Saturday, April 11, 2020

Lessons from my first published paper


They say you never forget your firsts— first love, first job, or like in my case, my first paper that was accepted for publication in an international, peer-reviewed journal. That first experience taught me a lot about the publication process of journal submissions.
My story began with my father gifting me a cell phone. At that time, I was working as a trainee for my MD course and started using the phone to take photos when patients would be presenting with unique symptoms. One day, a few of us trainees were discussing a case where the patient had skin blisters and hypertrichosis (excessive body hair). We had no conclusion about the diagnosis of the case, though we had some ideas of what it could be. We decided to present the case in the grand round. In grand rounds, rare cases and cases that are difficult to diagnose are discussed by the trainees in presence of all faculty members. After hours of discussion and cross-examining, a conclusion is reached for those cases. After the presentation and discussion, our professor asked us to check the patient’s urine under the Wood’s lamp. We were surprised to find the urine was coral red in color. But it helped us finalize our diagnosis— porphyria cutanea tarda!
During this time, alongside recording the patient’s medical history and examination findings, I had continued to take photograph of him. Since it was a rare case, I thought I would write about it and send the paper out for publication.
When I began searching for similar cases, I was surprised to find that no similar cases had been recorded in my country, Bangladesh. But outside Bangladesh, quite a lot of work had been done in this field. So, I proceeded to write a case report and send it to my professor for feedback. I also attached some of the photos I have taken with my cell phone to those in the case report.
Then it was time to choose a journal. I was a novice to the process of online submission but you live and you learn! After facing lots of difficulties initially, I successfully submitted the case report to the New England Journal of Medicine. Within two days, I received my first rejection. When I informed my professor of the outcome, he asked me to submit it again but to an Asian journal. So, I submitted it to a journal published by Wolters Kluwer Medknow. The paper was rejected again but this time I got some feedback— I was asked to use more recent references and ‘plagiarism’ was also mentioned. They also recommended that I try to submit the article to a journal that only publishes case reports.
I revised the article to avoid plagiarism, used more recent references and then searched the internet for a journal that specializes in publishing case reports. I found one in India! After carefully reading the journal’s instructions for authors, I formatted the manuscript as per their guidelines and uploaded the manuscript to their website.
Finally, good news! The article was provisionally accepted but needed some revision of the content and photographs. I was asked to edit the photograph to conceal the identity of the patient and also asked to keep the patient consent form duly signed. I revised the paper as per their comments and uploaded it again. After a few days they finally accepted the paper and it was published on their website later.
What I learnt from this first dip in the process of journal submissions was that we need to meticulously check the patient and their history, document all the information related to the case, and photographs of the symptoms (while protecting the identity of the patients.) I also learnt that written consent must be taken from the patient before sending the paper out to journals. I also had takeaways about formatting, references and how to document data in a way that would make writing a paper easier for me. But my biggest takeaway was this— we should not be disheartened when we face rejection, but keep on our path with determination until we are successful.

Friday, April 10, 2020

Publishing in an International Scholarly Journal: Tips from the Editor of Technological Forecasting & Social Change (TF&SC)

These tips will help researchers for whom English is a second language, and who work at universities and research institutes where the international publishing culture is still young. The tips cover content, selecting a journal, writing, proofing and editing, and dealing with reviewer comments.
I imagine that you are under pressure to publish in prestigious journals. Perhaps you have sent papers to the journal I edit, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, which is an SSCI-indexed journal with an impact factor of more than 2.0, and thus attractive in the eyes of your dean or director. Let’s look under the bonnet to see what goes on at TF&SC.

Ten years ago, TF&SC received 200-some manuscript submissions each year. We enjoyed taking time to help authors improve their work and make their papers publishable. This year we will receive more than 1000 submissions. We publish the same number of pages per year, so this means our rejection rate must be much higher than in the past. Instead of finding ways to help authors, we must find ways to reject papers. A sad development, but of course it has further increased the prestige and quality of the journal.
This means indexing and impact factor should not be your only criteria for targeting a journal.
  • Ask how many manuscripts arrive per year, and what the acceptance rate is. This is an indication of how much attention and interaction you can expect from the editor.
  • Choose a journal that has a policy of mentoring authors (Systemic Practice and Action Research is one such), or
  • Submit your work to a special issue of a high-prestige journal when the guest editor promises such mentoring.
  • Alternatively, “practice” by submitting your first papers to a newer or un-indexed journal. (But NOT a predatory, author-pays, open-access journal.)
As TF&SC’s submission rate has skyrocketed, we must favor papers that are not just correct, but important. I am now based in Asia, and I meet many scholars here who, under publication pressure, submit work that is correct but very incremental in its contribution to knowledge. Few prestigious journals will publish such work.

Your choice of analytic methodology makes a difference too. Some techniques are popular in their country of origin (for example, grey forecasting in China) but of little interest to international audiences. When research communities were smaller and more local, editors and reviewers knew everyone active in a field, and would trust authors who use methodologies that heavily depend on researcher judgment (like structural equation modeling, in which the factors are not chosen objectively). In today’s globalized research arena, when editors see a manuscript from an unknown author from an unfamiliar country, that trust is not necessarily present. Use techniques that are internationally well-known and as objective as possible.

