Guide for ISI Paper Writing

R. AZIMIRAD
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS
MALEK ASHTAR UNIVERSITY OF
TECHNOLOGY
 My Education

 Ph. D. in Experimental Physics (Condensed Matter), Department of Physics,

Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran (2005-2008)
 Total Average Grade: 19.64/20
 Ph. D. Thesis Title: Investigation on physical and chemical properties of synthesized W, Mo
and Ti oxides nanostructures
 Supervisor: Prof. A.Z. Moshfegh Adviser: Dr. O. Akhavan
 Thesis Grade: Excellent
 M. Sc. in Experimental Physics (Condensed Matter), Department of Physics,
Faculty of Science, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran (2002-2004)
 Total Average Grade: 17.73/20
 M. Sc. Thesis Title: Fabrication and Characterization of (WO3)x-(Fe2O3)1-x Thin Film Systems
 Supervisor: Prof. A.Z. Moshfegh & Prof. E. Arzi
 Thesis Grade: 19.5/20 (Excellent)
 B. Sc. in Physics (Condensed Matter), Department of Physics, Sharif University
of Technology, Tehran, Iran (1998-2002)
 Total Average Grade: 17.55/20
 My Publications

25 ISI Papers

18 Int. Conferences
24 Farsi Papers

Referee of 16 ISI Papers

 ISI Journals

Journal Impact Factors

Journal Impact Factor is from
Journal Citation Report (JCR),
a product of Thomson ISI
(Institute for Scientific Information )

impact factor 2010 = A/B

A = the number of times articles

published in 2008-9 were cited in
indexed journals during 2010

B = the number of articles, reviews,

proceedings or notes published in
2008-2009
 Impact Factor 2008
Journal Name IF ISSN

CA-CANCER J CLIN 74.575 0007-9235

NEW ENGL J MED 50.017 0028-4793

ANNU REV IMMUNOL 41.059 0732-0582

NAT REV MOL CELL BIO 35.423 1471-0072

PHYSIOL REV 35.000 0031-9333

REV MOD PHYS 33.985 0034-6861

JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC 31.718 0098-7484

NATURE 31.434 0028-0836

….. …. ……

MER-MAR ENG REV 0.005 0047-5955

NAV ARCHIT 0.001 0306-0209

ENG INTELL SYST ELEC 0 1472-8915

FORENSIC SCI INT-GEN 0 1872-4973

J COMMUN NETW-UK 0 1477-4739

Search
 Important publishing advice

Submit to the right journal (scope, speed and

prestige)
Submit to one journal only
Submit one article only to one journal
Check the English!
Pay attention to the structure
Pay attention to journal requirements
Be honest!
 What is a good manuscript?

Does the article fit the aims and scope of the journal?
Is the research novel and does it add to the existing
body of knowledge?
Are the right conclusions drawn from the data
presented?
Is it of international relevance or unique features?
Is it well-presented in proper English?
 What is a good manuscript?

A good manuscript makes readers (especially

reviewers and editors) grasp the scientific
significance as EASILY as possible.
Writing a good manuscript is NOT easy!
Be prepared to work hard on it!
 How to prepare a “good” manuscript for
an international journal???

Preparations before writing

Construction of a manuscript
Some technical details that need special
attention
Language
Revision
 How to prepare a good manuscript

In the following section, you will learn how to

raise your chances of getting accepted,
including…
Basic principles that should always be kept in
mind
What editors and reviewers love, and what
they hate
 REMEMBER:

Cherish your own work – if you do not take

care, why should the journal?
 There is no secret recipe for success – just
some simple rules, dedication and hard
work.
Editors and reviewers are all busy scientists,
just like you – make things easy to save their
time!
 Before start

1. Think about WHY you want to publish your

work. (Actually, you should check the
originality of the idea at the very beginning of
your research.)
 Have you done something new and interesting?
 Is there anything challenging in your work?
 Is the work related directly to a current hot topic?
 Have you provided solutions to some difficult problems?
If all answers are “yes”, then start
preparations for your manuscript
 Before start

2. Decide on the type of the manuscript

 Full articles/Original articles

 Letters/Rapid Communications/Short communications

 Review papers/perspectives
 Before start

3. Choose the target journal

Choose one right journal for your work. DO NOT gamble by
scattering your manuscript to many journals. Only submit once!
You must get help from your supervisor or colleagues!!! The
supervisor (who is probably the corresponding author) has
responsibility for your work. You are encouraged to chase your
supervisor if necessary.
Articles in your references will likely lead you to the right
journal.
Read recent publications (at least go through the abstracts) in
each candidate journal. Find out the hot topics, the accepted
types of articles, etc.
 Before start

