How experienced does a researcher need to be before attempting to write a ''review article''? Are there specific conditions or criteria for publication?
Dear Nadjem, a bit of research experience is needed through practice and following the guidelines put forward by the institution you are writing the review for as well as other general conditions. Thank you
For review of an article the reviewer need not be a researcher, but he he needs to have an eye and ear for the facts!
It's not an easy task, by any means. First, you have to know the most central papers and books very well - and I'm not talking about ten papers, but rather 150-200, just to catch your attention. (To contribute with 10 papers - and call that a review - is actually an insult.)
You need to talk about how the topic evolved - why?, how?, who? - and discuss the branchings that the topic have seen - and you also need to distinguish between those papers that were/are the most influencial. So you see that you need to have a very good overview of it all, before you start typing.
Those influential papers need to be described in more detail, as those are the ones that have "steered" the topic. Check how and why changes have occurred, and make sure that you talk about fields surrounding the one you write about - as there can be lots of connections, from and to near-by fields.
If you are a junior scientist, you need to talk with a senior staff member to get help in starting this endeavour - because it is a lot of work. On the other hand, if you do it very well, you may be rewarded by many citations in the future.
I can safely say that I am an expert in this, and if you have any questions, then I will answer them. But first make sure that you have the skills, stamina, and time, because it will take time. :-)
Good luck! :-)
Dear Kalpathy Ramaiyer Subramanian, thank you for your answer. But, my question was about ''writing a review article'', not about ''peer-review process''.
Dear Michael Patriksson , I would thank you very much for your kind explanation. Much appreciated.
First thing - several very good journals (especially the one publishing only reviews), firstly expect to get a proposal for a review article (you propose title, topic, explain why it is worth to write a review on such topic, how many related reviews were already published ) - they accept the proposal or not. You can be also invited to submit a review on suggested topic.
The proposal include your CV - you need to prove that you are experienced in the field.
Writing a review is not so simple as most of the experts have suggested. I think first you should know what is lacking in most of the published article, I mean what the author(s) are suggesting the future of the science, methodology and applications and you need to give your own suggestions as a researcher. First you collect all the published review in your own field of study and standard books and then review them. You can also take the help of search engines by framing the keywords and see the most cited articles and the latest articles too. You need to spend at least 2 to 3 years for writing a good review article and also the most important thing is English writing, majority of review articles are rejected due to poor English.
My best wishes to you.
Regards
Sudhir
Thank you Dr. Grzegorz Boczkaj and Sudhir Kumar Singh for your answers. These are very interesting points.
Kind regards!
Dear Abdelkader Nadjem
I think that you already have a certain set of knowledge. To write a review article, you must have at least a little experience in this area, some knowledge and understanding of the main tasks of the industry and its problem areas. And then personal qualities, such as the ability to see the connections between phenomena and analytical thinking, will help you. Also, your supervisor plays an important role, who will give you valuable recommendations.
Wish you a success to your work
Dear Gulmira Baenova, I hope things are well with you. Thanks a lot for your kind answer. Much appreciated.
Kind Regards,
Sudhir Kumar Singh It's not enough to read reviews - you need to read the original articles. You see - some of the papers you read can be erroneous! That has been my experience before. Also the suggestions for future research can be wrong - or misjudged.
The synthesis element and the ability to show a critical approach in writing are both important in writing a review. These will need experience and practice to master these skills at the standards required by journals.
To write a review article for a book or a couple of books, you need to know the field. In general, the reviewer is expected to be at least an advanced doctoral candidate in the field in which the book to be reviewed is written. A good review has to show the contributions of the book or books to the field in question. The review should be critical and informative; objective and fair. I hope this helps. I am a specialist in literary and cultural studies.
Dears Samy A. Azer and María Rosa Olivera-Williams, I would like to thank you for your kind answers.
Best regards,
2-3 years is quite exaggerated, actually. I have done it in earnest perhaps 5-6 times over the years, and I do know the drill: picking a representative pack of journal papers, including the already written surveys, in order to follow the threads of publications that make up the majority of subthreads. The most fun is of course to find the way to sort papers into subcategories, and then to extract the gist of each paper, or indeed throw away those (plenty) papers that do not contribute anything - which is a steadily growing pile.
Just one clarification. When I read your question about preparing to write a review article, I thought you were trying to write a book review article. I am the editor of book reviews for A contracorriente and shared with you our guidelines to write a book review. Our reviews are between 1,500 words and 3,500 or 4,000. However, if you are considering writing a review or survey article, you really need to know the field and top posts on the topic that you are evaluating. I hope that this clarifies my first answer.
