Acceptance of a research paper is what all authors want and wish, let us discuss the key factors, precautions and cares to be taken that acceptance rate be assured of any author to the best - is it journal selection, writing skills, a well planned experiment, facilities available, opportunities and expertise, a well established and reputed laboratory / group, skills of writing and presentation skills, payment to open access journals, reviewers choice, a good discussion, novel ideas, original research, first time report, big/mega projects, well known/reputed researcher, credibility, market value of a researcher etc etc.....................tips may please be discussed by your experiences and knowledge for getting best/high acceptance rate of research papers
1. Select the right journal – Scope, review time, reputation
2. Perform the research – thorough reading of existing literature, well planned research methodology and experiment, good discussion and conclusions
3. Write the paper – Follow journal guidelines, skills of writing and presentation skills
4. Pray to God.
@Kuldeep.
All of them are key concepts, but I would also take a look at:
1. Journal´s guide for authors.
2. Journal´s scope
3. Journals last published articles
Thanks Dear Jesus, I agree to your valuable points, that journal selection counts much, and in my own experience really it matters, one journal of low IF rejected one of my paper and after that when i selected an appropriate journal as per your points suggested it got published in a journal with triple the IF. Just for sharing such experiences I floated this question on RG which I believe will be of a great help to beginners or to those facing rejections and with a message that receiving rejection must not discourage any researcher - and some ways, means and tips be discussed to increase the acceptance rate of research papers, thanks indeed
1. Select the right journal – Scope, review time, reputation
2. Perform the research – thorough reading of existing literature, well planned research methodology and experiment, good discussion and conclusions
3. Write the paper – Follow journal guidelines, skills of writing and presentation skills
4. Pray to God.
Dear Jesus and Nageswara Rao, pl just also make me clear one point at this stage of preliminary discussion, that if any researcher feels that by taking help of any experienced researcher, editor or a learned / knowledgeable researcher paper can be accepted early or its chances increases for acceptance - whether this fellow can be a co-author or just be acknowledged as a helper?
@Kuldeep.
I think the chances of being accepted increase if such an experienced researcher is the co-author.
If it is a double blind review it will not affect the chance by the addition purely for the name. I personally would not like to add a name for the acceptance. However if you can involve a senior person during the planning stage and discussion stage, the quality of presentation can be improved by his/her suggestions. Then you have sufficient justification to add the name. If it is not a blind review there may be a chance. I personally would give comments during paper review purely on the merits of the paper and not on the names. I am not sure about your discipline.
@Nageswara.
I agree with you. But the question is: is it really a blind review. Sometimes, I doubt it.
Dear Jesus, many very prestigious journals ask a list of possible evaluators.reviewers. I agree with you that second rank journals may not be that transparect, but top a! journals are!
Of course, Carlos, this is one of the main charactericstics of a top journal
Most of the journals for which I do the review are blind. They are all prestigious journals in my domain. Even in conferences people are resorting to blind review. I also review for some journals where the names of the authors are given and not blind. But then my decision is never based on author's affiliation or familiarity or friendship with me. I hope all professionals should do the same.
@Ruchi
What you said is true. Ultimately it is the quality and usefulness of research that will be the basis. There may be some exceptions where other factors may be considered.
Selecting the right journal and proper presentation of the research work with thorough proof editing (as per the journal requirement) are the basic mandates. Such efforts reduce the load of the reviewers of the journals too.
“Your Paper, Your Way” has made submission easier for more than 1 million authors!
New way of submission - experience from Elsevier.
Some points that authors still need to keep in mind:
- The core manuscript can be submitted as a single MS Word or PDF filewith all the figures, tables within that file.
- Submissions must still be complete, with all key sections.
- Source files are mandatory only at the revision stage.
- Figures should be of high enough quality for refereeing.
- Language must still be of a good standard.
- Core ethical requirements, such as blinded title page for double-blind review, Conflict of Interest forms, etc. remain.
- References can be in any style but must be complete and consistent.
https://www.elsevier.com/editors-update/story/online-submission/your-paper,-your-way-has-made-submission-easier-for-more-than-1-million-authors?utm_campaign=50692_Editors%27%20Update_Sep2016temp&utm_campaignPK=266334794&utm_term=OP27564&utm_content=266438382&utm_source=22&BID=784259271&utm_medium=email&SIS_ID=0
First of all, pay a attention who gives which advise. F.i., if he/she does not have a high h-index, that means there are not sufficient experiences about writing papers.
Then, take care of the language. English (generally) must be strong enough. Pick a good journal (= not predatory one). Thin about the formal structure of the paper.
However, in any case, be sure or convinced about what you truly want to say: are you saying it?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publication