Choosing a Publication Venue

Journal selection behavior among early-career academicians in Iran: how they choose the most appropriate journal for their publications

Purpose

Journals are the essential tools of researchers, especially academicians, to present their scientific findings. So, choosing the right journal helps not only science development but also their academic promotion. The purpose of this study is to examine the factors that Iranian medical researchers consider when selecting scholarly journals in which to submit their work.

Design/methodology/approach

A self-administered online questionnaire was emailed in May 2021, with 101 responses received. The sample included all the faculty members with the role of “lecturer” in Iranian medical universities and who have 1–5 articles in the Scopus database as early-career Iranian medical researchers. The questionnaire consisted of 36 items, divided into five sections: basic information, attitudes and beliefs, ways to choose a journal, problems and familiarity with the components of scientometrics/validity metrics related to journals.

Findings

The findings indicate that these researchers value the expertise of experienced researchers and professionals, like librarians, when selecting publication venues. They often use journal indexes to guide journal selection. They also consider factors like the length of typical peer review and the complexity of submission guidelines when making decisions.

Research limitations/implications

The study of one country, though detecting requirements of journal selection behavior, cannot be generalized to the entire region.

Practical implications

The current study has academic implications as far as decisions on journal selection are concerned. University policymakers in Iran may consider re-examining their emphasis on academicians’ promotion policies at Iranian universities of medical sciences.

Originality/value

These findings may support the work of early-career researchers and those individuals (e.g., librarians) that serve them, as well as publishers and editors of scholarly journals.

Time to publish? Turnaround times, acceptance rates, and impact factors of journals in fisheries science

Selecting a target journal is a universal decision faced by authors of scientific papers. Components of the decision, including expected turnaround time, journal acceptance rate, and journal impact factor, vary in terms of accessibility. In this study, I collated recent turnaround times and impact factors for 82 journals that publish papers in the field of fisheries sciences. In addition, I gathered acceptance rates for the same journals when possible. Findings indicated clear among-journal differences in turnaround time, with median times-to-publication ranging from 79 to 323 days. There was no clear correlation between turnaround time and acceptance rate nor between turnaround time and impact factor; however, acceptance rate and impact factor were negatively correlated. I found no field-wide differences in turnaround time since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, though some individual journals took significantly longer or significantly shorter to publish during the pandemic. Depending on their priorities, authors choosing a target journal should use the results of this study as guidance toward a more informed decision.

Nurse Author: Who Me? Yes, You!

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Potential nurse authors may find writing a challenge, including managing the publication process from getting started through submission to revision of the work and its acceptance. This special article presents strategies to help inexperienced writers develop and hone skills for journal publication.

POTENTIAL PUBLICATION STRATEGIES

Tips discussed here that may lead to manuscript acceptance include selecting a topic of interest, using motivational self-talk approaches and structuring time to write, choosing coauthors, targeting a journal for submission, writing strong sentences in active voice, developing a structured abstract, using correct citation and reference formats, understanding reviews and resubmitting the manuscript, and keeping momentum to produce continued writing results. Practical writing hints are also suggested for inexperienced writers.

RELEVANCE AND CONCLUSION

These strategies can help guide nurse writers in planning, navigating the system, and finding success as a published author.

Scientometric overview of nursing research on pain management

Objective:

to analyse research articles on pain and nursing issues using bibliometric and scientometric methodologies.

Method:

articles in the Web of Science database containing pain and nurse and pain and nursing were analyzed using scientometric methods through data visualization techniques and advanced text analytics.

Result:

among the 107,559 research articles found in the field of nursing, 3,976 of them were written based on the keywords pain and nursing, and were considered in conformity with the scope of this study. Preliminary analyses indicated that the publications have increased through the years with minor fluctuations. Titles, keywords, and abstracts were analyzed through text analytics to reveal keyword clusters and topic structures. Studies on oncology and pain in the field of nursing have a relatively higher frequency.

Conclusion:

the results of the analyses revealed the characteristics of the current literature in a broad range of areas by considering the particular dimensions. Therefore, the findings may support present and future research in this field by shedding light on the networks, trends, and contents in the related literature.

Ready! Aim! Fire! targeting the right medical science journal

OBJECTIVE

Inadvertently submitting a paper to a journal that is unlikely to publish it is a waste of resources and ultimately delays dissemination of one's research. A high proportion of manuscripts are rejected by their author's first-choice journal. The aim of the present work was to review guidance provided within the literature for journal selection that might minimize the chance of manuscript rejection. We also consider papers that encompass more than one main medical science and describe the selection process that we used with a paper that was published in Cardiovascular Endocrinology.

METHODS

A database search (Embase, PubMed and Medworm) was performed for all articles published in the scientific literature providing guidance on journal selection. Articles were identified that either had journal selection as their principal topic or included journal selection as part of a broader discussion of publishing. The relative performance of four free-to-use, web-based applications that claim to provide guidance on journal selection was compared.

RESULTS

The searches identified 286 hits, of which 249 were in English. Of these papers, 16 discussed journal selection and a further 10 articles were identified from citations within the original 16 articles. Only one article described a comprehensive model for submission decision-making. Identification of appropriate candidate journals by various web-based applications was erratic, with the Jane database providing the most robust suggestions.

CONCLUSION

Our work suggests that little attention has been focused in the scientific literature on the mechanisms that authors use to select a journal for their work. Nevertheless, scientists for the most part seem to have a good sense of where their papers are most likely to be accepted. Beyond ensuring that a manuscript fulfils all the target journal's requirements, the literature suggests that it is important to have an objective view of the scientific contribution or 'value' of your work.