Writing Academic Papers

IS IT POSSIBLE FOR ME TO WRITE?. 1
THE PRACTICE OF WRITING.. 2
WHAT DO EDITORS LOOK FOR?. 3
THE SUBMISSION AND REVIEW PROCESS.. 4
REFERENCE. 5
FURTHER READING.. 5

IS IT POSSIBLE FOR ME TO WRITE?

These pages aim to help novice writers to prepare their work for publication.

Basic Skill

Since we write all the time, it is obvious that we possess the basic skill required – putting words next to each other in order to communicate. We do not have to learn a new skill in order to be able to write for publication, we simply have to translate the skill we already possess into a different context. More importantly, through informal writing we demonstrate awareness that different aims and settings require different styles, and that we are able to adapt to those different aims and settings. Writing for publication is simply a further and, in many ways, minor adaptation. Similarly, writing for publication is not as difficult as is commonly supposed, and the rewards are great. Like many other things, writing and publishing are practice effect skills – the more you do them the better you get at them.

Organise Your Thoughts

Writing helps us to organise our own thoughts about a particular topic. In a sense, publishing an article is drawing a line under our views on a given issue at a given time. Writing is also potentially rewarding in the way that all communication is – through sharing our experiences with others. As with all such sharing, we get the benefit of the feedback of others, and may potentially learn from their experiences and in-sights. In academic and clinical life, this is helpful in advancing not only the individual, but also the discipline, and this in turn leads to the reward of feeling part of a group endeavour. There is, of course, always the possibility that others will disagree with us. First-time authors often fear others will find their view foolish. In fact, writing is actually safer than face-to-face disagreement, since one is not exposed to the possibility of ridicule in the presence of others! More practically, such fears are very rarely proved true, and academics are generally very liberal in their acceptance of the work of others.

Rewards of Writing

There are also more tangible rewards. The letter of acceptance, the arrival of the proofs of the paper, the arrival of the complimentary copies of the journal or the reprints, the correspondence, the requests for reprints, the congratulations of colleagues, even (occasionally) money! All these gifts, and more, are the lot of the published author, however modest the paper. If you want to communicate your work, can you imagine not being delighted when you have successfully done so?

THE PRACTICE OF WRITING

This section will concentrate on how to translate these into effective writing for publication. There will be no attempt to deal in detail with style, grammar and so on. There are books, which offer advice about these matters (see Further reading, below). Rather, the intention here is to get you writing, and to get you to continue up to the point of submission for publication.

What Kind of Publication?

One good place to start is to consider what kind of piece of writing you want to do. In medicine there is a traditional route, which begins with a letter publication, then moves through short reports in clinical journals to full papers in peer-reviewed academic journals, reflecting the increasing experience and expertise of the maturing author/researcher/clinician. The former is a good way to get a clinical observation into the public domain, and to gain feedback and potential collaboration from colleagues. Importantly, two principal components of academic writing – the ability to write succinctly and clearly – are particularly evident in letter publications. The letter publication and short report offer two ways of making the task of writing for publication more manageable because the piece itself is in both cases brief and, therefore, imposes less of a conceptual load on the author, although the constraints of writing to a word limit are themselves an important discipline to master.

The Salami Principle

The other chief way of lightening the burden inherent in writing for publication is to calibrate the task and then work on each element of it individually – the Salami Principle. The classic way of so doing is to write an outline of the paper and then fill in each element of the outline. The original outline has two purposes: to guide the ensuing drafts and to stimulate ideas. First, try writing a very brief outline on the word-processor before writing successive elements into the outline. Then move around within the outline as you get fresh ideas about how to express particular elements of the paper. This is helpful because if you get tired of working on a particular strand of the paper, you can move on to something fresh and then return to the original element when you feel like it. It is also often the case that ideas will come to mind when writing parts of the paper other than the one being worked on - jot down the idea, then return to the part of the script you are mainly working on.

Begin with an estimate of how much each element of the outline will contribute to the overall paper in terms of length, then count words regularly to gauge your progress towards the final goal. The aim, in any writing, is simply to finish the task. However, this ultimate aim is often distant, thus it is recommended that you set yourself goals for interim achievement and give yourself rewards for achieving them. Set a target number of words for a writing session (be realistic – start small and work up) or a target number of words per hour. For example, if you like to drink coffee and, when writing, allow yourself a cupful only after at least 500 words has been written. Prepare yourself for writing by trying to go through the same routine every time you sit down to write. Be flexible, but try, for example, to spend the same amount of time on the task, to use the same computer each time and have it set up in the same way each time. Have all the materials you will need for reference during that session available. Eventually, you will be able to write more easily as these elements of the environment become established as triggers for writing.

Grammar, Spelling & Punctuation

These technical aspects of writing often deter the would-be author, but are comparatively easy to deal with through care and practice. Spelling, in particular, is easily dealt with now that spell checks are included in all but the simplest word-processing packages. It is, however, worth being aware of such potential pitfalls as alternative spellings, homophones (words which sound the same but have different meanings and different spellings according to their meanings), and differences between English and American English. Writing is a craft skill (rather like research) and it is expected that a good craftsperson will take account of and embrace all elements of the craft.

