Significance For International Publication

Klinik Manuskrip Riset Dasar RistekDikti: Surabaya, 1-2 Maret 2018
| 0
Scientific Significance for international

Publication, Ethics & Publication in Digital Era
Tole Sutikno
Universitas Ahmad Dahlan
Email: tole@ee.uad.ac.id, thsutikno@gmail.com, WA: 085 628 628 10
| 1
Profil Singkat:
Tole Sutikno, S.T., M.T., Ph.D. Scopus h-index: 11 (108 documents & 528 total citations)
Lahir: Lamongan, 12 Juni 1975 Google Scholar h-index: 18 (998 total citations)
Pendidikan:
S1 Teknik Elektro, UNDIP, Semarang 1993-1999
S2 Teknik Elektro, UGM, Yogyakarta 2000-2004
S3 Teknik Elektro, UTM, Johor (Malaysia) 2008-2016
Kepala LPPI Universitas Ahmad Dahlan

Founder, Indonesian Publication Index (IPI) http://portalgaruda.org
Editor-in-Chief/Managing Editors:
1. TELKOMNIKA Telecommunication Computing Electronics and Control , ISSN: 1693-6930 (terakreditasi “A”
RistekDikti, terindeks Scopus Q3)
2. International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems, ISSN: 2088-8694 (terindeks Scopus, Q3)
3. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering , ISSN: 2088-8708 (terindeks Scopus, Q2)
| 2
Tiga (3) aturan dasar yang perlu dipahami Penulis
1. Kenali audien
2. Pikirkan tentang apa yang menarik bagi audien
3. Ketika kita menulis, ALWAYS keep our audience & its
interests dalam pikiran kita
The most important of good writing practices:

 “Write with the reader in mind” = melayani pembaca
 NOT in our mind
| 3
Content:
1. Introduction
2. Skeleton (kerangka) of an Article
3. Steps to organizing your manuscript
4. Simple steps in writing & example
5. Most common reasons for journal rejection
| 4
Ethics in publishing: Policies and ethics #1 (in Elsevier)
Policies for authors

For details on Elsevier’s polices, visit our policy pages.
• Copyright: rights related to the publication and distribution of research
• Article Sharing: details on self-archiving and posting
• Article Withdrawal: article removal or retractions
• Patient Consent: use of personal information of patients or other
individuals
• Open access licenses: details on the licenses available when
publishing open access
• Permissions: obtaining permission for using Elsevier published
material
• Research data: policy and principles on research data
• Text and data mining: Elsevier’s policy on data and text mining
| 5
Ethics in publishing: Policies and ethics #2 (in Elsevier)

Ethics topics to consider when publishing:
• Authorship of the paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant
contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
• Originality and plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works,
and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited
or quoted.
• Data access and retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a
paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data.
• Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication: An author should not in general publish
manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.
Elsevier does not view the following uses of a work as prior publication: publication in the form of an
abstract; publication as an academic thesis; publication as an electronic preprint. Information on prior
publication is included within each Elsevier journal’s Guide for Authors. Note: Cell Press, The Lancet,
and some society-owned titles have different policies on prior publication. Information on these is
available on the journal homepage.
• Acknowledgement of sources: Proper acknowledgment.
• Disclosure and conflicts of interest: All submissions must include disclosure of all relationships
that could be viewed as presenting a potential conflict of interest.
• Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or
inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal
editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
• Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of
the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
• Hazards and human or animal subjects: Statements of compliance are required if the work
involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, or
if it involves the use of animal or human subjects.
• Use of patient images or case details: Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee
approval and informed consent, which should be documented in the paper.
| 6
Perilaku tidak etis (Unethical behavior)  "bisa

mendapat penolakan dan bahkan larangan
menerbitkannya di jurnal"
• Multiple submissions
• Redundant publications
• Plagiarism
• Data fabrication and falsification
• Improper use of human subjects and animals in research
• Improper author contribution
| 7
1. Introduction
| 8
As an International journal?
• The content is from a wide range of international authors,
• Have an Editorial Board that has international expertise and where

appropriate that are well represented geographically.
| 9
The Editor asks:
1. What did I learn from reading this paper?
2. Is it worth knowing (layak diketahui)?
3. Will this paper have an impact on the field?

