“School of Authors” is a website from Comunicar, Scientific Journal in Education and Communication, indexed in main international data bases, that complements other websites in Spanish, English and Portuguese. “School of Authors” is written and edited, basically, by the Editorial Board of “Comunicar” and it aims to offer different sources, for manuscript submissions in scientific journals in a planned and strategic manner. It is intended to make authors think about scientific information management for publishing scientific manuscripts in high impact journals.

Writing a good research tittle: Mistakes that should be avoided.

Posted on December 22nd, 2019 by Rafael Repiso– Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

In the beginning it was the name, everything begins with a name and as the times passes through it gains in meaning and at the end; it will only remain that, a name engraved either in metal or marble, diamonds and rust. There exist many identifying elements in an article, but none as fundamental as the title. The author should not rush when selecting the title of the article and it is even very common that if it is done wrong, the reviewers correct it.

The objectives of the title are:

• Describe the content of the article in a clear, specific, accurate, brief and concise way.
• To allow the reader to identify the content of the work easily.
• To help the information managers (documentary makers, librarians, etc.) to catalogue and classify the material accurately.
• To attract the reader.

The title, as well as the other identifying sections (abstract, keywords, DOI, etc.), should be composed once the article is done. It prevails the capacity to explain the content over the concision of the same, however the title should be brief.

The main error of a title is that is disconnected from the reality of the study it represents, that indicates that it has been done something that really has not been achieved. That the reader has finished with a reading and gets disappointed because what was promised has not been fulfilled. Manuel Alejandro Bobenrieth classified the errors of the titles in three categories: clarity, conciseness and over-explication (which in certain way is a concise error).

1. Clarity errors: Correct syntax and vocabulary to the readers’ reach.

• Use ambiguous or vague words.
• Use slangs, jargon.
• Use abbreviations and acronyms

2. Concision errors: Brevity in the way of expressing the concepts, that is, the effect of expressing them properly and with precision with the least possible words.

• Too extensive (to exceed 15 words).
• Too brief (telegraphic and nonspecific titles).
• Excess of prepositions and articles.
• Unnecessary use of subtitles.

3. Over-explanation errors: Statement or repetitive and useless presentation of a concept, which is taken for granted. Examples:

• “Study” about… Research about… “Report” of…
• “Contribution” to… “Results of a study” on…
• “Analysis of the results” of…

 

Is there a writing style of the selected journal?

Posted on December 15th, 2019 by Ana Pérez-Escoda– Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

Facing the challenge of publishing a scientific article implies the knowledge of the aspects regarding its formal presentation, given that, being author suggests the domain of the technics that help to the reading and comprehension. As Griffies, Perrie & Hull (Elements of Style for Writing Scientific Journal Articles) affirm, not all the researchers have training in the right writing style for scientific articles, even despite of the academic relevance within each study field. Therefore, getting to know the elements of style in the writing of an academic article is essential, because for brilliant that the researcher could be, not connecting correctly with the academic community through the publications could go in detriment of the impact and visibility.

Despite of the fact that each journal has specific guidelines- which should be read carefully before sending the manuscript (norms, norms, norms)-, there is not an explicit writing style of the selected journal, but there is an expected writing style, implicit and tacit when a scientific-academic article is sent.

‘Comunicar’ available on Researcher App

Posted on December 2nd, 2019 by Arantxa Vizcaíno-Verdú– Translation_ Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

Comunicar Journal is already available on Researcher app. A free application for mobile devices available on Google Play, App Store and App Gallery, which makes it easier the tracking of articles from international scientific sources, and that simplifies the search of manuscripts and keep us aware about new publications.

 

Why and what for should we publish?

Posted on November 25th by Ángel Hernando Gómez. Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

On several occasions, in research training consultancies that we are carrying out, we are surprised to have university professors as students who, having defended their doctoral thesis years ago, have not published any article on the research that was sustained by them. This topic that in other contexts would be unusual and surprising is too widespread in our environment, in fact, we had to regulate the need to publish one or more articles in order to defend the doctoral thesis and achieve the degree of doctor (changing one of the requirements , that it was an unpublished investigation of which nothing had been published, which was previously raised).

When we carry out an investigation and do not publish anything about it, we make several mistakes that threaten ourselves, our university and the scientific community in general.

Everyone has known that the academic and scientific progression of a researcher is directly related, every day more, with the number of articles published and the quality of these. If you want to advance in your academic career and progress in the increasingly difficult university career, you must publish in quality and high-impact scientific journals (especially those that are indexed in the most important databases: WOS -with JCR and ESCI- and SCOPUS), if you want the evaluation agencies of your country to accredit you in the different university categories.

But not only you can benefit from the publication (or damage by non-publication) of your articles, a very important part of the funds that support the budget of the university to which you belong are granted, by the different administrative and research bodies, based on the number and quality of the articles that your research professors publish in impact scientific journals, so if you want to collaborate with the entity where you work, try to publish your research in indexed journals.

An investigation that does not “see the light”, not being published, subtracts from the scientific community the contributions and advances that it could have. If you have benefited from obtaining a grant for a research project, it may be, among other aspects, because it is based on the construction of a state of the art as a result of a good literature review. The construction of this theoretical framework has been possible because the researchers that have preceded you, in your thematic field of research, have fulfilled their duty to share and make public the results of their research, it is fair that you do the same and “return” part of what has been received so that their contributions benefit the scientific construction in general and, in particular, future researchers in their thematic field.

In parallel to what has already been mentioned, you can also collaborate with your publications to a better positioning of your university in the international rankings that compare them since most of them contemplate, as a very relevant indicator, the publications of the professors of a university (in quantity and quality) in scientific journals of impact.

In short, for all the mentioned reasons, it is necessary for teachers to publish the results of their research in scientific journals of impact. The fact of publishing does not entail, in our opinion, any disadvantages and will only result in advantages for you, your Center and the scientific community to which you belong.

 

 

How to cite several authors in APA format?

Posted on November 18th, 2019 by Águeda Delgado-Ponce – Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

The elaboration of a solid theoretical base must pay attention fundamentally and carefully to the review of previous works; its reading, reflection and, as it cannot be otherwise, the recognition of its authorship.

Although there are areas or fields of study that are more individualistic and in which the works are usually carried out by a single author, in the social sciences and especially in the field of experimental sciences, medicine, etc. research is a shared task. The impact projects (I+D, excellence, European, International…) are carried out by teams of researchers, who at the time of publishing their results share authorship. In addition, although in some cases, according to the number, justification of the work of each author is requested, the scientific journals value that the article is signed by several authors from different universities, since the collaboration, the comparison of contexts, the diversity of approaches are an added value to the studies.

In these cases, the order of signature is an important aspect that reflects the contribution of each author to the research and, therefore, must be respected when the citation of the work is made. Along with this, if we follow the APA (American Psychological Association) Style Manual, when we cite the work of several authors, we will consider the following points:

Citations on the text

5 keys to improve your scientific writing: Importance of punctuation

Posted on November 11th, 2019 by Luis M Romero-Rodríguez – Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

One of the main difficulties when writing a scientific article is to adapt our writing style – which is part of our identity – to the narrative styles of scientific journals. It is very common to find new researchers writing articles with endless paragraphs, composed by juxtaposed, coordinated and subordinate sentences, direct, indirect and circumstantial complements and, in addition, with semicolons (;) to separate ideas, painting with these signs -as if it were a canvas- their premium operas.

The grammar and the correct use of punctuation ensure a clear communication of ideas, in turn improving the structure of the arguments presented in the article, ergo ensuring their readability and understanding. We must not forget that an article has a pedagogical and persuasive purpose.

Simplicity tends to significantly improve the quality exposition of ideas

Of course, each area of ​​knowledge is a world: It is not the same to write for a journal of literature or history (Arts and Humanities), than for journals of “hard” sciences, such as physics or mathematics. In the first we will probably find grandiloquent paragraphs and linguistic ornaments in a manuscript that can have more than 12 thousand words, while on the second case concise writing is more common, which goes directly to the problem, its solution and conclusions and in those that do not abound -for unnecessary- complex sentences with many complements. In short: subject, verb and complement.

In the case of Social Sciences, our editorial style is usually a hybrid in extension, structure (the most common IMRDC) and linguistic, because our sciences and disciplines force us to introduce the subject and justify it, review the state of the matter, explain the methods, to analyze the results and to expose the conclusions and discussions, all this by means of the use of our language, but also thinking about the possibility that the manuscript has later translation to English, whose writing is still more concrete.

