RSP - Publishing Support

Why does picking a journal matter?

The most common reason papers get rejected is because they are deemed to be outside the scope of the academic focus of the journal which it has been submitted to. So submitting to an appropriate journal for your area of research is an essential pre-requisite to getting published.

Once you’ve picked a journal, you can then gear your work towards them, in terms of aspects like the journal’s special interest and goals to it’s formatting style.

What to consider when picking a journal?

Open Access

Different journals have different approaches to Open Access: some may only allow OA articles which will have an APC charge; some may have restrictions that will not allow you to meet your OA requirements; we may have agreements with some that allow Gold OA without any further charge.

As you scope out journals, you may find it useful to see if we have a Read and Publish Agreement with any relevant journals, and you may wish to use Jisc’s Sherpa Romeo to see if the Journal will allow you to archive the accepted manuscript in Pure (as is required by the University’s Open Access Policy).

Avoiding predatory publishers

Beware what are known as ‘predatory publishers’ that try to lure researchers in with misleading impact and scope such that they can charge authors fees to publish with them. Think Check Submit is a useful website for more information on how predatory publishers operate and what you can do to protect yourself.

Scoping publications in your field and using metrics

The simplest way to find a journal is to see where similar research is getting published. A quick scan of your citations can sometimes highlight relevant publishers. Alternatively, an abstract and citation database like Scopus can provide a sense of key journals in your academic discipline (Full access is available via your University login credentials). You can search for similar articles to see where they are published or you can select the 'Sources' tab to find journals in your subject area.

Scival is also a useful tool developed by Scopus to compare journals within and across diferent subject areas. You will be able to compare journals based on metrics like outputs, field-weighted citations, Journal Impact Factors, collaborations etc. Whilst these metrics can be a useful guide, it is important that you evaluate how they use them. It’s important that you question what you are trying to find out, whether aspects are being under represented, and whether journals could be skewing their numbers. Please see our “Responsible Metrics” section for more guidance on making the most of metrics.

Finding Multiple Journals

If you find a couple of journals, it can be useful to know which journal to submit to next if your first submission is unsuccessful, but you must submit to one journal at a time. Submitting to multiple journals at the same time is viewed as poor academic conduct and may lead to some journals declining to consider your future publications if you’re found out. If the first journal declines your article for publication, you are then free to submit the paper elsewhere.

Picking your Topic

Whilst you can always write an entirely new piece of research for publication, it is common for PhD authors to adapt parts of their PhD thesis with a view to publishing either a journal article or full length monograph. As authors of PhD theses typically maintain copyright over the work (unless a contractual agreement with a commercial sponsor or similar overrides this) they are free to seek to publish this research elsewhere.

It is worth noting that while most publishers do not regard a PhD thesis as a prior publication, some may take a different approach. This spreadsheet can help what different publisher’s policies are towards considering thesis material for publication.

Talking to your Supervisor

Your supervisor will be a particularly helpful guide for getting your work published. Not only will they have a keen sense of your research and writing, but they will also have a good sense of the field and could help you find a good journal to publish with.

In some academic disciplines, it is common for works authored by a PhD student to include their academic supervisor(s) and others working within their research group. Often the input of a supervisor or more experienced academic as a co-author can provide useful support in the writing of a paper for authors less experienced with the process.

If you are unsure about who to credit as an author, The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors identifies four areas of contribution which would merit an authorship credit which can provide a useful frame of reference in this area.

Support from the Centre for Academic Writing (CAW)

The Centre for Academic Writing at Coventry University can provide a range of support from one to one tutorials to in depth accredited academic modules which are designed to help improve participants academic writing skills.

What is peer review?

If your paper passes the initial editorial check, whereby the journal editors assess that it meets the scope of the journal you have submitted to, then it will be passed on for peer review. Typically two peer reviewers will be appointed; some journals invite the authors of the paper to suggest appropriate figures in their field who would be able to act as a peer reviewer, others appoint reviewers independently.

Broadly speaking there are three different types of peer review:

• Single blind - where the identity of the author(s) is known to the reviewer, but not vice-versa
• Double blind - where the author and reviewer and both anonymous to one another
• Open peer review - where all parties are known to one another. Under open peer review the reviewer's comments and earlier versions of the manuscript are also often made available so the whole process is more transparent.