- ISI journal citations (JCR), Scopus …
- Citations in professional literature (e.g. benchmarking technical reports,
textbooks)
- Professional application (e.g. engineering design, software, patents)
Journal publishers do not want zero-cited articles

Klinik Manuskrip Riset Dasar RistekDikti: Surabaya, 1-2 Maret | 2018
10
Clarivate Analytics Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2017 Release (JCR 2016 data)
• Date of news item: 15 June 2017

• Please be advised of the release of the latest issue of Journal Citation
Reports which provides 2016 data and is now available to subscribed
institutions.
• Information can be found in the Clarivate Analytics News item at:
http://news.clarivate.com/2017-06-14-Worlds-most-influential-journals-for-
2017-unveiled-in-the-Journal-Citation-Reports-from-Clarivate-Analytics
• Journal Citation Reports - See how to identify top performing journals and
link to view all of the journals included in the 2017 update at:
http://scientific.thomsonreuters.com/imgblast/JCRFullCovlist-2016.pdf
• If you have any questions or require assistance please contact Jisc Web of
Science Service for UK Education Support at: webofscience@jisc.ac.uk
11
Clarivate Analytics Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2017 Release (JCR 2016 data)
http://ipscience-help.thomsonreuters.com/incitesLiveJCR/whatsNewGroup/whatsNewJCR.html
What's New in Journal Citation Reports?
2017 JCR RELEASE

This release of Journal Citation Reports provides 2016 data. The 2017 data will be made
available in the 2018 Journal Citation Reports release.
Journals appearing in JCR

A complete list of the titles covered in this year's JCR is available here.
A list of journals receiving their first Impact Factor is available here.
This release of the JCR also includes the following new features:
Improved filters in the Journal and Categories by rank pages, and Compare Journals
page: http://ipscience-help.thomsonreuters.com/incitesLiveJCR/JCRGroup/howDoI/viewAndRank.html
% of citable items on each Journal Profile page:
http://ipscience-help.thomsonreuters.com/incitesLiveJCR/JCRGroup/jcrJournalProfile/jcrJournalInformation.html
12
Journal Citation Report (JCR)

13
Is a title indexed in Scopus? A reminder to check

before you publish
Here’s how to verify if a title is indexed in Scopus:
• Check our title lists. You don’t need access to Scopus to find out what is
and what is NOT covered, the information is publicly available from our info
page.There are 3 lists to check against:
- Scopus Source List: The complete list of indexed journal titles
- Book Title List: The complete list of indexed book titles
- Scopus Discontinued Sources List: The list of journal titles for which
indexing has been discontinued (and as of which volume and issue)
• Find it in Scopus. You can also go to Scopus.com itself to check. Open the
“Sources” page and search for a title, publisher or ISSN.
• Ask! When in doubt, contact the Scopus Helpdesk and one of our Customer
Service representatives can let you know if a title is indexed (or is going to
be indexed).
14
Scopus: CiteScore
15
Comparison: CiteScore vs Impact Factor

16
Metrics make journal assessment more complete & transparent

17
18
19
20
2. Skeleton (Kerangka) of an Article

21
Types of paper
Article type Description Word Abstract Refere Figures Miscellaneous Maximum
count* nces and number of
Tables authors
Book Review 500-700 None 1-3 None Solicited 1

“diminta” &
Unsolicited
Original 3,000 Structured 50 6 Unsolicited 10
Article 300 words
Review Basic Science 4,000 300 words 100 6 Solicited & 5

Articles / Clinical Unsolicited
Brief Reports 1,500 150 words 20 2-3 Unsolicited 3 & group

name
Letters Within 8 500 None 3-5 None Unsolicited 3
weeks of
publication,
original
author to
respond
Bridging the 1,500 None 10 1-2 Solicited 3
Gap
Meeting 4,000 300 words 100 6 Solicited 3 & group
Reports name
Commentary 1,500 None 10-12 1-2 Solicited 3
Visual 200 None 1-2 None Regular Feature 2

Vaccinology
http://www.elsevier.com/inca/publications/misc/Vaccine_Article_Type_Guidelines_May%202012.doc
22
Green Energy & Environment

Types of paper
Contributions falling into the following categories will be considered for
publication:
- Review (>10000 words),
- Mini review (~5000 words),
- Feature article >8000 words),
- Research article,
- Communication (~3000 words),
- Highlight (~1000 words), and
- Perspective (~3000 words).
Please ensure that you select the appropriate article type from the list of
options when making your submission. Authors contributing to special
issues should ensure that they select the special issue article type from this
list.
Ref: http://www.keaipublishing.com/en/journals/green-energy-and-environment/guide-
for-authors/
http://circres.ahajournals.org/content/article-types
23
The Nature journals

The Nature journals publish several different types of articles about science and
medicine. Broadly speaking, these can be divided into articles reporting original
scientific research; those reviewing scientific research; scientific journalism (news);
opinion about science-related matters; articles about science history; and articles
about the interface of science and culture.
• Original research is published either as an Article, Letter, Resource (presents a

large dataset of broad usefulness, interest and significance) Brief Communication
or Technical Report.
• Articles in the Nature journals that review recent advances in the scientific literature
are called Reviews. The Nature Reviews journals also publish Progress articles
(highly topical, short reviews). Nature publishes Insights (themed collections of
several review articles) and, occasionally, Analysis (meta-analysis of existing
data). Some of the Nature journals publish Perspectives and Historical
Perspectives. Perspectives discuss models and ideas from a personal but
balanced viewpoint. They are intended to stimulate discussion and new
experimental approaches. All these articles (Reviews, Progress, Analysis,
Insights, Perspectives and Historical Perspectives) are peer-reviewed. See
each journal's guide to authors for further information.
• The Nature journals also publish News and Views: short, accessible articles
focused on one scientific advance independent of the author's own research.
24
Skeleton (kerangka) of an Article

• Structured
- IMRaD formula (will discuss more on next
slide)
• Unstructured
- Paragraphs- few sentences summarizing each
section
A perspective, opinion, or commentary is based on ideas, opinions,

and insights, and hence does not follow a strict structure like the
IMRaD.
Selama ide mengalir secara logis, penulis bebas menyusun artikel
sesuai keinginannya.
25
IMRaD formula
Artikel  Tell a story – clarity (jelas, gamblang…) and conciseness
(keringkasan yg padat isinya)
• Title Make them easy for indexing and searching

• Authorship (informative, attractive & effective)
• Abstract & Keywords
• Main text (IMRAD)

• Introduction
• Method Journal SPACE is not unlimited
• Results Kondisikan agar Authors menyajikan
• And artikel mereka as concise as possible
• Discussion
• Conclusions
• Acknowledgements
• References
26
3. Steps to Organizing your

manuscript
27
Steps to organizing your manuscript

1. Prepare the figures and tables
2. Write the Methods
3. Write up the Results
4. Write the Discussion
Finalize the Results and Discussion before writing the introduction.
This is because, if the discussion is insufficient, how can you
objectively demonstrate the scientific significance of your work in
the introduction?
5. Write a clear Conclusion
6. Write a compelling introduction
7. Write the Abstract
8. Compose a concise and descriptive Title
9. Select Keywords for indexing
10. Write the Acknowledgements
11. Write up the References
Ref: Dr. Angel Borja (AZTI-Tecnalia, Spain)

28
Length of the manuscript
Look at the journal's Guide for Authors, but an ideal length for a
manuscript is 25 to 40 pages, double spaced, including essential data
only. Here are some general guidelines:
• Title: Short and informative
• Abstract: 1 paragraph (<250 words)
• Introduction: 1.5-2 pages
• Methods: 2-3 pages
• Results: 6-8 pages
• Discussion: 4-6 pages
• Conclusion: 1 paragraph
• Figures: 6-8 (one per page)
• Tables: 1-3 (one per page)
• References: 20-50 papers (2-4 pages)
29
Prepare the
figures and
tables
Remember that "a figure is worth a thousand words." Hence, illustrations, including
figures and tables, are the most efficient way to present your results. Your data are
the driving force of the paper, so your illustrations are critical!
How do you decide between presenting your data as tables or figures? Generally,
tables give the actual experimental results, while figures are often used for
comparisons of experimental results with those of previous works, or with
calculated/theoretical values (Figure 1).
30
Prepare the figures and tables (2)
Figure 1. An example of
the same data presented
as table or as figure.
Depending in your
objectives, you can show
your data either as table (if
you wish to stress
numbers) or as figure (if
you wish to compare
gradients).
31
Another important factor: figure and table legends

must be self-explanatory (Figure 2)
Figure 2. In a figure or table, all the information must be there to understand the contents, including
the spelling out of each abbreviation, the locations mentioned in the text and coordinates.
32
When presenting your tables and figures, appearances count! To this end:
 Avoid crowded plots (Figure 3), using only three or four data sets per figure; use well-
selected scales.
 Think about appropriate axis label size
 Include clear symbols and data sets that are easy to distinguish.
 Never include long boring tables (e.g., chemical compositions of emulsion systems or lists
of species and abundances). You can include them as supplementary material.
Figure 3. This is an example of how to best present your data. In the first figure (left), data are crowded
with too many plots. In the second figure (right), data are separated into two datasets, and plots show
gradients, which can be useful for discussion.
33
We must pay attention to the use of decimals, lines, etc.
Figure 4. Inadequate use of lines, number of decimals, decimal separators (use

always dots, not commas) and position of units (above) and its adequate use
(below) for a more clear table.
34
Write the Methods
• This section responds to the question of how the problem was

studied. If your paper is proposing a new method, you need to
include detailed information so a knowledgeable reader can
reproduce the experiment.
• However, do not repeat the details of established methods; use
References and Supporting Materials to indicate the previously
published procedures. Broad summaries or key references are
sufficient.
• Reviewers will criticize incomplete or incorrect methods descriptions
and may recommend rejection, because this section is critical in the
process of reproducing your investigation. In this way, all chemicals
must be identified. Do not use proprietary, unidentifiable compounds.
To this end, it's important to use standard systems for numbers and
nomenclature.
• Present proper control experiments and statistics used, again to
make the experiment of investigation repeatable.
35
Write the Methods (2)
List the methods in the same order they will appear in the Results
section, in the logical order in which you did the research:
• Description of the site
• Description of the surveys or experiments done, giving information
on dates, etc.
• Description of the laboratory methods, including separation or
treatment of samples, analytical methods, following the order of
waters, sediments and biomonitors. If you have worked with different
biodiversity components start from the simplest (i.e. microbes) to the
more complex (i.e. mammals)
• Description of the statistical methods used (including confidence
levels, etc.)
In this section, avoid adding comments, results, and discussion, which

is a common error.
36
Write up the Results
• This section responds to the question "What have you found?"

Hence, only representative results from your research should be
presented. The results should be essential for discussion.
• Use sub-headings to keep results of the same type together, which
is easier to review and read. Number these sub-sections for the
convenience of internal cross-referencing, but always taking into
account the publisher's Guide for Authors.
• For the data, decide on a logical order that tells a clear story and
makes it and easy to understand. Generally, this will be in the same
order as presented in the methods section.
• An important issue is that you must not include references in this
section; you are presenting your results, so you cannot refer to
others here. If you refer to others, is because you are discussing
your results, and this must be included in the Discussion section.
37
Write the Discussion
Here you must respond to what the results mean. Probably it is the
easiest section to write, but the hardest section to get right. This is
because it is the most important section of your article. Here you get the
chance to sell your data. Take into account that a huge numbers of
manuscripts are rejected because the Discussion is weak.
You need to make the Discussion corresponding to the Results, but do not
reiterate the results. Here you need to compare the published results by
your colleagues with yours (using some of the references included in
the Introduction). Never ignore work in disagreement with yours, in turn,
you must confront it and convince the reader that you are correct or
better.
Take into account the following tips:
1. Avoid statements that go beyond what the results can support.
2. Avoid unspecific expressions such as "higher temperature", "at a
lower rate", "highly significant". Quantitative descriptions are always
preferred (35ºC, 0.5%, p<0.001, respectively).
3. Avoid sudden introduction of new terms or ideas; you must present
everything in the introduction, to be confronted with your results here.
38
Write the Discussion (2)
4. Speculations on possible interpretations are allowed, but these

should be rooted in fact, rather than imagination. To achieve good
interpretations think about:
- How do these results relate to the original question or objectives outlined in
the Introduction section?
- Do the data support your hypothesis?
- Are your results consistent with what other investigators have reported?
- Discuss weaknesses and discrepancies. If your results were unexpected, try
to explain why
- Is there another way to interpret your results?
- What further research would be necessary to answer the questions raised
by your results?
- Explain what is new without exaggerating
5. Revision of Results and Discussion is not just paper work. You
may do further experiments, derivations, or simulations. Sometimes you
cannot clarify your idea in words because some critical items have not
been studied substantially.
39
Write a clear Conclusion
• This section shows how the work advances the field from the
present state of knowledge. In some journals, it's a separate section;
in others, it's the last paragraph of the Discussion section. Whatever
the case, without a clear conclusion section, reviewers and readers
will find it difficult to judge your work and whether it merits
publication in the journal.
• A common error in this section is repeating the abstract, or just
listing experimental results. Trivial statements of your results are
unacceptable in this section.
• You should provide a clear scientific justification for your work in this
section, and indicate uses and extensions if appropriate. Moreover,
you can suggest future experiments and point out those that are
underway.
• You can propose present global and specific conclusions, in relation
to the objectives included in the introduction.
40
Write a compelling introduction

This is your opportunity to convince readers that you clearly know why
your work is useful. Introduction provides background information and
usually includes a brief review of the literature
A good introduction should answer the following questions:

- What is the problem to be solved?
- Are there any existing solutions?
- Which is the best?
- What is its main limitation?
- What do you hope to achieve?
Editors like to see that you have provided a perspective consistent with
the nature of the journal. You need to introduce the main scientific
publications on which your work is based, citing a couple of original and
important works, including recent review articles.
However, editors hate improper citations of too many references irrelevant
to the work, or inappropriate judgments on your own achievements.
They will think you have no sense of purpose.
41
Write a compelling introduction (2)
Here are some additional tips for the introduction:

• Never use more words than necessary (be concise and to-the-point).
Don't make this section into a history lesson. Long introductions put
readers off.
• We all know that you are keen to present your new data. But do not
forget that you need to give the whole picture at first.
• The introduction must be organized from the global to the particular
point of view, guiding the readers to your objectives when writing this
paper.
• State the purpose of the paper and research strategy adopted to
answer the question, but do not mix introduction with results, discussion
and conclusion. Always keep them separate to ensure that the
manuscript flows logically from one section to the next.
• Hypothesis and objectives must be clearly remarked at the end of the
introduction.
• Expressions such as "novel," "first time," "first ever," and "paradigm-
changing" are not preferred. Use them sparingly.
42
Write the Abstract
• The abstract tells prospective readers what you did and what the
important findings in your research were. Together with the title, it's
the advertisement of your article. Make it interesting and easily
understood without reading the whole article. Avoid using jargon,
uncommon abbreviations and references.
• You must be accurate, using the words that convey the precise
meaning of your research. The abstract provides a short description
of the perspective and purpose of your paper. It gives key results but
minimizes experimental details. It is very important to remind that the
abstract offers a short description of the interpretation/conclusion in
the last sentence.
• A clear abstract will strongly influence whether or not your work is
further considered.
• However, the abstracts must be keep as brief as possible. Just
check the 'Guide for authors' of the journal, but normally they have
less than 250 words.
43
Write the Abstract (2)
In an abstract, the two whats are essential.

• What has been done?
• What are the main findings?
44
Compose a concise and descriptive Title
• The title must explain what the paper is broadly about. It is your first
(and probably only) opportunity to attract the reader's attention. In
this way, remember that the first readers are the Editor and the
referees. Also, readers are the potential authors who will cite your
article, so the first impression is powerful!
• We are all flooded by publications, and readers don't have time to
read all scientific production. They must be selective, and this
selection often comes from the title.
• Reviewers will check whether the title is specific and whether it
reflects the content of the manuscript. Editors hate titles that make
no sense or fail to represent the subject matter adequately. Hence,
keep the title informative and concise (clear, descriptive, and not too
long). You must avoid technical jargon and abbreviations, if possible.
This is because you need to attract a readership as large as
possible. Dedicate some time to think about the title and discuss it
with your co-authors.
45
Compose a concise and descriptive Title (2)
Here you can see some examples of original titles, and how they were changed
after reviews and comments to them:
Example 1
• Original title: Preliminary observations on the effect of salinity on benthic
community distribution within a estuarine system, in the North Sea
• Revised title: Effect of salinity on benthic distribution within the Scheldt estuary
(North Sea)
• Comments: Long title distracts readers. Remove all redundancies such as
"studies on," "the nature of," etc. Never use expressions such as "preliminary."
Be precise.
Example 2
• Original title: Action of antibiotics on bacteria
• Revised title: Inhibition of growth of Mycobacterium tuberculosis by
streptomycin
• Comments: Titles should be specific. Think about "how will I search for this
piece of information" when you design the title.
46
Select Keywords for indexing
• Keywords are used for indexing your paper. They are the label of
your manuscript. It is true that now they are less used by journals
because you can search the whole text. However, when looking for
keywords, avoid words with a broad meaning and words already
included in the title.
• Some journals require that the keywords are not those from the
journal name, because it is implicit that the topic is that. For
example, the journal Soil Biology & Biochemistry requires that the
word "soil" not be selected as a keyword.
• Only abbreviations firmly established in the field are eligible (e.g.,
TOC, CTD), avoiding those which are not broadly used (e.g., EBA,
MMI).
• Again, check the Guide for Authors and look at the number of
keywords admitted, label, definitions, thesaurus, range, and other
special requests.
47
Write the Acknowledgements
• Here, you can thank people who have contributed to the manuscript
but not to the extent where that would justify authorship. For
example, here you can include technical help and assistance with
writing and proofreading. Probably, the most important thing is to
thank your funding agency or the agency giving you a grant or
fellowship.
• In the case of European projects, do not forget to include the grant
number or reference. Also, some institutes include the number of
publications of the organization, e.g., "This is publication number
657 from AZTI-Tecnalia."
48
Write up the References
• Typically, there are more mistakes in the references than in any other
part of the manuscript. It is one of the most annoying problems, and
causes great headaches among editors. Now, it is easier since to avoid
these problem, because there are many available tools.
• In the text, you must cite all the scientific publications on which your
work is based. But do not over-inflate the manuscript with too many
references – it doesn't make a better manuscript! Avoid excessive self-
citations and excessive citations of publications from the same region.
• Minimize personal communications, do not include unpublished
observations, manuscripts submitted but not yet accepted for
publication, publications that are not peer reviewed, grey literature, or
articles not published in English.
• You can use any software, such as EndNote or Mendeley, to format and
include your references in the paper. Most journals have now the
possibility to download small files with the format of the references,
allowing you to change it automatically.
49
Write up the References (2)
Make the reference list and the in-text citation conform strictly to the
style given in the Guide for Authors. Remember that presentation of
the references in the correct format is the responsibility of the author,
not the editor. Checking the format is normally a large job for the
editors. Make their work easier and they will appreciate the effort.
Finally, check the following:

• Spelling of author names
• Year of publications
• Usages of "et al."
• Punctuation
• Whether all references are included
50
4. Simple Steps in Writing & Example

51
Judul artikel yang baik?

Condenses the paper’s content in a few words (Memadatkan
isi artikel dalam beberapa kata)
Captures the readers’ attention (Merebut/menawan
perhatian pembaca)
Differentiates the paper from other papers of the same subject
area (Membedakan artikel kita dari artikel lain dari area
subjek yang sama)
52
Prinsip dasar menulis Judul artikel yang baik?

Tiga tip dasar yang perlu diingat saat menulis judul:
 Keep it simple, brief and attractive: Fungsi utama judul adalah
memberikan ringkasan isi artikel dengan tepat. Jadi jagalah judulnya
singkat & jelas. Gunakan kata kerja aktif dan bukan frasa berbasis kata
benda yang kompleks, dan hindari detail yang tidak perlu. Selain itu,
judul yang bagus untuk artikel penelitian biasanya sekitar 10-12 kata.
 Use appropriate descriptive words: Judul artikel penelitian yang
baik seharusnya berisi kata kunci yang digunakan dalam naskah dan
menentukan sifat dasar (nature) penelitian. Pikirkan istilah yang akan
digunakan orang untuk mencari studi Anda dan memasukkannya ke
dalam judul Anda.
 Avoid abbreviations and jargon: Singkatan yang sudah sangat
dikenal seperti TOEFL, PhD dan sebagainya dapat digunakan dalam
judul artikel. Namun, singkatan dan jargon lain yang kurang dikenal
atau spesifik yang tidak akan segera familiar bagi pembaca harus
ditinggalkan.
53
Five (5) simple steps in writing a good title for your paper
• STEP 1 : Ask yourself these questions and make note of the
answers:
- What is my paper about?
- What techniques/ designs were used?
- Who/what is studied?
- What were the results?
• STEP 2: Use your answers to list key words.
• STEP 3: Create a sentence that includes the key words you

listed.
• STEP 4: Delete all unnecessary/ repetitive words and link the

remaining.
• STEP 5: Delete non-essential information and reword the title.

54
Title: Critical thinking, questioning and student

engagement in Korean university English courses
• STEP 1 : Ask yourself these questions and make note of the answers:
- What is my paper about? The paper explores the viability of higher-level questioning in student-
centered activities to elevate critical thinking and increase student engagement among Korean
university English majors.
- What techniques/ designs were used? The author examines research that identifies limitations
for Korean students associated with their reluctance to speak or share opinions in class due to
sociocultural influences in the classroom.
- Who/what is studied? Korean students in Korean university English courses
- What were the results? Findings revealed that cultural and institutional factors, as well as
limitations in English language proficiency, can impact participation in student-centered, critical
thinking activities.
• STEP 2: Use your answers to list key words  higher-level questioning, student-centered
activities, critical thinking, student engagement, Korean university English majors, Korean
students, reluctance to speak or share opinions in class, sociocultural influences in the classroom
• STEP 3: Create a sentence that includes the key words you listed  Higher-level
questioning, critical thinking, student-centered activities and student engagement in Korean
university English majors to speak or share opinions in class due to sociocultural influences
• STEP 4: Delete all unnecessary/repetitive words and link the remaining  Higher-level
questioning, critical thinking and student engagement in Korean university English majors to
speak or share opinions in class
• STEP 5: Delete non-essential information and reword the title  Critical thinking,
questioning and student engagement in Korean university English courses
55
Abstract
56
Abstract
57
Introduction
58
Introduction
Background
Rationale/justification
59
Introduction
Problem Statement
60
Introduction
Objectives
61
Introduction
Scope
62
Literature Review/
Related Works
63
Literature Review/
Related Works
64
Literature Review/Related
Works
65
Works
66
Works
67
Works
68
Works
69
Works
Masih panjang …..