4. One more thing before typing your manuscript...

Apply the Guide for Authors (GFA) to your manuscript, even
to the first draft (text layout, paper citation, nomenclature,
figures and table, etc.). It will save your time, and the editor’s.
A good GfAs often contains constructive instructions on
scientific writing.
 e.g., Cell: www.cell.com/misc/page?page=authors
 Biochimica et Biophysica Acta – General Subjects:

www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription/cws_home/506066/author
instructions
 All editors hate wasting time on poorly prepared
manuscripts. They may well
think that the author shows no respect.
 Construction

The general structure of a full

article:
Title
Abstract
Keywords
Main text (IMRAD)
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 And Discussions
Conclusions
Acknowledgement
Reference
Supplementary materials
 Construction

However, we often use the following order

when writing:
Methods, Results and Discussion
Conclusions and Introduction
Abstract and title

Finalize Results & Discussion before you write the

introduction. If the discussion is insufficient, how can you
objectively demonstrate the scientific significance of your
work in the introduction?
 Title

What is the paper broadly about?

Your opportunity to attract the reader’s attention.

Reviewers will check whether the title is specific and whether it reflects the
content of the manuscript.
Editors hate titles that make no sense or fail to represent the subject matter
adequately; So, keep it informative and concise.
All important aspects of the paper should figure in the title.

A title should be a label, not a sentence.

Avoid technical jargon and abbreviations if possible.

Consider more than one title, and ask colleagues which one is a better
description of your paper.
Title
 Author names

Keep consistent in the style of writing your full name

and the abbreviation for all your publications – for
the efficiency of indexing and searching.
Consider following information:
 Who did the work
 Where they did it
 Where they are now
 Their relative involvement
 To whom correspondence should be addressed
Degrees and titles are not required.
Example
 Abstract

Tell the prospective readers what you did and what the
important findings were.
This is the advertisement of your article. Make it interesting,
and easy to be understood without reading the whole article
(Avoid using jargon and uncommon abbreviations if possible.)
You must be accurate! Use words which reflect the precise
meaning
A clear abstract will strongly influence whether or not your
work is further considered;
Keep it as BRIEF as possible!!!
 Keywords

Mainly used for indexing

It is the label of your manuscript. Avoid words with a
broad meaning.
E.g., the word “soil” in “Soil Biology & Biochemistry”
should not be selected as a keyword.
Only abbreviations firmly established in the field are
eligible (e.g., DNA).
Check the Guide for Authors!
PACS-Number
 Introduction

To convince readers that you clearly know why your work is

useful
What is the problem? Are there any existing solutions?
Which is the best? What is its main limitation?
And what do you hope to achieve?
Editors like to see that you have provided a perspective consistent with
nature of the journal. You need to introduce the main scientific
publications on which your work is based. (Cite a couple of original and
important works, including recent review articles)
However, they hate improper citations of too many references
irrelevant to the work, or inappropriate judgments on your own
achievements. They will think that you have no sense of purpose at all!
 Introduction

Watch for the following:

Never use more words than necessary. Never make this section into
a history lesson. Long introductions put readers off.
Introductions of Letters are even shorter.
We all know that you are keen to present your new data. But do not
forget that you need to give the whole picture at first.
Do not mix introduction with results, discussion, and conclusion.

Always keep them separate to ensure that the manuscript flows

logically from one section to the next.
Expressions such as “novel”, “first time”, “first ever”, are not
preferred. Use them sparingly.
Example of Introduction
 Materials and Methods

How was the problem studied

 Include detailed information, so that a knowledgeable
reader can reproduce the experiment.
 However, use references and Supporting Materials to
indicate the previously published procedures. Do not repeat
the details of established methods. Broad summaries are
sufficient.
 Reviewers will criticize incomplete or incorrect descriptions
(and may recommend rejection).
 Materials and Methods

Document all methods performed in your study.

Summarize in your own words what you did.
Write in the past tense.
For materials considered following three important
points:
 exact technical specifications
 Quantities
 preparation method and source
Report date of experiment conducted and georeferences
of experimental site.
Methodology need to be described in detail.
 Results

What have you found?

