some relationships do exist. Indicate this in the relationship that relationship with a person or not necessarily present a manuscript for single-blind may pose a organization that could aff- conflict. Participants in the journals or in the title page for competing ect one's objectivity, or peer-review and double-blind journals. interest. inappropriately influence publication process must Investigators must disclose one's actions. disclose relationships that potential competing interests to could be viewed as study participants and should potential competing state in the manuscript whether interests. they have done so. Reviewers must also disclose any competing interests that could bias their opinions of the manuscript. Neglecting to disclose the When submitting a paper, a declaration (with the heading 2An undisclosed role of the study sponsor(s), Yes. Undeclared financial 'Role of the funding source') funding source if any, in study design; in the conflicts may seriously should be made in a separate that may pose a collection, analysis, and undermine the credibility section of the text and placed competing interpretation of data; in the of the journal, the authors, before the References. Describe interest. writing of the report; and in and the science itself the role of the study sponsor(s), the decision to submit the if any, in study design; in the collection, analysis, and paper for publication. interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the paper for publication. Editors may request that authors of a study funded by an agency with a proprietary or financial interest in the outcome sign a statement, such as “I had full access to all of the data in this study and I take complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.” *When in doubt, always consult with your professor, advisor, or someone in a position of authority who can guide you to the right course of action. 120

19.5. Top 5 reasons to publish ethically 21.5.1. It ensures scientific progress. 21.5.2. It protects life and the planet 21.5.3. It promotes ethical behavior 21.5.4. It’s good for your reputation 21.5.5. It’s the only way. 1 2 3 . It protects life and the planet Publishing .It promotes ethical behavior. ethically ensures that we have trusted Doing the right thing sets an example information on which to build future and reinforces our responsibility to therapies, technologies, and policies. our peers and society at large (who Published work based on fraudulent data generally pay for our work). Believing can form an inappropriate basis for our or actions won’t make a follow up studies leading to waste of difference are above the law can lead resources and harmful effects to patients, those who don’t know better into believing the same. communities, or habitats It ensures scientific progress Truth is the foundation of science and the progress of ideas. The scientific community thrives only when each participant publishes with integrity. 5 4 . It’s good for your reputation There’s nothing like getting published and It’s the only way. A good being able to accept credit and accolades for a reputation and acting with integrity job well done. Do it the right way. A published opens the door to opportunity. Your paper is a permanent record of your work. work represents not only you but the Don’t become part of the minority who end up research institution, the funding with a retracted paper and a tarnished body, and other researchers. reputation 121

Chapter 20 Plagiarism 20.0. Plagiarism One of the most common types of publication misconduct is plagiarism–when one author deliberately uses another's work without permission, credit, or acknowledgment. Plagiarism takes different forms, from literal copying for paraphrasing some else's work and can include: ■ Data ■ Words and Phrases ■ Ideas and Concepts 20.1. Plagiarism has varying different levels of severity, such as: ■ How much of someone's work was taken–a few lines, paragraphs, pages, the full article? ■ What was copied–results, methods, or introduction section? When it comes to your work, always remember that crediting the work of others (including your advisors or your own previous work) is a critical part of the process. Authors should always place your work in the context of the advancement of the field, and acknowledge the findings of others on which you have built your research. 20.2. Guide to Plagiarism and How to Prevent It* Action What is it? Is it unethical? What should you do? Literal Copying Reproducing a work Yes. Literal copying is Keep track of sources you used word for word, in only acceptable if you while researching and where whole or in part, reference the source and you used it in your paper. Make without permission put quotation marks sure you fully acknowledge and and acknowledgment around the copied text properly cite the original source of the original source. in your paper. Use quotation marks around word-for-word text and reference properly Yes. \"Substantial\" can Ask yourself if your work has This can include be defined as both benefited from the skill and research materials, processes, tables, or quantity and quality of judgment of the original author? equipment. Substantial what was copied. If your The degree to which you answer copying work captures the “yes” will indicate whether essence of another's substantial copying has taken work, it should be cited. place. If so, be sure to cite the original source. 122

