Oxford University Press's
Academic Insights for the Thinking World

10 tips for getting your journal article published

Writing a paper that gets accepted for publication in a high-quality journal is not easy. If it was, we’d all be doing it! Academic journals publish articles that are well-written, and based on solid scholarship with a robust methodology. They must present well-supported stories and make significant contributions to the knowledge base of the journal’s specific discipline. Often, manuscripts are rejected before even going out to review because they are poorly written or fail to meet a journal’s publication requirements. Publication requirements don’t just mean submission guidelines, which, of course, need to be followed, but also the more fundamental aspects of composing a publishable article.

Here are ten recommendations on how to effectively write papers that will be considered for publication in high-quality journals:

1. Who is your audience? This is the first question you should ask yourself. Is it the experts in your specific field or scientists in other disciplines? Is it the reading public, or policy makers? Each of these audiences will bring different background assumptions or knowledge to your piece, so how you write for each of them will differ. Ask yourself the questions your audience may ask: Why am I reading this? Why should I keep reading this, rather than reading something else, or doing something else entirely?

2. Respect your audience. Do not make them have to work to figure out what you’re trying to say or what the structure of your story is. The people you are submitting your manuscript to are busy people, especially journal reviewers and editors. If your article is hard to read and follow, it makes their job harder than it should be – increasing the likelihood that your work will be rated poorly or rejected if being considered for publication.

3. Outline your ideas. Use this step to get down the order of your ideas, identifying the main and supporting points of your article. Outlining does not have to be in an orderly, linear fashion, if that does not work for you. Using post-it notes, the mind-map technique, or writing on a blackboard are all techniques you can use to ensure your ideas form a coherent structure.

4. Start with your idea, then expand upon and support it.  Academic writing should not be like a mystery novel that reveals the outcome only at the end. Effective scientific narratives start from a stated focus, move through a clear structure of support, and bring the story to fruition. The organization and order of ideas should be clear throughout. If you find yourself circling back or repeating details, that likely means the structure of your work needs to be revised.

5. Keep it simple. Just because the topic is complex does not mean the writing should be. Simple, straightforward sentences are better than long, convoluted ones. Exact, plain words are better than vague ones. Do not use jargon or acronyms – especially when submitting to multi-disciplinary international journals. Make sure every word plays a role in presenting your case and that you know the meaning of any unusual words you use. If you are looking to publish in a language that requires heavy translation on your part, seek help from your advisor, colleagues, university writing centres and professional writing services to improve your article.

6. Practice makes perfect. It might seem like a clichéd answer, but it really is the key. Write regularly; practice it as a discipline in and of itself. Writing a high-quality, publishable article requires confidence in your ideas, and practice and skill which takes time to acquire. You can learn to write well, but you need to increase the amount of time spent writing, too. This doesn’t have to be at your desk or in front of a computer, though. Make good use of time spent walking, waiting for the bus, or commuting on the train to think of how you can improve what you are currently writing.

7. Pay attention to good and bad writing. Which academic writers produce work that engages you? Which ones do not? What is the difference in how they present their arguments? What is the difference in how they use words and lay out sentences? Thinking carefully about other people’s writing is a step toward improving your own.

8. Write now, edit later. Some people are able to compose and edit at the same time, but if this is not the case for you, keep the two functions separate. The first draft of your research might be horrible, and nothing you would show anyone else. It doesn’t matter. Get something down. Work on it every day to get more down until you have your story or argument complete. Wait until later to edit it.

9. Give your manuscript ‘drawer time’. This is the time your manuscript spends in the dark of your file cabinet or unopened on your hard drive. This is one of the most valuable tools you can use when writing, because it allows you to become a better editor of your own work. Letting your manuscript sit for a while means that when you come to read it again, you should be able to identify any problems with it.

10. Stick at it. It is undoubtedly true that it is more important than ever for students and early career professionals to develop good writing skills and a thorough knowledge of the journals publication process. However, developing those skills and putting them into practice takes time, so don’t get discouraged. We all had to start somewhere!

Featured image credit: home-office by Free-Photos. CC0 public domain via Pixabay.

Recent Comments

  1. Joel Basoga

    this is helpful.

  2. Murar Yeolekar

    Well said , through ten facts that are essential.Depending on the journal speciality , a couple of illustrative diagrams may convey more than text. Also charts , and tables , appropriate in number could help one express better. Finally , the right statistical tests applied with meaningful conclusions could make the submission complete towards acceptance. As reviewer , I can say both core of the content and style of presentation matter. Prof M E Yeolekar , Mumbai.

  3. Opara Darlington

    I have an article ready for publication

  4. Amy Wilson

    I have an article ready to be published.

  5. Stephen

    Well written and inspiring to a complete novice like me. Thank you.