Only representative results should be presented. The results
should be essential for discussion. Use Supporting
Materials freely for data of secondary importance.
Do not attempt to “hide” data in the hope of saving it for a later
paper. You may lose evidence to reinforce your conclusion.
Use sub-headings to keep results of the same type together –
easier to review and read. Number these sub-sections for the
convenience of internal cross-referencing. Decide on a logical
order of the data that tells a clear and easy way to understand
story.
 Results: Figures & Tables

“A figure is worth a thousand

words…”
Illustrations, including figures and
tables, are the most efficient way to
present the results.
Your data are the “driving force of the
paper”. Therefore, your illustrations
are critical!
 Figures & Tables

Generally, tables give the actual experimental

results.
Graphs are often used for comparison of
experimental results with those of previous works,
or with calculated/theoretical values.
 No illustrations should duplicate the information
described elsewhere in the manuscript.
 Figures & Tables

Illustrations should be used for ESSENTIAL data

only.
 Comment from an Editor: Can't you describe the results of Fig.
13 in the text, since this figure does not show much information
of interest? You should realize that space is valuable!!
The legend of a figure should be brief. And it should
contain sufficient explanatory details to make the
figure understood easily without referring to the text.
 Indication from a reviewer: readers often look at the figures first
and many times go no further.
 Figures & Tables

Appearances count!
Un-crowded plots: 3 or 4 data sets per figure; wellselected
scales; appropriate axis label size; symbols clear to see
and data sets easy to discriminate.
Each photograph must have a scale marker of the
professional quality on one corner.
Use color ONLY when necessary. If different line styles
can clarify the meaning, never use colors or other
thrilling effects.
Do not include long boring tables! (e.g., chemical
compositions of emulsion systems)
 Figures & Tables

An example of an unreadable figure with the

unnecessary usage of color
 Figures & Tables

Use High-Quality Illustrations

Figures & Tables
Example
 Discussion

What the results mean

It is the most important section of your article. Here you
get the chance to SELL your data! A huge numbers of
manuscripts are rejected because the Discussion is weak.
Make the Discussion corresponding to the Results. But do
not reiterate the results.
You need to compare the published results with yours.
DO NOT ignore work in disagreement with yours –
confront it and convince the reader that you are correct or
better.
 Discussion

Check for the following:

How do these results relate to the original question or objectives
outlined in the Introduction section?
Do the data support your hypothesis?

Are your results consistent with what other investigators have reported?

Discuss weaknesses and discrepancies. If your results were unexpected,

try to explain why
Is there another way to interpret your results?

What further research would be necessary to answer the questions

raised by your results?
Have you explained what is new without exaggerating?
Example
 Conclusion/ Summary

How the work advances the field from the present state of
knowledge
Without a clear conclusion section reviewers and readers will find
it difficult to judge the work, and whether or not it merits
publication in the journal.
DON’T REPEAT THE ABSTRACT, or just list experimental results.

Trivial statements of your results are unacceptable in this section.

You should provide a clear scientific justification for your work in
this section, and indicate uses and extensions if appropriate.
Moreover, you can suggest future experiments and point out those
that are underway.
Example
 Acknowledgements

Acknowledge for

 significant technical help received from others

 grants, fellowships or other financial assistance

Do not thank someone without identifying the

nature of the assistance
Do not thank peer reviewers. Do not thank someone
just for inspiration.
 References

Typically, there are more mistakes in the references

than any other part of the manuscript. It is one of the
most annoying problems, and causes great headaches
among editors…
Cite the main scientific publications on which your work is
based
Do not over-inflate the manuscript with too many references -
it doesn’t make a better manuscript!
Avoid excessive self-citations

Avoid excessive citations of publications from the same region.

 References

Make the reference list and the in-text citation conform

strictly to the style given in the Guide for Authors!!!
Presentation in the correct format is the responsibility of
the author, not the Editor!
Checking the format is normally a large job for the editors.
Make their work easier and they will appreciate the effort.
Check the following:
 Spelling of author names, year of publications
 Usages of “et al.”, and punctuations.
Example
Example

(Sankey et al., 1991)

(Cartwright, 1980)

(Harrison, 1983)

(Bigelow et al., 1992)

 Some special technical aspects of the manuscript

25- 30 pages is the ideal length for a submitted manuscript, including

ESSENTIAL data only.
 Title page
 Abstract 1 paragraph
 Introduction 1.5-2 ms pages
 Methods 2-4 ms pages
 Results and Discussion 10-12 ms pages
 Conclusions 1-2 ms pages
 Figures 6-8
 Tables 1-3
 References 20-50 papers
Letters or short communications have a stricter limitation of the length. For
example, 3000 words with no more than 5 illustrations.
 Additional aspects of a manuscript

Make use of supporting material

Supporting material will be available online to readers if
the paper is eventually published.
The supporting materials section should be referred to in
the main manuscript to direct reader, as appropriate.
It helps to keep the main manuscript clear and concise.