Yes. Make sure that you understand Paraphrasing Reproducing someone Paraphrasing is only what the original author means. Text-recycling else's ideas while not acceptable if you Never copy and paste words that copying word for properly reference the you do not fully understand. word, without source and make sure Think about how the essential permission and that you do not change ideas of the source relate to your acknowledgment of the meaning intended by own work, until you can deliver the original source the source the information to others without referring to the source. Compare your paraphrasing with the source, to make sure you retain the intended meaning, even if you change the words. Reproducing portions Put anything in quotes that is of an author's own taken directly from a previously work in a paper, and published paper, even if you are resubmitting it for reusing something in your own publication as an words .Make sure to reference entirely new paper the source accordingly. *When in doubt, always consult with your professor, advisor, or someone in a position of authority who can guide you to the right course of action. 20.3. Simultaneous submission Authors have an obligation to make sure their paper is based on original–never before published–research. Intentionally submitting or re-submitting work for duplicate publication is considered a breach of publishing ethics. ■ Simultaneous submission occurs when a person submits a paper to different publications at the same time, which can result in more than one journal publishing that particular paper. ■ Duplicate/multiple publication occurs when two or more papers, without full cross- reference, share essentially the same hypotheses, data, discussion points, and/or conclusions. ✓ This can occur in varying degrees: literal duplication, partial but substantial duplication, or even duplication by paraphrasing. ✓ One of the main reasons duplicate publication of original research is considered unethical, is that it can result in \"inadvertent double-counting or inappropriate weighting of the results of a single study, which distorts the available evidence\". ✓ There are certain situations in which the publishers of two journals might agree in advance to use the \"duplicate work\" These include: ■ Combined editorials (e.g. about a plagiarism case involving the two journals). ■ (Clinical) guidelines, position statements. 123

■ Translations of articles–provided that prior approval has been granted by the first Publisher, and that full and prominent disclosure of its original source is given at the time of submission. 20.3.1. The main rule of thumb: Articles submitted for publication must be original and must not have been submitted to any other publication. At the time of submission, authors must disclose any details of related papers (also when in a different language), similar papers in press, and translations. While the boundaries around duplicate publication may vary from field to field, all publishers have requirements for submitting papers. It's a good idea to make sure you fully understand them to avoid violating the process. 20.4. Guide to Duplicate Submission/Publication and How to Prevent It* Action What is it? Is it unethical? What should you do? Simultaneous Submitting a paper to Yes. Submission is Avoid submitting a paper to more than one submission two or more journals not permitted as long publication at a time. Even if a submitted at the same time as a manuscript is paper is currently under review and you do under review with not know the status, wait to hear back from another journal. the publisher before approaching another journal, and then only if the _rst publisher will not be publishing the paper. Duplicate When an author Yes. Avoid submitting a previously published publication submits a paper or paper for consideration in another journal. portions of his or her Avoid submitting papers that describe own paper that has essentially the same research to more than been previously one journal. Always provide full disclosure published to another about any previous submissions (including journal, without meeting presentations and posting of disclosing prior results in registries) that might be regarded submission(s). as duplicate publication.3This should include disclosing previous publication of an abstract during the proceedings of meetings.1 Duplication by When an author Yes. Put anything in quotes that is taken directly Paraphrasing or writes about his or from a previously published paper, even if \"Text- her own research in Creating several you are reusing something in your own recycling\" two or more articles publications from the words. Make sure to reference the source from different angles same research is accordingly or on different aspects considered of the research manipulative. See without our separate factsheet acknowledgment of on plagiarism/ text the original paper. recycling. Translations of Submitting a paper to Yes. If you want to submit your paper to journal a paper journals in different that is published in a different country or a published in languages without Translated articles different language, ask the publisher if this another acknowledgment of are acceptable when is permissible. At the time of submission, language the original paper all necessary disclose any details of related papers in a consents have been different language, and any existing obtained from the 124

previous publisher of translations the paper in any other language and from any other person who might own rights in the paper. 20.5. Salami Slicing • The “slicing” of research that would form one meaningful paper into several different papers is called \"salami publication\" or \"salami slicing\".1 • Unlike duplicate publication, which involves reporting the exact same data in two or more publications, salami slicing involves breaking up or segmenting a large study into two or more publications. These segments are referred to as \"slices\" of a study.2 • As a general rule, as long as the \"slices\" of a broken up study share the same hypotheses, population, and methods, this is not acceptable practice. The same \"slice\" should never be published more than once.3 The reason: according to the U.S. • Office of Research Integrity, salami slicing can result in a distortion of the literature by leading unsuspecting readers to believe that data presented in each salami slice (i.e., journal article) is derived from a different subject sample. • This not only skews the \"scientific database\" but it creates repetition that wastes readers' time as well as the time of editors and reviewers, who must handle each paper separately. Further, it unfairly inflates the author's citation record. • There are instances where data from large clinical trials and epidemiological studies cannot be published simultaneously, or are such that they address different and distinct questions with multiple and unrelated endpoints. In these cases, it is legitimate to describe important outcomes of the studies separately. However each paper should clearly define its hypothesis and be presented as one section of a much larger study. Most journals request that authors who either know or suspect a manuscript submitted for publication represents fragmented data should disclose this information, as well as enclose any other papers (published or unpublished) that might be part of the paper under consideration. 125