Will your script be rejected because its spelling, grammar or punctuation is poor? - probably not, unless the offences are so grave as to obscure communication. However, since presentation is such an easy matter to deal with, it seems unwise to fail to attend to it, particularly when other flaws in papers may be much more difficult to address. Most errors are simple, and are easily corrected with sufficient re-reading. Over and above this, it is usually helpful to write in short sentences and to avoid punctuation you do not really know how to use. In this context, one important piece of advice comes from Professor Windy Dryden, an incredibly prolific author and editor: HELP THE READER - do not assume that because you understand what you mean, the reader will. Similarly, do not assume that because you mentioned something a couple of paragraphs ago, the reader will immediately refer back to it. Good writing signposts every new element before it arises and explicitly connects it to what has gone before.

WHAT DO EDITORS LOOK FOR?

It is generally accepted that the most successful papers are those written by experienced authors. This is not because they are great writers (although some are), but because they are practiced and take care. More than this, their papers generally reveal the following characteristics, which you can easily emulate. Successful papers show knowledge of the market. Such papers do not need to be particularly original, but they address a need within the market. Knowing the market allows your paper to be relevant to the audience and timely in its appearance. These two facts alone greatly enhance the chances of publication. Following from this, the author of the successful paper knows the journal to which the paper is submitted. This involves knowing the academic level at which the journal is pitched, knowing the sort of papers it publishes and knowing its intended readership. The author can then respond accordingly and choose a journal which most closely fits the level, subject matter and proposed audience of her paper. Naturally, the definition of relevance is not precise, but by not being clear as to the focus of the journal, you immediately reduce the chances of successful publication.

THE SUBMISSION AND REVIEW PROCESS

Most academic journals follow a broadly similar submission process, and knowledge of this will

increase your chances of successful publication.

Instructions to Authors

It is worthwhile obtaining the Instructions to Authors (ITA) and Aims and Scope statements of a range of journals you want to target. These documents, particularly the ITA, should guide the way you construct your papers, and should be followed with slavish accuracy. As with spelling and punctuation, adherence to the ITA is a simple matter, and it wastes your time to have a script returned (often before it even reaches the formal review process) because it fails to follow the ITA. The ITA will also guide you as to the requirements of the journal regarding subheadings, referencing style, and so on. It is by far the best policy to write with a single journal in mind (and revise for another journal if it is subsequently rejected) rather than attempt to write a ‘generic’ article which you think you will adapt later. Ensure that you send your script to the journal in the form required by the editor. With regard to electronic copies, pay attention to the format required by the journal.

Authorship

If you are writing a joint paper with others, agree the order of precedence between you at an early stage. Also agree who will perform what roles in the writing process, and try to set agreed deadlines as a group. In the case of a team working together on a large project which is likely to result in a number of papers, the question of authorship is best resolved at an early stage. The general rule of thumb, is the greater the involvement, the higher in the batting order. People in clinical practice working alongside academic colleagues should be aware that those of us who work in the academic sector may be slightly more assertive in pushing for first authorship, since we perceive (rightly or wrongly) that it affects our job prospects.

Review Process

The review process varies widely, even amongst the peer review journals. Surprisingly, some high prestige medical journals (for example, the British Medical Journal) offer non-blind (open) review, whilst yet others (e.g. British Journal of Psychiatry) offer the author a choice between blind and open review. After review, the author typically receives one of the following four results: unconditionally accept; accept subject to satisfactory amendment; resubmit following amendment; reject. The process can take between 3 and 6 months. At Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing, the general reviewing policy is simple: if you do the amendments (or present a good case for not so doing) we publish; if you do not, we do not. This is not the case with all journals, and you may find yourself in the frustrating situation of having undertaken the originally required changes, only to find the reviewer now requires a series of further amendments. If the journal is offering to publish if the changes are made, always make them. You are already most of the way to getting into print, so capitalize on your investment in this particular submission. If a resubmission is required, this does not imply an offer to publish, and so the position is less clear. The only exception to this rule is if you believe the reviewer essentially wants a different paper from the one you have submitted (perhaps because of the reviewer’s own academic or clinical interests). It may well be a waste of time trying to meet someone else’s expectations of what your paper should be about.

Amendments

Where publication is offered subject to amendment, you will increase the likelihood and speed of publication if you approach the amendments in the following way. First, ensure that you undertake all the amendments you can. Second, list, in a covering letter, all the changes you have made and note where they appear in the revised script and where in the original script the issues to which the amendments refer occur. This, in turn, speeds up publication of your paper and avoids the possibility of getting into protracted correspondence between yourself, the editor and the reviewer about the adequacy or otherwise of the changes made.

Finally, if you cannot make all the changes, or do not feel it is appropriate to do so, state why in a covering letter. The reviewer may well feel you have made an adequate case for why the changes should not be made. Sometimes, however, a paper cannot be saved. Regardless of how worthy it is, it may fail to meet sufficiently high standards of presentation or academic content. This in itself is part of the learning process, and most people who write as part of their job have many rejection letters and at least a few papers, which never got published. It is important to learn from the feedback, even when it is negative.

One of the best ways of dealing with rejection is to ensure that you always have fallback plans – where will you submit the paper instead, what will you write about next and where will you submit that? Most papers get published eventually, in one form or another. As a clinician, you potentially have an important contribution to make, since your clinical work should lead research and justifies appropriate evaluation and dissemination. Indeed, this final element – dissemination – is the key to evolving excellence in clinical practice.

REFERENCE

Braine J 1974 Writing a Novel. Methuen, London.