Publication Advice
BOOKS
PhD on Track has the following tips for choosing publishing houses:
How many titles are published in your field, both annually and totally?
Are you familiar with the authors and editors cooperating with
this publisher?
Are you familiar with researchers cooperating with this publisher?
Do they have a division for your discipline?
Do they publish relevant book series?
Is the publisher or the book series ranked in the Norwegian Scientific Index or the Danish BFI Authority List?
What are the copyright policies?
What are the publisher’s ethical profile and aims?
Do you regularly read books from this publisher?
Courtesy of : PhD On Track
JOURNALS
Choosing a journal is more important than just looking at the ABS rankings. Each journal represents a scholarly community with its particular rules (many of which are often unwritten). As an example, see the advice on publishing in the Journal of Management from a presentation given at Edinburgh Napier in April 2017.
General Publishing Criteria
Unusual, surprising, quirky, or challenging papers are welcome
A strong theoretical orientation
No preference is given to a particular topic, method or level of analysis
General Rejection Criteria
Lack of a clear, significant and interesting contribution
Lack of methodological rigor
Lack of a clear and appropriate theoretical framework
Lack of clear implications for management theory and practice
Lack of Fit
Lack of a compelling research agenda
Post Rejection Tips
Some papers are rejected after a number of reviews
Don’t take it personally
Once you have recovered from disappointment ask yourself – do they have a point?
Use the process to develop the paper
Discuss with editor
Consider appealing (if you have a strong case)
Send it to another journal (but revise it first, you may end up with the same reviewers
Further information below:
SOCIAL MEDIA
Advice and Guidance
NEWS
The Conversation is an online comment and analysis magazine aimed at the general public and entirely written by academics. We run articles on everything from nuclear weapons policy to mind control to Russian ballet, and we're always looking for new people with interesting ideas who would like to write for us. We mainly run short sharp pieces of analysis or explanation in the region of 800 words, though we sometimes publish longer reads and also dabble in other strands like interviews and podcasts. The subject that you want to write about must fall within your research interests, but otherwise the sky is the limit.
One of the big attractions of writing for us is that we can't publish until you have approved the final edited version, which gives you much more control over your material than in the rest of the media. The size of your potential audience is substantial, partly thanks to our creative commons policy, which means that any media outlet can republish your piece so long as they credit you and us and don't change anything. Our writers get access to a trove of metrics that track readership numbers, social media comments and shares, where it's been read and where it's been republished. And the whole process is designed to give you as much support from our dedicated team as necessary.
If you'd like to write for us, please email Steven Vass, the Scotland Editor, at
steven.vass@theconversation.com. Best is to send a short pitch of about 100 words outlining what you want to say, why now is the right time and why a general audience would be interested. Or if you're keen but not sure what the thrust should be, by all means drop me a line and we can take it from there.