70
Material & Methodology

71

72

73

74
Results and Discussion

75

76

77

78
Conclusion
79
Conclusion
80
5. Most common reasons for

journal rejection
81
Most common reasons for journal rejection
Rejection is the norm in academic publishing. Even researchers at the

top of their field have experienced rejection.
1. Lack of originality, novelty, or significance
2. Mismatch with the journal
3. Flaws in study design
4. Poor Writing and Organization
5. Inadequate preparation of the manuscript
6. Rejection reasons not related to manuscript quality
82
2.1 Lack of originality, novelty, or significance
 Results that are not generalizable

 Use of methods that have become obsolete because of new technologies or
techniques
 Secondary analyses that extend or replicate published findings without adding
substantial knowledge
 Studies that report already known knowledge but positions the knowledge as
novel by extending it to a new geography, population, or cultural setting
 Results that are unoriginal, predictable, or trivial
 Results that have no clinical, theoretical, or practical implications
Journal editors typically prefer to publish:

 groundbreaking new research (introducing new ideas or methods)
 constantly on the lookout for research that is exciting and fresh
Many authors tend to cite the reason that “this has never been studied before” to
explain why their paper is significant. This is not good enough; the study needs to
be placed in a broader context. Authors should give specific reasons why the
research is important
83
2.2 Mismatch with the journal
 Findings that are of interest to a very narrow or specialized audience

that the journal does not cater to specifically
 Manuscripts that lie outside the stated aims and scope of the journal
 Topics that are not of interest to the journal’s readership
 Manuscripts that do not follow the format specified by the journal
(e.g., case report submitted to a journal that explicitly states it
doesn’t publish case reports)
Many manuscripts are rejected outright by journals, before they even

undergo peer review, because the manuscript is not appropriate for the
journal’s readership or does not fit into the journal’s aims and scope.
84
2.3 Flaws “cacat”in study design
 Poorly formulated research question

 Poor conceptualization of the approach to answering the research
question
 Choice of a weak or unreliable method
 Choice of an incorrect method or model that is not suitable for the
problem to be studied
 Inappropriate statistical analysis
 Unreliable or incomplete data
 Inappropriate or suboptimal instrumentation
 Small or inappropriately chosen sample
Even a well-written paper will not mask flaws in study design. Indeed, this
is a fundamental problem that must be resolved in the initial stages of the
study, while conceptualizing the study. The best way to guard against such
flaws is to do a thorough literature review to determine the best
methodologies and practices for your own research.
85
2.4 Poor Writing and Organization
 Inadequate description of methods

 Discussion that only repeats the results but does not interpret them
 Insufficient explanation of the rationale for the study
 Insufficient literature review
 Conclusions that do not appear to be supported by the study data
 Failure to place the study in a broad context
 Introduction that does not establish the background of the problem
studied
It is very important for authors to present a persuasive and rational

argument in their papers. You should be able to convince readers that
your research is both sound and important through your writing.
86
2.5 Inadequate preparation of the manuscript
 Failure to follow the journal’s Instructions for Authors

 Sentences that are not clear and concise
 Title, abstract, and/or cover letter that are not persuasive
 Wordiness and excessive use of jargon
 Large number of careless errors like poor grammar or spelling mistakes
 Poorly designed tables or figures
Non-English-speaking authors often confront an additional problem: peer

reviewers do not always distinguish between the manuscript content and
style of writing. Thus, their manuscripts may end up getting negative
comments even if the research is of high quality.
However, all the problems in this category are easily fixable, either by
asking a native English speaking friend or colleague to review the paper or
by getting the paper professionally edited and formatted.
87
2.6 Rejection reasons not related to manuscript quality
Low quality of the manuscript is not the only reason for rejections.
Some major factors that can also affect journal decisions are:
a. Space constraints
b. Quality and experience of peer reviewers
c. Volume of submissions
d. Journal’s decision-making policy
e. The journal editor is looking for something specific at a particular
time
f. The journal receives more than one submission on the same topic
88
Space constraints
It is not uncommon for journals to reject high-quality manuscripts, and

