to remember

to to gain
understand perspective
 A written and published report
describing original research results Must meet certain requirements on
how it is written and published
(Robert Day)

Scientific
Paper
Must contain the first disclosure of
To be a valid publication: it must be
results with sufficient information for
published in the right place (peer-
peers to do the ff: assess
reviewed journal or a top-ranked
observations; repeat experiments and
conference)
evaluate intellectual process
Thesis Journal
Publication
 Thesis Journal Publication
Output Final technical report Journal article
Writing for
For supervisor or adviser For editor and audience
whom
Presented and critiqued by panel Publication goes through the
Process
members peer review process
Must be direct and focused
Breadth Comprehensive answer to SOP (reconsider the variables
previously covered)
Title, Abstract, Rationale, SOP,
TB, RM, Analysis and Title, Abstract, Introduction, Body,
Structure
Interpretation, Conclusion, Discussion, References
Recommendation, Bibliography
“A research paper
should be circular
in argument – the
conclusion should
return to the
opening, and
examine the
original purpose in
the light of the
presented
research.” (Berry,
1986)
 Ideal and legal
Scientific protection of Economic
Gain reputation
Communication intellectual Measures
property

It is unethical to
Progress conduct a study Reach a broad Improve chance
scientific thought and not report the audience of promotion
findings
 Authors need not convince readers that they did the
work…

The professional public would like to learn something it

did not already know, expressed in succinct phrase,
points are agile and alert

Authors need to target the journal (editor and

audience) and the research market

Choose the journal and direct your efforts in placing a

paper there (read previous publications to know it better)
Confe-
rence
Journal
Book
Editor
Based on the final Choose the
Constantly assess
technical report, appropriate
the preliminary
choose your perspective of the
article done
preferred Journal research report

Ensure that writing Go through the

Submit to
style is clean, prescribed review
preferred Journal
concise, coherent process
Editors Reviewers
• If it can be interpreted in more
than one way, it’s wrong
• Know our audience, know your
subject, know your purpose
• It you can’t find a reason to put
a comma in, leave it out
• Keep your writing clear,
concise and correct
• If it works, do it
Davis
• Be simple and concise
• Make sure the meaning of
every word
• Use verbs instead of abstract
nouns
• Break up noun clusters and
‘stacked modifiers’ (i.e. strings
of adjectives and nouns, with
no clue about which modifies
which)
O’Connor
 Peer Review. Papers Reporting a finished Sharing research
are reviewed by piece of significant results in
peers of the authors scientific conferences.
in the respective achievement. Publication
field’s scientific

Conference
Journal
Publications

Publications
Management
Scientific Quality

Actors: Reviewer, Process: Call for

community prior to Editor-in-Chief, Papers (Title,
publications to Associate Editor, Acronym, Venue;
ensure publishable Managing Editor, Gen. Info/Theme;
quality of the Publisher Topics of Interest;
research paper Submission
Publication
Process: Choose guidelines; Deadline)
Journal, Submit, Review Process:
Review, Decision Done by a pool of
(Accept, Revision, reviewers; Decision
Reject) (Accept or Reject);
Rebuttal; Camera-
ready paper deadline
 • Thematic relevance to the
journal’s scope of subjects
• Significance of contribution
• Originality of work
• Coverage of relevant
literature
Other info from
Strong Papers:
Reviewers
1) Strong
reputation of
author
2) Successful • Clarity of writing: readability,
test of proposed organization, conciseness and
theory technical quality
3) Different • Appropriate title and abstract
content than
usually • Appropriate use of well-designed
published figures and tables
• Sound conclusion and discussion
• Length of paper relative to usefulness

Writing style
considerations
 Strong reputation of the
author

Successful test of the

proposed theory

Different content than usually

published in the journal
Establish the overall claim of the paper
 Review Chapter 5 of your final technical report and determine
from there the overall claim of your article.
What is the paper all about?
 Write between 500 to 1,000 words the content of your paper
What has been written about the topic?
 Compress your RRL between 1,000 to 2,000 words
(depending on the ceiling provided by the journal)
Submission on Sept. 10, 2018 (12NN) by encoding in
your respective Google Docs bearing the Workshop
Title and Number