When writing in English, observe a simple rule about semicolons; don’t use them. Ever. Be cautious about homonyms and sound-alike words. Give careful attention to subject-verb agreement, and try not to dangle or misplace adjectival phrases. These are among the most common errors I see in manuscripts. If you do not know what I’m talking about – or even if you do – have your paper looked at by a native English speaker who is familiar with scientific writing

Self-styled “professional editors” may not meet these criteria. I see much truly awful English, submitted by authors who claim to have engaged a professional English editor. To be blunt, these authors have been ripped off. Check out independent editors most carefully before hiring them.
The global research community values cultural diversity and the new insights international researchers bring to scientific investigation. However, it takes a strictly mono-cultural view of plagiarism. Plagiarism is stealing. It is intellectually dishonest, it can lead to an author being blackballed from journals, and it can end academic careers. An author from one country, who did not attribute certain passages in her paper, told me, “I am dishonoring my teacher if I do not use his exact words.” One from another country pleaded, “Here, what we say to each other is far more important that what we write on paper.” If you share their sentiments, you must put them aside before submitting work to international journals.
Some cultures place surnames before given names; other cultures (like mine) do the reverse. This can confuse you when you build your paper’s reference list. But that list must be correct, and in your target journal’s prescribed format! If in doubt about the name of the author you wish to cite, ask someone who is familiar with that author’s culture.
Did you know there are 185 active researchers named Wei Wang?* To ensure you get the credit when your work is cited, especially if you have a fairly common name like Mr. Wang, get a unique researcher identifier at www.orcid.org, and use it when you submit papers. Then too, looking up a researcher on ORCID can help you determine which is his/her family name and which the given name.

Finally, you have persuaded an editor to send your paper to reviewers, and you have received their critiques. A new inter-cultural obstacle rears its head: Your national culture values criticism that is gentle and indirect. The reviewer comes from a nation prone to bluntness. To avoid conflict, people in your country always channel criticism through a third person. In the journal world, the reviewer writes directly to you. You feel like you’ve been assaulted.
 
Remember, the reviewer is not attacking you. She or he may be attacking the way you expressed your research results. Perhaps attacking the results themselves. But not attacking you as a person. Don’t reply immediately. Let the review sit on your desk for a week or two. After that, try to discern how the reviewers’ comments could improve your paper, and revise the paper accordingly.

Science is equal parts investigation and communication. Communication involves strategically choosing audience and channel (journal), and being wise to inter-cultural matters. Pay attention to the quality of your communication just as you do to the quality of your lab work and fieldwork. And remember, the best way to learn to write journal articles is to read journal articles.

About the author:
Fred Phillips (ORCID I.D. O-8311-201) is currently a Professor at University of New Mexico and Visiting Scientist at the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing. He is also Editor-in-Chief of Elsevier’s international journal Technological Forecasting & Social Change. He is Distinguished Professor at Yuan Ze University in Taiwan, and also holds academic appointments at SUNY Stony Brook, the University of Texas at Austin, and the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Lima. His consulting firm’s (www.generalinformatics.com) practice areas are high-tech regional economic development, higher education, and research policy.

Thursday, April 9, 2020

Interpreting the Turnitin Similarity Report-"It can be dangerous at looking at the overall raw similarity score".

Turnitin video under review...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMZLHYplMxA

academic integrity
academic excellence



Around 7 minutes
70 billion pages archived
68 million pages crawled daily
15 million pages added daily

Global Student Papers Database
"student collusion"
1 billion papers

09:30
Misconceptions about the Turnitin Similarity Report
"Up to the instructor to interpret the report."
10:25
 10:54 - "It can be dangerous at looking at the overall raw similarity score".

Wednesday, April 8, 2020

Turnitin Reporting Problems: Required Header and Journal Names

Here is another ongoing Turnitin reporting problem that just can't be fixed. Although the journal has a template to follow with its name located in the header, Turnitin sees it and flags it. This is really an unacceptable problem and needs to be corrected within the software search and name matching process. My solution to this problem in the past has been to turn this information into a screen capture and then re-insert it into the header.


Once again, although 2% seems small, when you cumulatively add up these flagging errors, you can very quickly exceed an editor's 'plagiarism score' maximum requirement and have your paper rejected.



The solution to this Turnitin problem totally depends on whether the journal will allow you to submit your paper without their name and information in the header. From my own experience, I always try to delete any university information such as names, emails, etc. from a pre-submission Turnitin report analysis. I also try to not include any required legal or copyright information as well when I submit my manuscript to the software.

However, if you must include this information in your final submission and the publisher/journal runs a Turnitin report, be prepared for a very nasty surprise and a score possibly higher than that allowed for consideration. You have been warned!

Turnitin Reporting Problems: Goodness of fit criteria and theory citations

For years now I have tried to come up with a solution on how to circumnavigate Turnitin's insistence on always flagging GoF items names and criteria used in LISREL 9.1 output, along with their related supporting theory. As you can see from this report generated on 7 April 2020, I continue to have no luck with this problem. What really makes me crazy about this is the citations are flagged! Is the Turnitin software really this stupid?


Turnitin Reporting Problems: Hypotheses Statement Flagging



Just yesterday I ran another Turnitin report for a paper I am submitting to a journal, and once again,, Turnitin flagged the entire hypotheses statements both in the body of the paper and in the table. Here are screen captures from this software's ongoing unacceptable limitation. Grammarly does not do this. Why does Turnitin?

Here is the same problem repeated in the paper's table for hypotheses validity:
Here is a possible solution:

Access ACM Digital Library for Free


Written by Nikos Vaggalis   
Tuesday, 07 April 2020
Due to the Coronavirus pandemic, the ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) Library has opened its virtual gates to non-members for free until June 30, 2020.
It's a unique opportunity to delve into the depths of the ACM library, well maze more appropriately, since the material that it contains is very rich and spans multiple Computing disciplines.
There's the main categories of Journals, Magazines, Proceedings, Books, SIGs (Special Interest Groups), Conferences and People to explore.
Under Journals you'll find:
  • DGOV:Digital Government: Research and Practice
  • HEALTH:ACM Transactions on Computing for Healthcare
  • JETC:ACM Journal on Emerging Technologies in Computing Systems
  • TOCE:Transactions on Computing Education 
among others.

Under Magazines you'll find

  • CACM:The communications of the ACM,ACM's flagship magazine,"the premier chronicler of computing technologies, covering the latest discoveries, innovations, and research that inspire and influence the field".
  • eLearn,the latest innovations in online education and training.
  • ACM Inroads,the publication for professionals interested in advancing computing education in the world.
  • ACM Queue , "the publication for software engineers that frames and defines the technical problems and challenges that loom ahead, helping readers to sharpen their own thinking and pursue innovative solutions" 
Note that until June you have access to all magazine issues, present and past.
Moving on to SIGs and Conferences, which are the categories that immediately spring to mind whenever "ACM" is mentioned, the depth of the resources you'll encounter is limitless. So many papers of interest groups and conference proceedings to go through. SIG-AI, SIG-ARCH, SIG-CHI, SIG-COM and so on.

SIG-ARCH, Special Interest Group on Computer Architecture, alone has 18,417 publications available to download, while SIG-AI,Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence, has 24,526!
Taking into account that amount of information, you have two options - Search or, if you know exactly which subcategory (is it AIES: AI, Ethics, And Society, ASE: Automated Software Engineering,COLT: Computational Learning Theory,or maybe LCTES: Languages, Compilers, and Tools for Embedded Systems?) you are interested in, go straight for it.
Under People you can find the profiles of computer scientists, educators and practitioners who submit their work for publication in ACM’s proceedings, journals, magazines and books.
I've left the Books section for last and not without a reason. While this category has the fewest resources, just 31 titles, it contains some gems like "Concurrency: the Works of Leslie Lamport" :
This book is a celebration of Leslie Lamport's work on concurrency, interwoven in four-and-a-half decades of an evolving industry: from the introduction of the first personal computer to an era when parallel and distributed multiprocessors are abundant
and of course "Making Databases Work: the Pragmatic Wisdom of Michael Stonebraker", a most influential figure in the world of Databases and Postgres in particular.

The book describes, in 36 chapters, the unique nature, significance, and impact of Mike's achievements in advancing modern database systems over more than 40 years. The stories involve technical concepts, projects, people, prototype systems, failures, lucky accidents, crazy risks, startups, products, venture capital, and lots of applications that drove Mike Stonebraker's achievements and career.
You might want to check "The Enduring Influence Of Postgres"
for more on that.
And, you access those for free! ("Making Databases Work" costs around $100 as a paperback at Amazon, E-book $79.96 at Morgan Claypool Publishers)
Researcher or otherwise, you will certainly find something of interest.
One caveat though. As Mike James writes in "Occupy ACM - No More Paywalls", all research publications ought to be freely available and  we should not have to wait for windows like these in order to get free access to it:
The scandal that is the archaic practice of making money from research paid for by the public has raised its head once again. Perhaps now it is time for members of academic organizations such as the ACM to take the democratic lead and force open access policies.
In the old days, the days of paper print, there was some small justification for journals charging libraries and individuals for access to scientific papers. In this day of the Internet and low-cost publishing, it makes no sense for the academic publisher to charge a silly price for access to a PDF.
Take advantage of this unique offer while it lasts.
 acmdigitallib

More Information

Open Access to ACM Digital Library During Coronavirus Pandemic

Related Articles

Occupy ACM - No More Paywalls
Top AI Researchers Rebel Against Nature
JSTOR Extends Free Access - But Not Much

Scopus/TCI1 (not SJR) Journal of Multidisciplinary in Social Sciences (JMSS)

  https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/sduhs/article/view/274241