the primary reason for this is lack of space. Journals want to publish
on a range of topics that represent the entire scope of the journal.
Editors of print journals especially have to pick and choose which
papers to publish, since they can only publish a limited number of
articles. Open access journals are less constrained by this
consideration since space is not a big issue for them.
89
Quality and experience of peer reviewers
The quality of peer review varies widely according to reviewers’

professional experience, educational background, research
interests, etc.
90
Volume of submissions
For obvious reasons, journals that attract a large number of

submissions will also reject a large number of manuscripts. For
example, Nature receives 10,000 submissions a year, making the
rejection of even high quality manuscripts inevitable.
91
Journal’s decision-making policy
This varies widely among journals. For example, some journals follow
a policy of rejecting any manuscript that will require major revisions,
while some journals will complete another round of peer review if
they are unsure of the manuscript's quality.
92
The journal editor is looking for something specific at a

particular time
Sometimes, journal editors may wish to publish a thematic issue of the
journal or may be interested in a current hot topic, in which case
they might tend to accept more papers focusing on that particular
topic.
93
The journal receives more than one submission on the

same topic
In such cases, the journal may well choose to publish only one of the
manuscripts, rejecting the other for no other reason than that they
already have a paper on a similar topic.
94
Remarks
How can you publish research papers in international journals?
I suggest few things, your papers should:

• Present new methods of analysis or experimentation.
• Present a new process, design, or technology.
• Discuss and provide fresh thoughts on topics we address
• Be written in clear and understandable language (Ditulis dalam
bahasa yang jelas dan mudah dipahami).
• Be of interest to the reader of journals you are publishing.
• Be of long-term value for the profession because of the above
attributes.
95
Some words of wisdom (bijak)
• Innovative application of older technologies is often “good

enough”
• You get a publication if you are the first to write about
something
Hermann Maurer
96
Thank You

Significance For International Publication

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Significance For International Publication

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Klinik Manuskrip Riset Dasar RistekDikti: Surabaya, 1-2 Maret 2018

Scientific Significance for international

Kepala LPPI Universitas Ahmad Dahlan

Tiga (3) aturan dasar yang perlu dipahami Penulis

The most important of good writing practices:

Ethics in publishing: Policies and ethics #1 (in Elsevier)

Policies for authors

Ethics in publishing: Policies and ethics #2 (in Elsevier)

Perilaku tidak etis (Unethical behavior)  "bisa

• The content is from a wide range of international authors,

• Have an Editorial Board that has international expertise and where

The Editor asks:

1. What did I learn from reading this paper?

2. Is it worth knowing (layak diketahui)?

3. Will this paper have an impact on the field?

Journal publishers do not want zero-cited articles

• Date of news item: 15 June 2017

What's New in Journal Citation Reports?

2017 JCR RELEASE

Journals appearing in JCR

Journal Citation Report (JCR)

Is a title indexed in Scopus? A reminder to check

Comparison: CiteScore vs Impact Factor

Metrics make journal assessment more complete & transparent

2. Skeleton (Kerangka) of an Article

Book Review 500-700 None 1-3 None Solicited 1

Review Basic Science 4,000 300 words 100 6 Solicited & 5

Brief Reports 1,500 150 words 20 2-3 Unsolicited 3 & group

Visual 200 None 1-2 None Regular Feature 2

Green Energy & Environment

The Nature journals

• Original research is published either as an Article, Letter, Resource (presents a

Skeleton (kerangka) of an Article

A perspective, opinion, or commentary is based on ideas, opinions,

• Title Make them easy for indexing and searching

• Main text (IMRAD)

3. Steps to Organizing your

Steps to organizing your manuscript

Ref: Dr. Angel Borja (AZTI-Tecnalia, Spain)

Length of the manuscript

Prepare the figures and tables (2)

Another important factor: figure and table legends

We must pay attention to the use of decimals, lines, etc.

Figure 4. Inadequate use of lines, number of decimals, decimal separators (use

Write the Methods

• This section responds to the question of how the problem was

Write the Methods (2)

In this section, avoid adding comments, results, and discussion, which

Write up the Results

• This section responds to the question "What have you found?"

Write the Discussion

Write the Discussion (2)

4. Speculations on possible interpretations are allowed, but these

Write a clear Conclusion

Write a compelling introduction

A good introduction should answer the following questions:

Write a compelling introduction (2)

Here are some additional tips for the introduction:

Write the Abstract

Write the Abstract (2)

In an abstract, the two whats are essential.

Compose a concise and descriptive Title

Compose a concise and descriptive Title (2)