You can put as much material as you wish in this section.

However, all the information should be related and
supportive to your article.
 Additional aspects

Text layout:

Keep consistent throughout the manuscript.

Double line spacing and 12 font is preferred: make it

convenient for reviewers to make annotations.
 Language

Attention! If the language prevents reviewers from

understanding the scientific content of your work,
the possibility of acceptance will be lowered greatly.
At the minimum, you should provide the best
English you can manage along with your high quality
science. Please have a skilled writer or someone
fluent in English help to check your manuscript
before submission.
 Language

Save your readers the trouble of guessing what you mean!

 Complaint from an Editor: “[This] paper fell well below my

threshold. I refuse to spend time trying to understand what the

author is trying to say. Besides, I really want to send a message
that they can't submit garbage to us and expect us to fix it. My
rule of thumb is that if there are more than 6 grammatical
errors in the abstract, then I don't waste my time carefully
reading the rest. ”
 Language

KISS (Keep It Simple and Succinct)

Accuracy, Brevity, Clarity and Objectivity

 Language

Direct and short sentences are preferred!

Long sentences will not make the writing more professional.

They only confuse readers.

Nowadays, the average length of sentences in scientific writing

is about 12-17 words.

It is said that we read one sentence in one breath. Long

sentences choke readers.

One idea or piece of information per sentence is sufficient.

Avoid multiple statements in one sentence.
 Long sentences

See the 80-word long sentence below. Even the editor

found it incomprehensible.
 The luminous efficiency of MOLED device drawn down faster than
PLED, which may be caused by different fabrication process, i.e., the
distribution of (tpbi)2Ir(acac) dye in host is more uniform in liquid
polymer from spin coating method than thermal deposition of solid
organic small molecules, so that the quenching phenomena in small
molecular device are more critical than in polymer device, even the
doping concentration of phosphor dye in MOLED (2 wt%) is lower than
that in PLED (4 wt%).
 Long sentences

Another awful example (with 91 words):

 If it is the case, intravenous administration should result in that
emulsion has higher intravenous administration retention
concentration, but which is not in accordance with the result, and
therefore the more rational interpretation should be that SLN with
mean diameter of 46nm is greatly different from emulsion with mean
diameter of 65 nm in entering tumor, namely, it is probably difficult for
emulsion to enter and exit from tumor blood vessel as freely as SLN,
which may be caused by the fact that the tumor blood vessel aperture is
smaller.
 Long sentences

Problems with long sentences:

Inappropriate use of passive voice or dummy clauses (e.g., “It has been found
that there had been many …”) makes sentences complex.

Bad structure of sentences with wrongly used conjunctive words or dangling

modifiers. (e.g., “because…, so…”, “Although…, but…”, “considering…, it is…”)

Excessive use of subordinate clauses in one sentence. (e.g., “It has already
been found that when…there would be … which…while…”)

Mixing different levels of parallelisms connected by “and” in one sentence.

(e.g., “…investigates the constructions of triangular norms and discusses the
rotation construction and the rotation-annihilation construction based on
weak negations ”)
 Language

Wrong use of words and phrases

Passive voice used for intransitive verbs e.g., It has been arrived → It has arrived at…

The 3rd singular form of verbs used for plural subjects e.g., The data was calculated
→ the data were calculated
Subject of the main clause is not the doer of the dangling modifier

e.g., “To improve the results, the experiment was done again.” → the experiment cannot
improve the results itself. It should be “We did the experiment again to improve the results”.
Multiple Nouns

e.g., Mean summer tree leaf water potential

the mean water potential of tree leaves measured in summer
Spoken abbreviations: “it’s”, “weren’t”, “hasn’t” – Never use them in scientific
writing
Finally, you should use English throughout the manuscript…
 Submission Process

Submit your article to only one journal at a time – submit to another journal only if your article
has been rejected.
Read the journal’s guidelines for authors and make sure your article conforms to its
requirements.
Ensure that the focus of your article complies with the aims and scope of the journal – otherwise
the editors will not be interested in it.
Submit your article only through the recommended means specified by the journal (by email,
post, etc). Make sure the format you use for the article is acceptable to the journal.
Send a short polite letter to the editor to accompany your article.