It may be best for the researcher to read a little before each attempt to understand the author's attitude as he or she writes the article because the researcher can figure out how the author is thinking. And second, the researcher is essential to other writers who are writing about the same subject. Of course, I think it's better for the researcher to re-examine several articles instead of just one, because he can compare smart clothes and get better results.
Abdelkader, review and concept based articles may be a bit tricky to write in the sense that one has to be knowledgeable enough about the theoretical field to which they are intending to make a contribution, one needs to be critical enough to highlight where they are positioning the paper and what the potential contribution is going to be. One should also point out what the future trajectories of their findings are. Interesting stuff.
Dear @ Abdelkader Nadjem Based on my experience, apart from familiarity with the foundation of the topic, making a directory comprised of relevant papers is a must. Thereupon, a proper categorization is imperative. Using the above, you would be able to arrange your data in a tidy fashion.
The experience of a researcher to write a review article and the criteria for publication of a review article are not well defined.
Harasit Kumar Paul Your statement does not make perfect sense, but I think I understand. :-)
As has been alluded to above (see my previous statements in this thread) you simply have to know the field very, very well - otherwise you are just wasting your own time. You need to dig up previous review papers in the field, so that you can describe the developments, and also so you can define which sub-categories on which you will focus - that is a quite important one, as it will help you immensely.
Which categories are up to you, but if you have never written a survey paper you should probably consult a senior scientist in order to make sure that the structure of your review is the right one. This is not easy, I should tell you. And that is one of the most important to do right.
Depending on how many articles that you wish to present and review, you will need those sub-categories to be ordered in the right way. When I did my first review in 1988 I simply printed out all papers and made piles; you should probably define a database (file folders) on your laptop, where you try to first categorise the type of papers that you will review. For each paper you might write a few sentences each, taken from the abstract, so that you make sure that the subcategories become well-defined: ideally when you're done there should NOT be any paper left that you could place in more than one pile - that is, you have then made sure that the categories are unique such that no paper could be moved to another pile and still fit. That matching will take a while - and that is the most crucial exercise. In 1988 I printed out everything I had and physically made piles, then browsing them, writing down key words that made it possible to single out one category from another. It took a very long time, but when you're done your piles will be solid.
One pile is defined by the previous reviews that you have found. Those are the most important ones, as they define your categories.
You also need to have a goal and a vision with the survey, so that your paper has a clear focus. That is crucial, too. Do you already have one in mind? What is the purpose with it?
Get to work, and perhaps you can come back with a structure. If so, my e-mail is [email protected]. I do not have that much time, but if you are serious and work hard, this might work. I hope you also have a local support - I can't take care of everything, you know. :-)
Reviews are usually not very easy as such. I always advise that you need to be very well informed about the topic to review about it. I am not so long in publications but I have published some review articles. Depending on the subject area, it may even be very hard to write a review article as compared to others.
Harasit Kumar Paul the criteria for writing a review article are generally well-defined. Just collect and print our all answers given by Michael Patriksson on this thread and then you have a good overview and definition. Talking about overview: One of the main prerequisites for writing a good review article is a good overview of the field of research to be covered.
Indeed, but that may not be enough. A review paper should be concluded with suggestions on new and upcoming threads of research that are worth-while.
Michael Patriksson that's perfectly right. In my review articles I normally had a concluding Section entitled "Conclusions and Future Outlook" or something like that. If you're not an expert in the field, how would you be able to give a "Future outlook"? Attached please find a typical example. In this case the respective concluding Section is entitled "What comes next?"
All depends on the topic. If you are writing about a specialized subject at the leading edge of science you better be working in the same field because you may better know what going on in the different laboratories throw-out the world. However if you are writing a more general review of a scientific topic it may just be sufficient to be up to date with the literature published in many different journals and books.
I claim that it is the author's duty to at least reflect upon, and hopefully suggest, sub-topics for future research - especially since it in fact it is natural to do so.
Michael Patriksson over the years it's very interesting to observe if the suggested future research is realized.
Raj Kumar Baral
Abdelkader Nadjem
Raj: No, that's not enough at all, in fact: It is quite difficult to arrange a very good review article:
0. Your list a-c must be assumed from the start, otherwise it is a stupid thing to do: it's not even needed to mention - an amateur would be rejected in five minutes, no two!
1. You need to know what to bring in and what not to bring in. This is something that perhaps even a majority of review article authors do terribly wrong: there is often a kind of worry that some subtopic may be given too much space, while the right way is to use what YOU know, to enlighten the world of science in the best possible way, from the expert's perspective. If every topic is given a roughly equal portion, then I can easily see that it is very bad one - it just shows, because of the worry to make sure that there is a volume "balance". Skip that, and let by all means your interests show: the more you tell the more we learn.
2. You need to decide the level of detail - which should not be uniform over the whole review, as some details need to be described fully, while others can be shrunk. This is a tricky one for those who have little experience, and that is why no junior can be responsible for the choice of level of detail. This bit might actually be as important as what topics to bring in, and which papers should be included. And since you are supposedly an expert you better do it right!
I am in the Humanities and you are scientists. However, I completely agree with the recommendations of Michael Patriksson. The same is true for the Humanities. I think you are now ready to write a review article. You may not be reading these tips as you must be very busy reading the posts in your field.
Frank T. Edelmann That's good to hear; I have the same reflection. The "mean value" is going down, though.
You can of course write a review article in 2 weeks and send it to a predatory journal! (marked in yellow in the attached pdf)
:-) I get e-mails like those at least once a Month. Maybe I might take the offer when I am 85, and write something incomprehensible, just to if it sticks!
Experience is not at all matters in writing a review articles though you should have a clear idea and knowledge on the subject. Try to write on narrow but interesting review topic so that you will grasp the research articles more easily.
Michael Patriksson I was also thinking of writing a complete nonsense manuscript and sending it to one of these journals to see if it gets published. But then, it's perhaps a good idea to wait until I am 85.
Michael Patriksson like you I wrote my first review article in the late 1980's. I still keep vivid memories of the huge piles of paper photocopied in the library. Today it is so much easier to collect the relevant references online.
Frank T. Edelmann On the other hand, by browsing in physical journal papers and in the Science Citation Index books I could also find papers that I didn't know I was interested in! :-) Nowadays I am lazy, and browse electronically by terms, but I remember that on occasion I browsed randomly, and made good hits, too.
Dear Abdelkader Nadjem , you have very good related research question. Link follows.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_to_write_a_review_paper3
Abdelkader Nadjem one important aspect which you need to consider is that there are very different types of review articles, e.g.
1. Comprehensive Reviews
2. Annual Reviews
3. Critical Reviews
4. Tutorial Reviews
5. "Mini Reviews"
You need to check out the homepage of the journal first in order to find out which type of reviews they publish.
My first article during my doctorate was a Review article. Although it went through a preparation process of almost 3 years. The main thing to keep in mind is critical thinking and understanding of the topic. Few areas don't need prior hard and fast experiences while others do need an area specialization where you are reviewing critical issues. For example, if I am reviewing an effective dose of a drug anybody with little experience can make a review to just report but the same does not go well with a topic like the effectiveness of Drug 'X' vs Drug 'Y.' Because you will need to have a thorough knowledge of biochemistry, drug-interaction, and clinical features of the ailment, etc.
The best advice will be to start writing and read, read.....you yourself will know you have done justice or not. All the best!
Dear Frank T. Edelmann , you have addresing Michael Patriksson : " I was also thinking of writing a complete nonsense manuscript and sending it to one of these journals to see if it gets published..."
There is such case, very good one, Evaluation of transformative hermenautic heuristics for processing random data , at my thread, read the introductory of question. :) :) :)
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_it_possible_to_publish_a_noteworthy_paper_in_a_Journal_Why_should_one_do_it
Abdelkader Nadjem
I know many of my quite junior subordinates have published so many reviews even in reputed journals in areas they have just started. It is of course true that they cannot explain many valid points written in those reviews as they have no much experience.There are many reputed journals which either invite reviews from experts of those areas or discourage reviews by inexperienced seeming experts. To my opinion, one must write reviews in the areas he has been associated with, and published at least some high quality original research papers in reputed journals.
Thank you,
Arbind
Very experienced. I do not take much interest in review papers written by people who have not conducted any research in the area of review. Oftentimes the review is disjointed, lacks rhythm and information flow. They turn out very boring.
Arbind K. Choudhary and Maurice Ekpenyong ideally, a researcher who writes a review article should have made significant contributions to the field himself AND should have an excellent overview of the area to be covered.
In my opinion, some of the peer reviewed international journals already fixed a criterion for review article. They needed a good experienced author in specific field for publishing review article.