20.5.1. Guide to Salami Slicing and How to Prevent It* Action What is it? Is it unethical? What should you do? Breaking up or Publishing small Yes. Salami slicing can Avoid inappropriately breaking segmenting data 'slices' of research result in a distortion of up data from a single study into from a single in several deferent the literature by leading two or more papers. When study and creating papers is called unsuspecting readers to submitting a paper, be deferent ‘salami believe that data transparent. Send copies of any manuscripts for publication’ or presented in each 'slice' manuscripts closely related to the publication ‘salami slicing’. is derived from a manuscript under consideration. Action deferent subject This includes any manuscripts sample. published, recently submitted, or already accepted. 126

Chapter 21 Research fraud 21.0. Research fraud It is publishing data or conclusions that were not generated by experiments or observations, but by invention or data manipulation. There are two kinds in research and scientific publishing: ■ Fabrication: making up research data and results, and recording or reporting them. ■ Falsification: manipulating research materials, images, data, equipment, or processes. Falsification includes changing or omitting data or results in such a way that the research is not accurately represented. A person might falsify data to make it fit with the desired end result of a study. Both fabrication and falsification are serious forms of misconduct because they result in a scientific record that does not accurately reflect observed truth. Certain instances of fraud can be easy to spot–for example if a referee knows for a fact that a particular laboratory does not have the facilities to conduct the research that was published. Or, if it's obvious an image looks manipulated or is made up from several different experiments. The data from the control experiments might be \"too perfect\". In such situations, an investigation would be conducted to determine if an act of fraud was committed. Digital image enhancement is acceptable. However, a positive relationship between the original data and the resulting image must be maintained to avoid creating unrepresentative data or the loss of meaningful signals. If a figure has been significantly manipulated, you must note the nature of the enhancements in the figure legend or in the 'Materials and Methods' section. What about unintentional error that comes across as misconduct? According to the U.S. Office of Research Integrity, research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion but its best never to have the integrity of your work come into question. As a researcher and author, it is essential to understand what constitutes appropriate data management (including data collection, retention, analysis and reporting) in accordance with responsible conduct of research. To help prevent fraud, most publishers have strict policies on manipulation of images and access to the reported data. It's a good idea to familiarize yourself with them before you submit a paper. 21.1. Some general guidelines (which may vary from field to field, publisher to publisher) include: 21.1.1. Manipulation of images ■ Images may be manipulated for improved clarity only. ■ No specific feature within an image may be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or introduced. ■ Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are usually acceptable as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. 127

21.1.2. Data access & retention ■ Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. Therefore all data for a specific paper should be retained for a reasonable time after publication. There should be a named custodian for the data. ■ Studies undertaken in human beings, e.g. clinical trials have specific guidelines about the duration of data retention. 21.1.3. Guide to Fraud Allegations and How to Prevent Them* Action What is it? Is it unethical? What should you do? Never tamper with or change data. Manipulating Yes. Comprehensive Keep meticulous records of your data data. Records of raw data should be guidelines on data accessible in case an editor asks for them-even after your paper has been Intentionally management and ethical published. Understand the modifying, handling of digital images publisher's policies on data before changing, or can be found at The Once you submit a paper. omitting data. of Research Integrity. http://ori.hhs.gov/images/d dblock/data.pdf. Manipulating This can Yes. If you need to adjust an image to data image include enhance clarity, make sure you research Your manuscript may be know what is considered acceptable materials, rejected if the original data before submitting your paper. Even processes, are not presented or if the image manipulations are tables, or misrepresented considered acceptable, report it to equipment. the publication prior to submitting your paper. Review any data images used to support your paper against the original image data to make sure nothing has been altered. 21.2. Funding Hacks for Researchers 21.2.1. How We Work – Grant Making 21.2.2. Concept Development. Program officers consult with foundation colleagues, researchers, policymakers, and other partners in the field and develop ideas that support foundation priorities 128

21.2.3. Pre-Proposal. A variety of ways to explore and refine concepts, with the help of organizations in the field, including direct solicitation, discussion, and request for proposal (RFP) to determine what to invest in and with whom. 21.2.4. Investment Development. Process of working with prospective grantee to develop a proposal, budget, and a results framework and tracker. We also complete our due diligence, confirm the applicant organization’s tax status, determine how to structure the investment, and assess risk. 21.2.5. Management and Close. Close communication to understand progress and challenges of ongoing work and agree on necessary changes 21.3. How We Work – Global Access 21.3.1. Primary Goal is . . . To conduct and manage foundation funded projects and the resulting products, services, processes, technologies, materials, software, data or other innovations (collectively, “Funded Developments”) in a manner that ensures “GlobalAccess.” 21.3.2. Global Access Requires that . .. The knowledge and information (including data) gained from the projects be promptly and broadly disseminated, and the Funded Developments be made available and accessible at an affordable price (i) to people most in need within developing countries or (ii) in support of the U.S. educational system and public libraries, as applicable to the funded projects. 21.3.3. The Gates Foundation Open Access Policy • Publications Are Discoverable and Accessible Online. Publications will be deposited in a specified repository(s) with proper tagging of metadata. • Publication will be on “Open Access” Terms. All publicationsshall be published under the Creative Commons Attribution Generic License (CCA BY GL) or an equivalent license. • Foundation will pay necessary fees. The foundation would pay reasonable fees required by a publisher to effect publication on these terms. • Publications will be accessible and open immediately. All publications shall beavailable immediately upon their publication, without any embargo period (after the transition ending January 1, 2017). Data Underlying Published Research Results Will Be Accessible andOpen Immediately. (also after the transition ending January 1, 2017). 21.4. Rationale for Open Access Policy • transparency and cooperation • reproducibility of research • cost-efficiency and preventing redundancies • acceleration of discovery and innovation • saving lives through more efficient and effective public health programs 129