  6. […] SUMBER: blog.oup.com […]

  7. […] 1. Fixing Instead of Breaking, Part Three – Blockchain, RA21, Privacy, and Trust We continue to battle the tidal wave of data with a bucket brigade of individual privacy settings. Maybe it's time to pause and consider a state-level solution, ala Estonia, notes Kent Anderson, in his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog. The blog post says (quote): In Estonia, your data is stored in an ultra-secure government system complete with digital signatures and timestamps. This means that nobody can access a citizen's data (look at or download) without the owner of the data being alerted and told specifically who accessed the data and for what purpose. For example, a citizen was alerted that the police had accessed his data because the officer was looking for cars matching a particular description. His car was crossed off the list of possible vehicles under suspicion because it had been in the shop at the time. The citizen knew all this, the data were accurate, and the police were able to continue their search. Estonia's blockchain infrastructure delivers unmatched security, trustworthy data exchange, and the ability for both sides of the data transaction to see what was transacted, by whom, and how. Most importantly, it protects the integrity of the underlying data………(unquote) The full entry can be read Here. 2. From Content Creation to Content Delivery: How EBSCO eBooks™ Builds an Accessible User Experience As an aggregator of e-books, companies like EBSCO face a special kind of challenge regarding accessibility. In her post in the EBSCOpost Blog, Emma Waecker discusses how EBSCO is working with publisher partners and industry leaders to establish best practices for creating accessible e-book files to enhance the user experience. The blog post says (quote): To address this at the source, EBSCO works with e-book publisher partners and industry leaders to identify and establish best practices for creating accessible e-book files, which helps to meet the needs of their mutual users. In discussing e-book accessibility with leaders in creating accessible content, they've put together suggestions about which formats are most inherently accessible, how to apply proper semantic tagging for improved document navigation, and conversely avoiding the overuse of non-semantic tags like and which interrupt the reading experience. EBSCO and its publishers agree that when possible, it's best to submit EPUB files, as HTML is natively more accessible than PDF. EBSCO also encourage the use of consistent page numbers in both PDF and EPUB formats so users can easily cite their source, regardless of the e-book format………….(unquote) The full entry can be read Here. 3. The "long tail" of research impact is engendered by innovative dissemination tools and meaningful community engagement Research impact often tends not to happen in one emphatic, public moment but rather at more discrete points of the 'long tail' of a research project. In their post in the LSE Impact of Social Sciences Blog, Kip Jones and Lee-Ann Fenge discuss what it takes to create meaningful community impact, highlighting a commitment to inclusive co-production and public engagement and the use of participatory research to create innovative dissemination tools. The blog post says (quote): This case study provides just one example of the possibilities of creating impact through public engagement. It highlights how research projects that include in-depth outputs and dissemination plans can contribute to social engagement and "impact" for social benefit. The fact that the underpinning research began almost a decade and a half ago attests to the principle that research that is meaningful is never really finished, and that dissemination is more than simply a few academic journal articles. In this project "community", in the guise of co-researchers (the research project’s advisory committee and community service providers), was pivotal in providing feedback, momentum, and expanding the audiences for the efforts………(unquote) The full entry can be read Here. 4. Publisher drops plan to charge extra for old papers after outcry Publisher Taylor & Francis has dropped plans to charge extra for access to older research papers online, after more than 110 universities recently signed a letter of protest. The Publisher earlier proposed to bring in extra charges for digital papers published more than 20 years ago. Papers published in a one-year window between 1997 – seen as the year that the digital academic publishing era began – and 1998 would have been placed in a "modern archive", and universities would have had to purchase access to this as a separate package, notes Holly Else, in her post in the Times Higher Education Blog. The blog post says (quote): Diminishing this coverage [to older articles] is opportunistic and potentially profiteering within a sector which is recognised to enjoy substantial profit margins at present as it greatly monetises the outputs and inputs of publicly-funded research. It gives the publisher another route to earn money from their collections. Collectively librarians consider this unfair and not in the ethos of partnership. After 20 years those articles suddenly disappear even though academics have been reading them before that and these are the people who produced the articles……..(unquote) The full entry can be read Here. 5. 10 tips for getting your journal article published Writing a paper that gets accepted for publication in a high-quality journal is not easy. Publication requirements don't just mean submission guidelines, which, of course, need to be followed, but also the more fundamental aspects of composing a publishable article. Steward T.A. Pickett and Mark J. McDonnell, in their post in the OUPblog, discusses ten recommendations on how to effectively write papers that will be considered for publication in high-quality journals The blog post says (quote): Academic writing should not be like a mystery novel that reveals the outcome only at the end. Effective scientific narratives start from a stated focus, move through a clear structure of support, and bring the story to fruition. The organisation and order of ideas should be clear throughout. If you find yourself circling back or repeating details, that likely means the structure of the work needs to be revised. Just because the topic is complex does not mean the writing should be. Simple, straightforward sentences are better than long, convoluted ones. Exact, plain words are better than vague ones. Do not use jargon or acronyms – especially when submitting to multi-disciplinary international journals……….(unquote) The full entry can be read Here. […]

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *