The Science Citation Index (now the Science Citation Index Expanded, or SCIE) is one of the core databases included in the products Web of Knowledge and Web of Science, owned by Thomson Reuters.

Altmetrics can be defined either as alternative metrics or article metrics. Both are appropriate definitions: altmetrics offer an alternative, or non-traditional method of evaluating research, and can be based more specifically on the article and how it is received, rather than the reputation or impact factor of the journal it is published in.

Many authors and researchers worry that their writing is too repetitive, but repetition can be a useful tool when used correctly. It is important to developing academic manuscripts, benefits readers, and is encouraged (in appropriate contexts) by editors and publishers.

During the course of the twentieth century, the structure and layout of academic research papers has become more standardized. The format commonly referred to as IMRAD now predominates, particularly in biomedical disciplines. However, many scientific disciplines use the same structure.

Procedures for the submission and publication of supplementary data, or supplementary information (SI) may differ from publisher to publisher. 

Peer review acts as a quality check on academic literature, defined as ‘a formal system whereby a piece of academic work is scrutinised by people who were not involved in its creation but are considered knowledgeable about the subject’ 

Single-Blind and Double-Blind Peer Review, find out what are the main differences between the two. In single-blind peer review, only the reviewers are anonymous. Reviewers know the authors, but authors don’t know the reviewers.  In double-blind peer review, both the authors and reviewers keep their anonymity.

Self-plagiarism is a worry to many authors and researchers. Often, they are unsure what self-plagiarism is or how to avoid it.

The Charlesworth Group is delighted to announce its partnership with KingYee Technology based in Beijing, China. Under this arrangement, Charlesworth will provide scientific editing services and a full package of educational services and outreach.

With scientific research becoming increasingly specialized, it can be difficult for journals to find experts to carry out peer review. Asking authors to suggest their own reviewers can therefore be mutually beneficial: journals save time and resources searching for an appropriate reviewer, and the author can support this process by providing contacts from their network.

Duplicate submission of papers to academic journals is actively discouraged by journals and publishers. Many publishers have strict policies about duplicate submission, and the reuse of research data. 

Although plagiarism can refer to the intentional copying of others’ work, it is most often committed accidentally, as a result of incorrect referencing or citation.  Alternatively, a lack of awareness of previous studies can lead to plagiarism, and a failure even to reference one’s own work will cause problems of copyright.

Authorship involves not only credit for the work but also accountability. It is this idea of credit and accountability which determines the need for ethical considerations to be made in scholarly publishing and, more specifically, scientific publishing.

The title and abstract are critical elements to your paper. They will be used by readers to decide whether or not to read the rest of your paper; and, even before publication, they will be used by journal editors to decide whether or not your paper should be sent for peer review evaluation, and by peer reviewers to decide if they want to review your paper.

Submitting your article to a journal is only the first step in the process to getting published.  In the vast majority of cases, papers will require at the very least some further changes or review based on the feedback from the journal editor and reviewers.

Carrying out research studies and then writing up the research results often involve many participants. Some (or all) of these may be considered to be ‘authors’ and appear in the list of authors connected with the final paper, but it is important to think about who actually constitutes an ‘author’.

The NSB Science & Engineering Indicators 2016 report reveals that authors based in the US were responsible for 18.8% of global scientific output in 2015, while China-based authors accounted for 18.2%.

Think.Check. Submit. is a campaign aiming to help authors identify reputable journals and make an informed decision about where to submit. Launched in October 2015, it is supported by organizations across the publishing industry* and is particularly aimed at academics at an early point in their careers, who may have little to no experience with the submission process.

The start of 2016 has seen a number of academic publishers declare their intention to make it compulsory for authors to use ORCID identifiers during the publication process. 

There are many compelling reasons to include tables and/or figures in journal articles. We review some considerations and tips to ensure that you have the best chance of utilizing these elements to full advantage in your journal submission.