Peer reviewers are generally unpaid for their work and fit peer review around their other work. Turnaround times can therefore take several weeks or months, depending on the peer reviewer’s other time commitments. Journals offering unusually quick turnaround times may fall into the category of 'predatory publishers' and should be viewed with some caution.

How to responding to points raised from peer review

Reviewers will provide a range of feedback which may range from minor points (e.g. suggestions around presentation and layout), to more substantive points such as critiquing the research methodology employed and conclusions drawn.

It is common practice to submit a response to the reviewer’s letter alongside the revised manuscript. In this letter it is important to respond to each comment or query raised by reviewers, no matter how minor, and explain how you have addressed each point. If you disagree with a point, be polite in your response and indicate why you have felt unable to implement a particular change which has been suggested.

A useful and easily digestible article providing 10 'rules' on how to respond to reviewers feedback was published by Plos One in 2017.

If your paper gets rejected

Don't panic! Many journals have an acceptance rate of well below 50%, meaning more articles are rejected than are accepted. A rejection isn't always indicative of the quality of the work, as it may simply be a reflection that the focus of the article falls outside the scope of the journal it has been submitted to.

If your paper is declined publication in one journal then you have the option of re-submitting it elsewhere for consideration. Hopefully the reviewer feedback you will have received will be constructive in nature and allow you to formulate a stronger submission second time around.

At this stage your article is heading for publication (hooray!) but this also means that the legal contractual part of the publication process starts to kick in.

Copyright Transfer Agreements (CTAs)

Most publishers will ask authors to sign a Copyright Transfer Agreement (CTA), assigning copyright from the author(s), in whom it resides by default, to the publisher. It is worth reading through the details of a CTA as they will typically detail those rights retained by the author including the right to re-use the paper in teaching, sharing the paper with colleagues and other individuals, archiving various versions of the paper in pre-print and institutional / subject repository systems etc.

Authors may request changes to the terms of the Agreement, however publishers may not always accept such changes. An alternative agreement template has been developed by the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) in the form of their Author Addendum. Your funder may also require you to add a Rights Retention Statement to the submitted manuscript. These are both attempts to permit the author to retain additional rights beyond the more restrictive standard Copyright Transfer Agreements.

Note that while it is common for academics to share publications via Academic Social Networking sites like Research Gate, this is subject to the publisher’s permissions and that posting the final publication will likely be a breach of the publisher's copyright.

Pure and Green Open Access

Both the REF and Coventry University require the accepted manuscript to be archived in Pure within 3 months of acceptance in order to help ensure compliance with various Open Access requirements.

Some publishers will permit the accepted manuscript to become available to coincide with publication, others implement an embargo period prior to the document's release. The Open Research and Scholarly Publications team at Coventry University help check publisher policies before the record goes live.

Please see the Pure tab for more help.

Open Access

At publication, you will start to feel the benefits of Open Access. With Gold Open Access, anyone who finds you article will be able to access it, which will help reach not only other researchers, but also practitioners, industry partners, policy makers and the general public. Even if you have not published Gold Open Access, you will probably still be able to provide access via the green route, although this may require an embargo period before the article can be released.

Social Media

Social media can be a really useful tool for authors to promote and advertise their publications. Some are specific to academia (e.g. Mendeley, Research Gate) while others reach a more general audience (Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook). It is common for authors to use platforms like Twitter to promote their research and develop communities around topics of interest, but you may find it useful to create a separate account in order to balance your professional and personal profiles. More guidance on using social media as an academic is available through our library holdings.

Monitoring Engagement

Monitoring engagement allows you to see the types of conversations that happen around your work, and could lead to potentially fruitful developments or collaborations. There are various services which measure the citations and other types of interaction which a publication receives, including Google Scholar, Scopus and Altmetrics. Do be aware that citation data may vary between providers, for instance, Google Scholar citation figures will be higher than Scopus since Scopus measures citations from other peer reviewed publications, whereas Google Scholar covers a wider range of material, including less academically rigorous material.