Most often some famous publishers such as Spinger, invite the conference papers to be included in a particular book that can be considered as the conference proceeding. In this case some editors will be assigned and they asked the authors to extend the conference paper and may the paper go under extra review process.

In some other publishers such as IGI-Global, a CFP publishes to invite the authors to contribute in a particular topic in form of a book chapter. They apply a more rigorous referee process.

Meanwhile, generally, a book chapter (published by those publishers and after passing the review process) gives more insights compared to a conference paper and would be more beneficial for the potential readers as well.

Depending on a country, but usually the peer reviwed jounals are perceived superior to book chapters...

Thanks for your responds Mirna. But, what qualities make peer-reviewed journal superior to book chapters? I have been requested to write a book chapter and have a research manuscript that I thought of sending. I find it difficult in deciding whether to send it to a journal or to publish it as a book chapter. Your comments please ....

Journal papers are usually much better reviewed than book chapters provided the quality of the journal is good.

I agree with Dr Subir, but  what are the benefits of publishing a book chapter, is this for money for example or something else like to participate in a book writing, because I feel like citing from journal is much more books.

@Mirna Leko-Šimić: Another important and not so obvious benefit is that the format of citations to journal articles is more uniform and so it is easier to find new citations to an article published in a journal. Also, if a journal is any good, an article is more likely to be indexed by various databases (Web of Science, Scopus etc.) which may be helpful for many purposes.

From the above responses, it is now clear that a research article should be publish preferable in a journal. What types of articles are good for book chapters?

Books and journals have different purposes, and indeed they are opposite in the chain. In a book, one expect matter that is well mastered, understood, and more or less standard.  That's the final step of the process original research -> derived research -> review article.  Original research in a book runs the risk of being merely skipped, because the readers are mostly students, researchers who begin in the domain, or simply curious people.

I would suggest theoretical papers or review articles.

Thank you so much for your input. I have finally decided to publish a review as a book chapter.

Most often some famous publishers such as Spinger, invite the conference papers to be included in a particular book that can be considered as the conference proceeding. In this case some editors will be assigned and they asked the authors to extend the conference paper and may the paper go under extra review process.

In some other publishers such as IGI-Global, a CFP publishes to invite the authors to contribute in a particular topic in form of a book chapter. They apply a more rigorous referee process.

Meanwhile, generally, a book chapter (published by those publishers and after passing the review process) gives more insights compared to a conference paper and would be more beneficial for the potential readers as well.

Both can be good. It all depends on the editorial board. Good reviewers and editors never accept bad materials be it a book chapter or a journal article.

A book chapter reviews the information gathered from published research and other articles. The book chapter should be in accordance with the other chapters of the book too.

But we publish the results of original research in a peer reviewed research paper which should stand alone. So if it research findings it should be published as a research paper first.

A research paper is normally 1 - 20 pages and structured in such a way that it reports the methods and results of an original study performed by the writer. The paper may be based on a study such as an experiment, survey, interview or analysis carried out, but in all cases, raw data have been collected and analyzed by the writer, and conclusions were drawn from the results of that analysis.

A book however, embodies a more free flowing method in that is is normally 100+ pages and more and have a broader scope in that is tells about something from start to finish and it takes time to write, edit, and publish as it needs to be broken into chapters that flows one into another in a captivating manner. The contents mainly tells a story that capture the readers interest starting with a beginning, middle and end.

Mostly review work/use cases/analysis.

It is better to publish new research work in a journal. Already existing knowledge can be nicely reorganized and simplified as a book chapter. A research paper is narrow and very focussed contributing new knowledge and will be of interesting to those who work in the area. A book chapter covers all details but not in deep and it is a compilation of existing knowledge presented well and attracts more readers as it is broad. Both has its own value and need unique skills.

If it's research go for reputable journal publishers. If it's review paper go for chapter in reputable book publisher. Your CV should have micmxture of both review papers and book chapters. If you want citation than go for review papers in journals. Never publish with predatory publishers for either review or chapters.

I think, book chapter is like bunch of full information on any perticular topic whereas research article in journal is a summary of research work outcome.

Nvenakeng Suzanne Awung

In my opinion, I did send my manuscript to a journal at first. After some years, I revised the same article and sent it to a Book Chapter publisher. Normally, journal more high impact than Book Chapter.