Increasing number of funders, seeking to grantees or provide some types, degree of open access to information, data and publications arising from funding. For example – Open Research Funders Group (http://www.orfg.org/). 21.5. Timing & choosing the right mechanism 21.5.1. Start Early  Consider your funding timeline and expect at least two submissions  Considering projects - shaping aims - forging collaborations, acquiring cohort approvals  Would you be a competitive candidate?  Length of funding  Amount of award & percent effort  How is evaluated - Is it a mentored grant?  Success rate  Pay line (NIH grants) National institute health  Faculty requirements (specific to postdocs)  NIH: each institute uses specific mechanisms uniquely read the fine print  Read all parts of the application AND application instructions  Don‘t rely on departmental staff to know the instructions for your application. 21.6. Key tips and considerations • Understand level of funding: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-16- 047.html# • Do not rely solely on NIH mechanisms, explore other options • Discuss with program officer • Don’t expect your department to know the details of submission or specific application requirements. • Read the fine print: some require verification of URM status • For career development awards:  Identify an appropriate mentor  Strong institutional support is key  Training plan matters, do not only focus only on the science  Get several examples of winning applications 21.7. Research Plan - Specific Aims Identify your research question  Can be brutal & frustrating  Normal to go through many early drafts of aims of various questions before deciding on final project Rewrite, rewrite, rewrite  Aims must be reviewed by as many people as possible (scientists / nonscientists)  Aims may change slightly as project develops 21.8. Research plan - Collaborations Outside collaborations can be extremely advantageous 130

 Strengthen your network outside of your institution Secondary data analysis or ancillary studies  Committee proposal approval may take >months  Budget for data use costs Obtain letters of support from all collaborators Primary data collection may strengthen your application  Talk with your program officer  Give plenty of time to develop proposals/budget with outside investigators 21.9. Career Development: • Brainstorm short and long-term career goals (2, 5, 10 years) • How does past training help you to be successful for the proposed project? • How will the proposed project help you achieve your career objectives? • Highlight importance of additional training 21.9.1. Personal Statements: Career Development Awards Why are you an excellent candidate?  Give the reviewer a clear vision of your journey  It’s OK if you’ve worked in various areas  Provide a narrative of how your previous work connects to where you are going Highlight how your unique experiences frame your perspective as a scientist 21.9.2. Mentoring team – Career Development Awards • Identify your primary mentor • What makes a strong primary mentor  Well-funded and history of funding  Solid track record of mentoring postdocs and Jr. faculty  Those who look good on paper VS those who can actually mentor.  Reviewers want to see clearly defined meeting plans for regularly scheduled meetings (spell it out!)  Commitment to your advancement  Considerations: may influence the data you use, bridge funding available, other collaborations, etc. 21.10. What makes a strong mentoring team  Balance of expertise  Regularly scheduled meetings with structured plan for training 21.11. Summary Statement • Don’t take anything personally • Read it, walk away then read it again a few days later • All criticisms can be used to improve your application • If something wasn’t clear to a reviewer then it wasn’t clear… period! • Make your grant user friendly! • Use tables, graphs, color, figures. Bold key phrases, or take away points 131

