Dear reseachers, some journals have strict rules for publishing articles which sometimes restrict the authors for publishing their study results (eg. number of words of main teext or abstract or title, number of references, number of tables or figures, etc.). What do you think in this regard? Do you agree with these rules? I am looking forward to your reply.
Best wishes
Behrooz
I believe that these rules are unacceptable and make the researcher turn in a closed circle in order to overcome these limitations, while the researcher should focus on the research should be in the ideal form for the purpose of benefiting from it
The publishers have reasons for their rules. From a simple business model perspective, the longer the article - the more it costs to publish and the less copy articles you end up with per issue. From another angle, it's about trying to create 'level playing fields' i.e. if one study can manage to succinctly summarise its findings in 5,000 words, 50 citations, three tables etc - then so should another. If the rules were not there - we could end up with publishing 'anarchy' and chaos.
Strict rules about number of words of main text or abstract or title, number of references, number of tables or figures, etc., are definitely stupid. On the other hand, every corresponding author and co-authors has to be aware that scientific paper is not a scientific book. So, if the authors are highly experienced in their research field, they have to find the publisher and to write a book. But if somebody has a lot of research results, than it will be useful to define a smaller number of research goals per paper, and to split the results into 2 or 3 papers. That's very useful, because a nowadays scientist doesn’t want to read the extremely long papers.
Dear Professor Dean
I somewhat agree with you. Some of these rules are useful for publishers as well as authors and provide a good framework for publishing articles. But some journals emphasize on other rules that are completely one-sided. These rules restrict the authors in proper publishing of their study .
Dear Professor Siniša Srečec
Your comments confirm my statement. However, it should be noted that if the author divides his findings into 2 or 3 articles, he may be accused of violating research ethical considerations (for example research duplication).
Dear Colleague Rezaei,
Not if the author(s) strictly define the next research goal in the next paper. It is also acceptable to use the first part of title in all papers (1, 2 and even third) and after the sign ‘:’ to write the next research goal. But it is also recommendable to submit all the papers into the same journal. I had situation like that (for instance: Srecec, S., Rezic, T., Santek, B., Maric, V. (2009) HOP PELLETS TYPE 90: INFLUENCE OF MANUFACTURE AND STORAGE ON LOSSES OF alpha-ACIDS. ACTA ALIMENTARIA. Volume: 38 Issue: 1 Pages: 141-147 DOI: 10.1556/AAlim.2008.0014. and the second paper: Srecec, S., Zechner-Krpan, V., Marag, S., Mrsic, G., Spoljaric, I. (2011) HOP PELLETS TYPE 90: ESEM STUDIES OF GLANDULAR TRICHOMES MORPHOLOGICAL AND STRUCTURAL CHANGES DURING THE DIFFERENT PHASES OF HOP PROCESSING. ACTA ALIMENTARIA Volume: 40 Issue: 2 Pages: 282-290 DOI: 10.1556/AAlim.40.2011.2.12).
Dear Professor Siniša Srečec
Thank you for your comments.
However, I believe that some journals have very strict rules for publishing, and some of these rules do not seem reasonable and are restrictive to authors.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Publishing