Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Body Image
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/bodyimage
Editorial
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Article history:
Received 1 October 2008
Writing a scientic research paper for submission to a peer-reviewed journal requires compositional skill
and attention to details. In evaluating submitted manuscripts, journal editors and reviewers often
encounter recurrent mistakes in composition and in compliance with the stylistic requirements of the
particular publication. This editorial article identies core tenets of effective scientic writing in the social
and behavioral sciences, and it delineates commonly committed errors in violation of the style prescribed
by the American Psychological Association (APA). The editor organizes his advice in a user-friendly
checklist to assist both authors and reviewers associated with this journal (Body Image: An International
Journal of Research), as well as other journals that adhere to APA style. This advisory article may also assist
research supervisors and instructors in academic training contexts.
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Manuscript preparation
APA style
Effective scientic writing
Introduction
Scientists invest exceptional intellect and innumerable hours
in the conduct of research for peer-reviewed publication. In
turn, journal editors and peer-reviewers devote considerable
time, effort, and expertise in carefully reading and evaluating
researchers manuscripts. Evaluators are impressed by wellwritten papers that are coherently organized, technically and
stylistically accurate, and possess prose that ows and informs. On
the other hand, they frequently encounter common mistakes in
composition, provision of requisite information, and stylistic
correctness. These errors of commission and omission can be
frustrating to the evaluating reader. Moreover, a poorly prepared
paper may lead its reader to question, with or without cognizance,
the authors conscientiousness in the science behind the paper.
Having spent over 35 years as a university professor, scientist,
research supervisor, and journal editor/reviewer, I wish to
convey constructive advice to authors preparing scientic
manuscripts for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Some
of my counsel concerns effective scientic writing. Other specic
guidance pertains to compliance with stylistic requirements of
the fth edition of the Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association (APA, 2001). I hope to offer something
of value beyond the mission and scope of this particular journal.
My aim is to give guidelines, in a user-friendly checklist format,
which will aid not only authors, reviewers, and editors, but also
students and instructors/supervisors in the social and behavioral
sciences. I offer my advice informed by the errors that authors
commonly make when submitting papers to journals that require
APA style.
The big picture
Researchers who seek to publish their work in a peer-reviewed
scientic journal must appreciate some fundamental facts about
the process. In most journals, pages are a xed, economic
commodity. Unless the journal is a purely electronic publication
or charges authors for journal pages, it can publish only a certain
number of pages per volume. This means lengthier papers must
earn their keep in terms of their quality and empirical
contributions to the literature. Of course, some journals specify
word-length criteria for various types of submitted papers (e.g.,
reviews, full-length articles, or brief research reports). Authors
should be attentive to these criteria.
A familiar problematic submission is a paper that derives from a
very lengthy thesis or dissertation. The author originally wrote it
for a different purposenamely, to impress a committee with the
comprehensive detail of the work and earn the degree. Having
succeeded, the author reluctantly reduces the beloved 200-page
document with 150 references and 15 tables and gures to a
submitted paper of 50 pages with 75 references and 7 tables/
gures. Because this reduction is still twice the length of most
papers published in social and behavioral science journals, the
& 2.
& 3.
& 4.
& 5.
& 6.
& 7.
& 4.
& 5.
& 6.
& 7.
& 7.
& 8.
& 9.
& 10.
& 11.
& 12.
& 13.
& 14.
& 15.
& 16.
Conclusions
Well-written scientic manuscripts greatly benet researchers
and professionals involved in the editorial review process. Authors