21.12. Funding Applying for a research grant can be a long and painful process and there are no guarantees it will end in success. The useful tips shared in our funding modules could prove just the boost you need to secure financial support. You will learn how (and why) you should critically assess your research idea. We then walk you through points to consider when locating the right funding opportunity to match it. You will hear about some of the common mistakes researchers make when filling in their applications and how your network can help. And, we explain the power of metrics (particularly altmetrics) in helping funders picture your future potential. 21.12. 1. How to increase your institution's grant success rates Academic and Government Strategic Alliances examines the challenges of research funding – and introduces a new solution. It seems like everyone involved in the funding process has it tough these days. Researchers who are relatively new to academia face unfamiliar processes and you lack the track record often needed to secure new funding. Seasoned academics face more competition. Research offices have to juggle multiple applications and spot new opportunities in fast moving environments. And funding bodies must account for every cent spent on research. That’s before you get to the challenges around big, interdisciplinary proposals that span multiple organizations. There’s also a rise in the number of research-intensive strategies coming out of the world’s universities, with many implementing ambitious plans to increase income from research by double-digit percentages. 21.12. 2. Key challenges in funding 1. Government spend on research funding is declining. 2. Much time is needed to write and review grant applications. 3. Tools and infrastructure for managing grant submissions and reviews is not optimal. When Elsevier's senior management team started looking at the challenges around funding, they found that in some disciplines, more three out of four research applications were unsuccessful. The average researcher works about 53 hours per week, of which 11 percent is spent on funding/developing research, according to the Elsevier CMI Researcher Workflow Report – Feb 2017. These failed bids represent a lot of lost time that highly skilled people could have spent teaching or conducting research. They’re also disheartening for faculty members; academics need to be hugely creative, and having repeatedly unsuccessful proposals can sap that creativity. Also saw that as the more competitive funding environment coincided with plateaus in spending, it put pressure on funding institutions. In 2016, 18 percent of proposals submitted to the NiH succeeded compared to 30 percent in 1997. (Here’s an article that examines NIH funding.) That amounts to a lot of time and money spent evaluating and rejecting proposals instead of funding and advancing science. “Research funding is getting much more competitive,” she explained. “For young faculty members coming in, it’s even harder – you don’t have the track record and the processes are unfamiliar. But the whole landscape is tougher now, success is harder won.” 132

21.12.3. How Funding Institutional can help you secure funding 21.12.3.1. Insights  Gain insight into the funding landscape 21.12.3.2. Discovery  Search for funding opportunities  Select relevant opportunities 21.12.3.3. Decisions  Disseminate opportunities and select for limited submission  Build teams  Track, report and manage  Learn more on the Funding Institutional webpage. Funding is a major priority for virtually all research institutions, but finding and securing grants is a time-consuming and increasingly competitive process. To succeed you need to gain insight into the complicated funding landscape, discover hidden opportunities and make informed decisions. In this webinar, you will learn about the key challenges in funding and how Elsevier’s Funding Institutional addresses them by supporting institutional staff across the funding workflow. 21.13. Gaining insights In the face of these challenges, what can universities and research institutions do? The way we see it at Elsevier, it comes down to having the right information – the right insights – to select the bids most suited to each faculty’s areas of expertise. Faculties need the information that will help them build the best teams, and find the most appropriate collaborators. That could mean understanding their own capabilities and strengths and understanding the capabilities and strengths of their competitors. After all, a responsible institution will ensure that they know which grants not to apply for to reduce the burden of failure on its faculty. As Dr. Hutnik points out: Understanding what your chances are is really important. For example, if you’re going for top- level grants without working your way up to it, you’re going to struggle – you need to start small and work your way up. There’s no sense in applying for something you have no chance of getting – you need to use data to understand where to put your resources. The universities that make good on their research-intensive strategies will be the ones who perfect these processes, and having the right data to drive those decisions will be vital to success now – and in the future. As Dr. Hutnik says, “Much of funding success comes down to reputation. If you 133

develop a reputation as someone who doesn’t get funding, that can be tough to get out of.” Data – and more importantly the ability to derive insights from that data – will prevent universities from falling into this situation. If faculties can see where they’ve applied before, where they’ve been successful before and which researchers have succeeded with which funders, they can significantly improve their chances of funding success. 21.14. Discovery Of course, understanding the situation within your institution is only part of the challenge. The institutions that achieve the greatest successes in securing funding will be those that have the clearest view on the available opportunities. “One of the major challenges is getting information to the faculty that they need so they don’t miss any potential opportunities,” Dr. Hutnik said. “Having the right tools makes it easier to match the right team to the right bid.” Faculties need to know what funding opportunities are out there as early as possible to give them the most amount of time to prepare. “Letting people know about funding as soon as possible is a huge step,” Dr. Hutnik explained. “Targeted information on what grants are coming up can make a big difference.” 21.15. Decisions As well as understanding the competition, data means understanding collaboration – for example, which researchers will work well together and what mix of skills and experience will be likeliest to succeed. Funders are increasingly looking for larger and more interdisciplinary research proposals, so having the right information can help an institution articulate and understand its own research strengths. From there, information can help you decide the strongest possible team – either across faculties or across universities – to be the strongest possible consortium to make a bid. Individual brilliance is important, but increasingly the key to success is being able to build teams that can tackle global challenges. 21.16. How to increase funding success 1. Gain insight into key funding trends 2. Uncover funding opportunities you can win 3. Apply evidence based decision-making for resource allocation 4. The interventions I’ve seen prove particularly successful are the ones where universities use data to get an insight into their strengths and understand which faculty members will work well together in a team. Bringing those people together and getting them to work collaboratively on a proposal is much more effective than one person leading, and then everyone adding their name once the proposal is written. When that process of co-creation is happening well, you see great results. Indeed it is exactly what should happen in the delivery of any collaborative research proposal! That process of working out who should be in a team and who should not come down to active management, and data will be a vital tool in your armory. There’s also a growing trend for funders to limit the number of applications from within each institution, so picking the right team with the greatest chance of success is vital. Additionally, as Dr. Hutnik points out, an increasing number of institutions are holding internal competitions to ensure that a university is always submitting its best possible proposal for these limited submissions. “If you don’t do internal competitions, you’re never going to be producing the single best possible proposal,” she said. “If you’re entering competitions against other universities who are doing high- level internal contests, you’re not going to measure well.” 134

These are important processes for institutions to master, as the days when academics rush to pursue funding and did so without input from the university are long gone. Driving up success rates by even as little as 10 percent can represent a big difference in terms of time and effort, and the more times your institution succeeds, the more its reputation is enhanced. About Elsevier Elsevier is a global information analytics business that helps scientists and clinicians to find new answers, reshape human knowledge, and tackle the most urgent human crises. For 140 years, we have partnered with the research world to curate and verify scientific knowledge. Today, we’re committed to bringing that rigor to a new generation of platforms. Elsevier provides digital solutions and tools in the areas of strategic research management, R&D performance, clinical decision support, and professional education; including ScienceDirect, Scopus, SciVal, ClinicalKey and Sherpath. Elsevier publishes over 2,500 digitized journals, including The Lancet and Cell, 39,000 e-book titles and many iconic reference works, including Gray's Anatomy. Elsevier is part of RELX, a global provider of information-based analytics and decision tools for professional and business customers. www.elsevier.com 135

Index1 Glossary of Technical Terms, ID-PIDs = Persistent Identifiers FAIR =Findable –• Accessible –• Interoperable –• Reusable – ESRC= Economic and Social Research Council IIRD = ‘Investigating Interdisciplinary Research Discourse’ RSL =Registered Social Landlord COPE = Committee on Publication Ethics MMCR = Müller's Muscle-Conjunctival Resection EES = Elsevier Editorial System H-index = or Hirsch index, measures the impact of a particular scientist rather than a journal. \"It is defined as the highest number of publications of a scientist ... OA = Open Access APC = Article Publishing Charge ERC-funded works, do authors need to DOI =Digital Object Identifier APCs =Article Publishing Charge KIS = Keep It Simple CV = curriculum vitae CMSs = Content Management Systems SEO = Search Engine Optimization CRIS = Current Research Information System ORCID = Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier ORCID is a non-profit organization that provides researchers with a unique digital identifier. These identifiers can be used by editors, funding agencies, ICMJE = International Committee of Medical Journal Editors WAME = World Association of Medical Editors EMWA= European Medical Writers Association AMWA = American Medical Writers Association RFP = Request for Proposal CCA BY GL = Creative Commons Attribution Generic License ORFG = Open Research Funders Group NIH grants = National institute health URM = Under-Represented Minority A URM is, quite simply, a minority group whose percentage of the population at a given law school is lower than their percentage of the population in the country. 136

Index 2 Key to tasks Task 1: (1) Concerns about water scarcity and management have focused attention on the relationship between agriculture and other competing water uses. (2) These results can be used by the relevant authorities to customize their interventions, knowing beforehand and in a well-structured form which are the different stakeholders’ priorities. In this way, more effective avenues of communication can be established in the decision-making processes regarding irrigation challenges. (3) Climate change raises many questions with strong moral and ethical dimensions that are important to address in climate-policy formation and international negotiations. Particularly in the United States, the public discussion of these dimensions is strongly influenced by religious groups and leaders. Over the past few years, many religious groups have taken positions on climate change, highlighting its ethical dimensions. (4) Policy strategies that pay careful attention to the effects of climate change and climate policy on the poor – in developing nations and the US itself – may find support among the US population. Religious framings of climate change resonate with the electorates of both progressive and conservative politicians and could serve as bridging devices for bipartisan climate-policy initiatives. Task 2: 1. We propose an extension of Christensen’s theory of disruptive technologies. The two main contributions of the paper are the extension to Christensen’s theory and the lessons from Kodak’s unsuccessful response to a major technological discontinuity. 2. Less research has delved into the actual content of IS strategy per se. … , our study contributes to the literature on IS strategy by identifying an extension to the existing typology, that is, by finding a fourth possible IS strategy,… Task 3: 1c, 2d, 3a, 4b Task 4: • As we discuss below, • The paper… • The paper proceeds as follows: we first briefly survey … • before, in Section 3, Task 5: 1. For example 137

2. For example 3. Such as 4. This means 5. That is Task 6: 1. (1) social capital (2) a set of relational resources embedded in relationships that positively influence firm conduct and performance. 2. (1) downscaling (2) any process in which coarse scale data is disaggregated to a finer scale while ensuring consistency with the original data set. Task 7: 1a, 2b, 3d, 4c Task 8: 1. The interviewers … 2. We ... Four researchers/ in pairs where one …and the other … 138

References and Useful Links and Sources for web side 1. Abraham P (2000). Duplicate and salami publications. Journal of Postgraduate Medicine, 46: 67. 2. Office of Research Integrity. Salami Slicing (i.e., data fragmentation). Available at: ori.hhs.gov/plagiarism- 16. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 3.Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (2005). Cases: Salami publication. Available at: publicationethics.org/search/site/salami. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 4.Angell M, Relman AS. Redundant publication. N Engl J Med 1989; 320:1212-1214. 5. Kassirer JP, Angell M. Redundant publication: a reminder. N Engl J Med 1995; 333:449-450 6. Office of Research Integrity U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Definition of Research Misconduct. Available at: ori.hhs.gov/definition-misconduct. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 7. Scott-Lichter D and the Editorial Policy Committee, Council of Science Editors. CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications, 2012 Update. 3rd Revised Edition. Wheat Ridge, CO: 2012. Available at: http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/resource-library/editorial-policies/white-paper-on- publication-ethics/acknowledgments/. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 8. Elsevier. Publishing Ethics Policies: Duties for Authors. Available at: elsevier.com/publishingethics. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 9. Rossner M, Yamada K. What’s In a Picture: The Temptation of Image Manipulation Journal Cell Biology 2004. Available at: http://jcb.rupress.org/content/166/1/11. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 10. Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, Version 2, 2015. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Accessed on June 17, 2017. 11. Elsevier Publishing Ethics policies: Duties of Authors. Available at: elsevier.com/publishingethics. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 12. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Publishing and Editorial Issues Related to Publication in Biomedical Journals: Overlapping Publications. Available at: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and- editorial-issues/overlapping-publications.html. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 13. Elsevier. Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK). Available at: elsevier.com/editors/perk/plagiarism- complaints. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 14. World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) policy statement on ghost writing initiated by commercial companies. Available at: wame.org/policy-statements#Ghost Writing - ghost. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 15. Jacobs A, Wager E. European Medical Writers Association (EMWA) Guidelines on the role of medical writers in developing peer-reviewed publications. Curr Med Res Opin. 2005;21:317-321. 139

Available at: emwa.org/Mum/EMWAguidelines.pdf. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 16. AMWA-EMWA-ISMPP Joint Position Statement on the Role of Professional Medical Writers. Available at: c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.amwa.org/resource/resmgr/about_amwa/JointPositionStatement.Profe.pdf. Accessed on June 17, 2017. 17. J.P. Holman, Experimental Methods for Engineers, 7th Ed., McGraw Hill, 2001. 18. M.S. Peters, K.D. Timeerhaus, R.E. West, Plant design and Economics for Chemical Engineers, 5th Ed., McGraw Hill, 2003. 19. http://www.burgerwriting.com/G.S. Patience, Experimental Methods and Instrumentation for Chemical Engineers, Elsevier BV, Amsterdam 2013. 20. M. J. Gelb, Present Yourself, Jalmar Press, 1988. 21. Chiron, F.-X., G.S. Patience, S. Ri_art, 2012. Kinetics of mixed copper- iron based oxygen carriers for hydrogen production by chemical looping water splitting, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 37 (14), 10489-10498. c G.S. Patience, D.C. Bo_to, P.A. Patience 15 22. Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies James Administration Building 23. Stephen M. Griffies NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ, USA and Associate Editor, Ocean Modelling William A. Perrie Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, NS, Canada and Editor-in-Chief, Ocean Modelling Gaëlle Hull Elsevier, Oxford, UK [December 2013] 24. CORDIS (the EU’s Community Research and Development Information Service) http://cordis. europa.eu/news/rcn/21983_en.html [accessed 27/12/2015] 25. EU advisory Board ec.europa.eu/research/ eurab/pdf/rec_4_5600_eurab_en.pdf [accessed 27/12/2015] 26. Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication 36, 82-93. van Vuuren, D.P., Lucas, P.L., and Hilderink H. (2007). Downscaling drivers of global environmental change: Enabling use of global SRES scenarios at the national and grid levels. Global Environmental Change 17, 114–130. 27. Ricart, S. and Clarimont, S. (2016). Modelling the links between irrigation, ecosystem services and rural development in pursuit of social legitimacy: 28. Results from a territorial analysis of the Neste System (Hautes-Pyrénées, France). Journal of Rural Studies 43, 1-12. 29. Lahsen, M. (2008). Experiences of modernity in the greenhouse: A cultural analysis of a physicist ‘‘trio’’ supporting the backlash against global warming. Global Environmental Change 18, Issue 1, 204-219. 30.Lucas, H.C.J., and Goh, J.M. (2009). Disruptive technology: How Kodak missed the digital photography revolution. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 18, 46-55. 31. Mallat, N. (2007). Exploring consumer adoption of mobile payments – A qualitative study. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 16, Issue 4, 413-432. 32. Oshri, I, Kotlarsky, J., and Gerbasi, A. (2015). Strategic innovation through outsourcing: The role of relational and contractual governance. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 24, Issue 3, 203-216. 33. Walker, B. (2004). The effects of rent restructuring on social housing in English rural areas. Journal of 140

Rural Studies 20, 445-460 34. Tobey, J.A. (1992). Economic issues in global climate change. Global Environmental Change, 2, Issue 3, 215-228. 35. Monazemi, A.R., Pittaway, J.J., Saremi, H.Q. and Wei, Y. (2012). Factors of stickiness in transfers of know-how between MNC units. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 21, Issue 1, 31-57 36. O’Toole, K and Burdess., N. (2004). New community governance in small rural towns: the Australian experience. Journal of Rural Studies 20, Issue 4, 433-443. 37. Qi Dong, J. and Wu, W. (2015). Business value of social media technologies: Evidence from online user innovation communities. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 24, Issue 2, 113-127. 38. Liepins, R. (2000). New energies for an old idea: reworking approaches to ‘community’ in contemporary rural studies. Journal of Rural Studies 16, Issue 1, 23-35. 39. Powe, N.A. and Shaw, T. (2004). Exploring the current and future role of market towns in servicing their hinterlands: a case study of Alnwick in the North East of England. Journal of Rural Studies, 20, Issue 4, 405- 418. Useful Sources for web side 1. http://www.top10bestwebsitehosting.com/ 2. http://townsendlab.berkeley.edu/thl-administration/lab-blog/personal-academic-webpages- how-tosand-tips-better-site 3. http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=413005 4. http://assett.colorado.edu/resources/create-your-website 5. http://ltlatnd.wordpress.com/2011/02/13/three-easy-ways-to-make-academic-websites/ 6. http://chronicle.com/blogs/profhacker/do-you-need-your-own-website-while-on-the-job- market/35825 7. http://jbdeaton.com/2011/how-to-build-a-great-academic-website/ 8. http://www.ehow.com/how_4884357_create-academic-website.html 9. http://web.library.emory.edu/blog/ins-and-outs-professional-academic-website Useful Links 1. http://www.vitae.ac.uk/researchers/1373/Academic%20CVs.html 2. http://blogs.nature.com/naturejobs/2011/09/27/38-tips-on-writing-an-academic- cv 3. http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/2011/dec/06/how-towrite- academic-cv 4. http://blogs.nature.com/naturejobs/2011/09/27/38-tips-on-writing-an-academic 5. http://www.careers.utoronto.ca/myCareer/resumeInterview/cv. aspx 6. http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/2011/dec/06/how-towrite- academic-cv 7. http://www.vitae.ac.uk/researchers/1373/Academic%20CVs. Html 8. http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/2011/dec/06/how-towrite- academic-cv 9. http://www.virginia.edu/vpr/postdoc/docs/CVCoverLetters. Pdf 10. http://www.createchange.org/ 11. .http://www.columbia.edu/cu/biology/ug/research/paper.html. 12. http://journaltool.asme.org/help/authorhelp/webhelp/guidelines/ writing a technical paper.htm 141

13. Authors Services elsevier.com/author-services. 14. Authors’ Update elsevier.com/authors-update 15. Elsevier Connect elsevier.com/connect 16. Elsevier Newsroom elsevier.com/about/elsevier-newsroom. 17. Elsevier Webshop webshop.elsevier.com. 18. Ethics in Research & Publication ethics.elsevier.com. 19. Journal Finder journalfinder.elsevier.com. 20. Mendeley mendeley.com. 21. Promote Your Work elsevier.com/promote-your-work. 22. Researcher Academy–free learning platform researcheracademy.com. 23. Share Link elsevier.com/author-share-link. Thank you so much for reading this book If you have any feedback or questions, please do contact me: [email protected] 142

A brief synopsis of the book The purpose of this book (How to Write & Publish a Scientific Paper from Clutter to Clarity) is to help scientists and students of the sciences in all disciplines to prepare manuscripts that will have a high probability of being accepted for publication and of being completely understood when they are published. This book includes an important and extensive study, as the readers will find and also the most important of what has been written about the mechanism of scientific writing and publishing in many modern scientific journals which have a very high impact factor, which makes scientific papers and research very important. I hope that this book will be a link to a series of scientific books in higher education that should be made available to readers and researchers interested in scientific research, as a first step on the long path that faces us towards a true scientific renaissance. 143