Prathvi Raj Chauhan yes, I fully agree with you. No experience - no review article.
Dear Frank T. Edelmann , you are welcome. You may join discussion there and bring some more examples, if any that you are aware of. Dear colleagues, the discussion room is opened for newcomers. :)
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_it_possible_to_publish_a_noteworthy_paper_in_a_Journal_Why_should_one_do_it
This thread is about review article.
Intensive experience of a couple of years at the least is required before one sets his eyes on writing a review. its time taking but quite enjoyable and rewarding too.
Very interesting.... I want to write an articles but under the assistance of the best article writer who will give me brief feedback on my articles.
Ljubomir Jacić please see this link entitled Open Access Publisher Accepts Nonsense Manuscript for Dollars
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/10/nonsense-for-dollars/
Frank T. Edelmann , very interesting link. Really, it is the scollary kitchen. I confirm a large part of Open Access Publisher accept Nonsense Manuscript for dollars.
Dear Aijaz Panhwar , I agree with you a good Review article is a best way to increase the number of reads and de citations.
It is indeed possible to write a review article without longstanding expertise. However, even with artificial intelligence, you need to possess fundamental knowledge about the subject. Accordingly, we have published an AI review paper about enterprise architecture in a renowned scientific journal (Computers in Industry). Our current research demonstrates that it is even possible to predict future topics. We will publish our study on predictions shortly. The AI double funnel works quite well on many topics.
Article Past, Current and Future Trends in Enterprise Architecture –...
Article The Application of Artificial Intelligence Technologies as a...
Thanks Frank T. Edelmann . I have read this case. Such bad practice is present nowadays all over the world. Predatory publishing is a cancer for academy!
If anyone has a need to structure a review paper on a topic that I might like, be my guest - given that the topic isn't boring. :-)
During the past 10 years we has the chance to publishing four review articles in the prestigious chemistry journal Chemical Society Reviews (IF 42.846). Prior to writing the manuscript they even require a detailed proposal of the review article which is peer-reviewed.
The toughest task - when getting ready to write a survey on a narrow science field these days - is to wade through the veritable rubbish of recent papers that often are incomplete, do not actually answer a real question, and those that simply are so bad that it is near-impossible to fathom what the paper is about. Therefore I am reluctant to do many more. But I also realise the necessity to support the narrow fields of mine to help coming scholars, so they do not start reading the 75% rate shallow papers instead of the solid ones. And since I like to summarise and provide hints for future work, I think I should write one or two during the next 12 Months ahead. The question is which topic(s), and that I need to think hard about.
Michael Patriksson yes, that's a good point. In our field of research, e.g. the RSC (Royal Society of Chemistry) journals often publish two types of review articles termed "Critical Reviews" and "Tutorial Reviews". Both of them give the author the chance to pre-select the references and sort out the rubbish.
On at least two occasions I have written surveys and simply submitted them as standard papers, and in one case they added the theme "Review paper" without telling me - which was fine, of course.
It is very interesting to see how different is the world of science is from the world of the humanities. I am not referring to the quality or the type of reviews that are written for both fields, but to the academic weight that some publications receive and especially for the issue of "money."
You shoulf atleast have some experience in the field in which u intend to write a review article....it will only help you and if a reviewer looks at your profile he will get a good impression ...unlike the one who just writes on any topic...say i being a civil engineer will write a review article on a topic of mechanical engineering...which i can write very well...but it wont be justified....thats the main point...only citing 100-150 articles and putting forth your observation wont sufficr...u need to have indepth knowledge of what you are reviewing...hope this helps...
regards. wani
In general it is desirable that the author of a review article is not just a spectator but has also made significant original contributions to the field of research covered in the review.
Preparing a review article in 18 steps ! Good reading!
Many examples of good practice were given.
http://ueberfachliche-kompetenzen.ethz.ch/dopraedi/pdfs/Mayer/guidelines_review_article.pdf
Ljubomir Jacić
I found it informative and valuable. Thank you!!
Ljubomir Jacić
We are getting regularly enlightened with your active participation and in-depth answers.
Thank you!!
Dear Omkar Singh Kushwaha I would say that Ljubomir Jacić 's answers are among the most profound and useful on RG.
Thank you Frank T. Edelmann for your valuable and informative answer.
Dear Hodhaifa Derdar you are absolutely right. Having an excellent overview of the research field is the most important prerequisite when it comes to writing a review article. I know what I'm talking about, because I have already written ca. 50 review articles.
