How to write a journal article

[Kalmar]

I'm about to enter graduate school (in the arts and humanities) and have a handful of ideas for papers I'd like to write. I have a lot of time on my hands right now so I'd like to begin writing with the hope of eventually getting one or more of these papers published (even if it's in lesser journals). My undergraduate thesis received a very high mark and I'm also thinking of editing it into an article format for publication.

 

I have never done this before and would appreciate any help or guidance. How do I go about writing articles intended for journals?

[Eigen]

Generally, you'll want someone in your field- undergraduate or grad school mentor- to help you navigate the publishing process, as it's quite complicated, and can be very field specific. 

 

You have two ways to go about writing: identify the journal you want to submit to, and tailor your article to that journal from the start, or write a paper, then decide which journal it would best fit in, and tweak it accordingly. 

 

Since you're working from distinct ideas, or in the case of your thesis, a partially written article, you probably want to think now about the fit of the journal. 

 

And that's the tricky part- deciding where to submit. And it's generally where a trusted mentor can be hugely helpful. 

[Kalmar]

Generally, you'll want someone in your field- undergraduate or grad school mentor- to help you navigate the publishing process, as it's quite complicated, and can be very field specific. 

 

You have two ways to go about writing: identify the journal you want to submit to, and tailor your article to that journal from the start, or write a paper, then decide which journal it would best fit in, and tweak it accordingly. 

 

Since you're working from distinct ideas, or in the case of your thesis, a partially written article, you probably want to think now about the fit of the journal. 

 

And that's the tricky part- deciding where to submit. And it's generally where a trusted mentor can be hugely helpful. 

Brilliant, that's very helpful. Generally speaking, are journal submissions done through connections or just submitted by virtue of being good enough on their own? As in, do I need someone to vouch for me to the journal or can I just submit something when I think it fits well enough?

[Eigen]

Hard to tell.

In my field, grad students will always submit as first author, with their faculty advisor as last author.

And there's definitely a benefit in the editor knowing that last authors name.

That said, past the editor, reviews are supposed to be blind.

[mpheels]

Reviewers for journals are usually "blind" to the identity of the authors. Some journals are more serious about this than others, but in general papers should be accepted/rejected based on scientific merit, interest, and fit with the journal. A trusted mentor can help you polish the paper and identify the right journal for submission, but they can't (or at least shouldn't) vouch for you or your article - if they did, it would defeat the purpose of peer review, and make the journal a less trustworthy source. Journals also generally avoid having reviewers read submissions from past/current so-investigators.

 

Several years ago I submitted my first publication as first-author. The journal required me to blind the article, deleting everything that would identify the authors or institution. i was using data from a pretty unique health registry, so despite the blinding, a reviewer could identify the research group based on the methods section. She made a couple of incorrect inferrences about the data set based on her pre-existing knowledge of the registry. I was able to address her concerns, but it was really kind of annoying when she wasn't supposed to know who I was in the first place.

[fuzzylogician]

Several years ago I submitted my first publication as first-author. The journal required me to blind the article, deleting everything that would identify the authors or institution. i was using data from a pretty unique health registry, so despite the blinding, a reviewer could identify the research group based on the methods section. She made a couple of incorrect inferrences about the data set based on her pre-existing knowledge of the registry. I was able to address her concerns, but it was really kind of annoying when she wasn't supposed to know who I was in the first place.

 

Something similar has happened to me in the past. The reviewer must have looked me up (which I suppose was not difficult, since I was presenting similar materials, though with a different title, at conferences at the time) and took the opportunity to take a stab at who (s)he (incorrectly) thought was my advisor by being quite cruel in the review, but the editor and my reply were effective in diffusing the situation and the paper has been accepted for publication. Overall I work on a problem that not that many people work on; when it comes to reviewing, the paper is sent to experts who can easily guess where the paper is coming from. I can also quite easily guess who the reviewers might be. But we all still make the effort to make sure the paper does not reveal the identity of the author, and beyond that we just have to trust that our colleagues are honest scientists.

[Angua]

Something similar has happened to me in the past. The reviewer must have looked me up (which I suppose was not difficult, since I was presenting similar materials, though with a different title, at conferences at the time) and took the opportunity to take a stab at who (s)he (incorrectly) thought was my advisor by being quite cruel in the review, but the editor and my reply were effective in diffusing the situation and the paper has been accepted for publication. Overall I work on a problem that not that many people work on; when it comes to reviewing, the paper is sent to experts who can easily guess where the paper is coming from. I can also quite easily guess who the reviewers might be. But we all still make the effort to make sure the paper does not reveal the identity of the author, and beyond that we just have to trust that our colleagues are honest scientists.

 

Yeah, this happens a ton in our blind reviews -- the truth is, if the journal has selected good reviewers who are familiar with the field, they can often narrow the list of potential authors down to just a few.

 

But they're not supposed to.