Here are 5 keys to improve your scientific writing:

1. Avoid excessively long paragraphs. If a paragraph has more than 7 lines, it can probably be separated into two or, otherwise, presents too many ideas.
2. One paragraph per idea. Already in another post of School of Authors we had explained three keys to ensure enough density of concepts between the paragraphs and, in addition, linearity of ideas that should be between them.
3. The semicolon. This punctuation mark sometimes becomes the “wild card” of the day and, the truth, is that it should be used the least. According to the RAE, the semicolon has only 4 uses.
4. Avoid the “Frankestein” writing. We understand that many times we distribute the writing work, but there is nothing more complicated than maintaining the same logic when an article is made with 4, 6 and up to 8 hands. If we cannot avoid it, let us at least delegate the revision and grammar and stylistic correction of the text to an author.
5. Read, read and reread. When we write something, we don’t usually read it carefully, perhaps due to overconfidence or saturation. However, the work of reading after writing is rather important in the same way that the writing of the text itself. A key to do it successfully is not checking it until after a few hours.

 

The 10 most frequent causes of dismissal of a manuscript

Posted on November 4^th, 2019 by Ángel Hernando Gómez

Author: Ángel Hernando Gómez – Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

When we send an article to a journal to try to get it published to us, the first filter that has to go through, before being placed or not in peer evaluation, is the “editing review” that is done by the editors of the journal. A high percentage of the manuscripts sent to scientific journals of impact do not pass this first review and are dismissed for a number of causes, most of them avoidable, among which are:

 

1.“Norms, norms, norms”. Although the guidelines for authors of specific quality journals, in detail, the norms that the authors must follow if they intend to publish in them, we find that a high percentage ignores them when respecting the indicated structure by the journal, anonymize the manuscript, follow the marked extension, the number of keywords and references, the way of citing, etc. Since we want to publish in that journal and our manuscript will be reviewed, in many cases for free, by several specialists in the field, you must follow, one hundred percent, the rules for authors if we want the editors to send our manuscript to the reviewers.

2. “Plagiarism.” The editors review the articles that correspond to them with a professional anti-plagiarism program and many are dismissed for the percentage of plagiarism they have. Do not assume that all journals will have a quantitative and qualitative reading of the percentage of plagiarism and / or autoplagiarism that your manuscript will have (many do not) and, to avoid surprises, it is advisable to pass a plagiarism detection program before sending the article to the journal.

3. “Bad journal selection”. Our article can be very good, but it has to “fit” in the magazine in which we intend to publish it, so when selecting it we have to take into account, among other aspects, its thematic line, the existence of monographs or not, its focus, periodicity and manuscript number by number, its acceptance / rejection percentage, etc. If we do not take these aspects into account, our work will be dismissed.

4. “Do not carry out the Discussion”. We find that a good number of articles that want to be evaluated do not make this basic section in scientific writing (we already talked about it in another entry of this School of authors of its importance) and, in many occasions, they confuse it with the Conclusion.

5. “Duplicate, triple the information”. Scientific writing is characterized by its accuracy, clarity and brevity. It is a way of writing where ideas are presented in an orderly, concise and fluid manner and, nevertheless, we find on numerous occasions that an idea described in straight text, then is presented again in a table and, in addition, A third time in a figure.

6. “Incorrect bibliographic search, bad establishment of the state of art -“ It is rather important to mention the great importance that publishers give to this section, if you want to publish in scientific journals of excellence and great impact, define the state of the art of your subject by an exhaustive search in the main databases where they are indexed (SCOPUS and WOS)

7. “Method poorly selected / performed”. The Method section of our manuscript is thoroughly reviewed by quality journals (many of them have methodological reviewers only for this section) so in addition to selecting journals that publish articles in accordance with our methodological line, pay special attention to the elaboration of the Method.

8. “Number of unsubstantiated authors”. In the author regulations, the maximum number of researchers who can sign an article is usually specified, if yours exceeds it and does not want it to be dismissed, do not forget to base the reason for that number on the cover letter.

9.  “Use of an English -not professional-. In the scientific journals of impact work professional translators who detect the quality of our translations (of the metadata or of the entire article if required), so if your English is not excellent and you do not want your work to be dismissed, hire to a professional translator

10. “Lack of attached documents”. The journals specify a series of documents that must be uploaded, in addition to the anonymous manuscript. The number and class of these documents varies depending on the journal (Title page, Cover letter, Highlight, declaration of interest, etc.) and article management platforms do not allow us to complete the process if they are not included, but in case and if you do not want to be dismissed, provide all the documents requested.

Taking into account these ten possible causes of dismissal will not guarantee that your article after the review will be published / rejected but it will certainly help your article not be dismissed, pass the filter of the “edit review” and be reviewed by pairs.