Make sure you provide full contact details for correspondence – your name, affiliation, address,
country, telephone number(s), email, etc.
Make sure you send all necessary materials required to publish the article (do not forget the
illustrations, etc).
Keep copies of all material you send (paper and electronic files), as the journal will probably not
return anything to you.
 Cover letter

Your chance to speak to the Editor directly

Do not summarize your manuscript, or repeat the
abstract, but mention what makes it special to the
journal. This is also the place to remark special
requirements, for instance if you do not wish your
manuscript to be reviewed by certain reviewers.
Many editors won’t reject a manuscript only because
the cover letter is bad. However, a good cover letter
may accelerate the editorial process of your paper.
Example of Cover letter
 Additional aspects

Suggest potential reviewers

Generally you are requested to provide 3-6 potential reviewers.

Your suggestions will help the Editor to pass your manuscript to

the review stage more efficiently.

You can easily find potential reviewers and their contact details
in various ways.

The reviewers should represent at least two regions of the world.

And they should not be your supervisor or close friends.
 After Submission

When you have submitted an article, you should expect an acknowledgement –

but this may take several weeks – if you do not hear from the journal, contact the
editor to make sure your article has been received by the journal.
If the journal feels that your article is totally unsuitable, the board of editors will
immediately reject it.
Your article will be sent out to reviewers – these are subject specialists in your
area who will read the article and return comments to the journal about the
article’s acceptability.
Usually you will not be told who has reviewed your article –this is to avoid undue
bias.
Once the article has been reviewed the journal will reply you, providing feedback
from the reviewers – this may take several months. If you do not hear from the
journal for a very long time after the acknowledgement (say six months to one
year), you should write to enquire on the status of your article.
 Decision

Accept
 At the present form
 With minor revision
 With major revision

Reject
 Revision

It is unusual for any article to be accepted by a journal without some revisions
being requested.
Revisions may be minor (eg change references order), or major (eg
methodology unclear).
Make revisions as requested by the editor – if there are any of the
recommended revisions that you disagree with, contact the editor to discuss.
Remember: editors and reviewers hate to see the same mistake twice!

 The revised article needs to be returned to the journal (remember to retain a

copy). Do not delay in doing this.
It is not uncommon for some articles to undertake several revisions.

It is possible that after revision the article is rejected – although it is unlikely
unless you failed to revise the article satisfactorily.
 Acceptance

 When your article is accepted you will receive confirmation

from the journal (by email or post).
 Complete and assign copyright form.

 Ensure you are aware of your rights regarding the article –

discuss with the journal if you are unsure.
 Check to see if the journal will provide you with printed
copies of your article (offprints), or a copy of the issue in
which it appears, or an electronic file of the final article
(usually in PDF format).
 Rejection

Do not be disheartened to receive a rejection letter – it may

not be due to the quality of the article, but because the
subject is inappropriate for the journal.
If your article is rejected, you can submit it elsewhere – but
remember there are reasons for rejection and you should
revise your article before submitting it elsewhere (and
remember to conform to the author guidelines of your newly
selected journal).
If the journal gives you reasons for rejecting the article,
consider their comments seriously – other journals may have
similar concerns about your article.
 Rejection

Which procedure do you prefer?

1. Send out a sloppily prepared manuscript → get
rejected after 4-6 months → send out again only a few
days later → get rejected again → … → sink into despair
2. Take 3-4 months to prepare the manuscript → get
the first decision after 4 months → revise carefully
within time limitation → … → accepted
You are SUBMITTING your manuscript to a scientific journal, not
THROWING it out . Please cherish your own achievements!
 Conclusion: what leads to Acceptance?

Attention to detail

Check and double check your work

Consider the reviews

English must be as good as possible

Presentation is important

Take your time with revision

Acknowledge those who have helped you

New original and previously unpublished

Critically evaluate your own manuscript

Ethical rules must be obeyed

 References

http://www.paperpub.com.cn

Bal K Joshi, “Guide for Scientific Paper Writing”,

Nepal Agric. Res. J., Vol. 6, 2005.

Michael Derntl, “Basics of Research Paper Writing

and Publishing”.
Thank you for your attention

Questions?