Dear Abdelkader Nadjem
Who is writing a review article should study and read a lot of papers related to his field. After that start to make a summary, a good story, and ensure that you mention enough references.
Dear Abdelhameed Ibrahim you are absolutely right. The references form the basis of any review article. The number of references depends on the type of review article. Please keep in mind that there are different types of review articles such as minireview, tutorial review, critical review, annual review, comprehensive review etc. For the first two the number of references is normally limited, e.g. to 50. An annual review (= annual survey of the progress in a certain filed in the last year) must cover all references which has appeared in the respective year (often in the range of 100-200). The number of references in a comprehensive review is not limited and can be several hundreds up to over one thousand.
Dear Frank T. Edelmann , thanks for your kind words: " I woould say that Ljubomir Jacić 's answers are among the most profound and useful on RG. " That means a lot to me! :)
Review articles significantly contribute to the progress of science by coherently presenting the existing findings on a research topic...
Researchers often face challenges to identify good quality, bias-free, and relevant data from the plethora of research-based evidence present in an ever-growing scientific literature database. Review articles adopt a methodical approach to select, critically appraise, and summarize the available research findings to answer a focused scientific question and identify potential research areas...
Attend this free webinar.
https://www.enago.com/academy/introduction-to-review-articles-writing-systematic-and-narrative-reviews/?utm_source=emailer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_221220
A researcher needs to be knowledgeable in an area to conduct a review. Otherwise, it should be another person's work been modified.
Dear Abdelkader Nadjem "How experienced does a researcher need to be before attempting to write a ''review article'': The main prerequisite to writing a good review article is to have an excellent overview of the field to be covered. If you have not written a review article before, I would suggest not to begin with a comprehensive review with 500+ references, but look for journals which publish e.g. "Mini-Reviews" or shorter "Tutorial Reviews" etc. Even a review with 50 references means a lot of work. For more information about this please have a look at the following links which could help answering your question:
1. Write a Literature Review
https://guides.lib.uoguelph.ca/c.php?g=130964&p=5000948
and
2. Why and How to Write a High-Impact Review Paper: Lessons From Eight Years of Editorial Board Service to Reviews of Geophysics: Why and How to Write High-Impact Reviews
Article Why and How to Write a High-Impact Review Paper: Lessons Fro...
The latter article is freely available as public full ext on RG.
My personal suggestion would be to just READ a few example review articles from your field of research to see how they are organized. Also make sure that the envisaged topic has not just been covered in a recent review article to avoid duplication.
You have to know about all of the most important articles in that field, from the earliest to the latest, and make sure you omit none of them in your review. Of course, there will be many that do not have enough contribution to include in your review, so you should be able to identify and skip them.
You should be able to identify the papers that caused major leaps in the field and took the subject in different directions or shifted the treatment of the subject to another level.
It would take a lot longer to write a review article compared to writing your own ideas as a regular article, as this is a full-length literature review, as opposed to a small section in a regular article. It requires lots of reading, understanding and summarizing hundreds of other articles. If you are one of the major contributors in the field, then your job will be easier, as you have already done lots of literature reviews when you were writing your own papers and you already know your papers better than any other researcher.
A review article, also called a literature review, is a survey of previously published research on a topic...
This page features a discussion of each of the following components of writing a scientific review article ...
https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=283300&p=2915110
https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/publishing-your-research/writing-your-paper/how-to-write-review-article/#:~:text=A%20review%20article%2C%20also%20called,t%20present%20new%20experimental%20results.
A review article is an article that summarizes the current state of understanding on a topic. A review article surveys and summarizes previously published studies, rather than reporting new facts or analysis. An author should've knowledge and experience in the field also.
As the amount of scientific information increases steadily, it is crucial to improve fast-reading comprehension. To grasp many scientific articles in a short period, artificial intelligence becomes essential.
Enclosed you will find a recent open-access paper from our research group, published in "AI."
Results
- It is feasible to detect trends from scientific papers applying AI.
- The breadth of a research area can be illustrated using t-SNE.
- Many abstracts deliver similar results compared to analyzing few full texts.
- Predicting trends seems to work relatively well.
Domain expertise is still crucial.
https://www.mdpi.com/2673-2688/2/2/11
From the plethora of research studies, researchers need to acquire scientific work that is free from methodological errors that lead to bias and contaminated knowledge. The researcher, therefore, needs to avoid studies that had not been undertaken through the rigid standard protocol that is dictated by the research process.
- Badges
- Science topic