Academic publishing

There is a big difference between writing a PhD and writing a paper for a journal or writing a book for a well-known publishing house. Oddly, writing a thesis does not prepare you well for writing for publication. PhDs are too dense and scholarly to interest many publishers as a book. Rarely, theses can become books, but they are not usually much more than "warmed up PhDs" and don't generally sell well.

By contrast, publishing a book with a major publishing house that has marketing appeal requires a set of skills that many scholars need to learn. A doctorate can be a transitionary document towards a potential book, however, and writing a doctorate can certainly lead naturally to the publication of journal articles, though again, additional skills need to be learned. A thesis chapter will not automatically be suitable as a published paper.

There is also a gulf between writing a PhD and writing a journalistic piece for the popular media - increasingly an important outlet for academics wishing to market their work.

How can one learn these skills?

Federation University's Graduate Research Centre can help. Our learning skills advisors are also PhD-qualified and published, so can assist you too.

Several misconceptions exist about academic publishing. These include that you cannot publish your academic work:

• until you have immersed yourself in all the literature
• if you have not done any new ('cutting edge') research
• before your PhD is accepted.

In fact, a great deal of different writing is published. This is because:

• Not all writing published is based on new 'research'
• If you wait until you find your place in the literature, you may lose the desire to write
• 'Knowing all the literature' is a long-term—indeed, never-ending—prospect
• Publishing a paper helps to establish your place in the literature, so you don't need to 'know the literature' to start
• Capable doctoral students are published well before their thesis is passed. In some disciplines, e.g., the sciences, it is essential.

There is no easy way to make the transition from doctoral student to published scholar. You just need to feel confident and make a start.

Source: R. Murray, (2005) Writing for Academic Journals.

The key thing about academic publishing is that you need to have an 'angle': a new idea; a new take on an old idea; a new way of looking at an old debate; or you need to tap into a current debate with a fresh perspective. This does not mean that you must have a radical, cutting-edge contribution: these are good, but they are rare. Few of us ever make cutting-edge contributions, not even over an entire career. Rather, you need to put a spin on existing literature that makes people see things a bit differently. Fortunately, this is quite achievable.

An example is the three-page paper 1963 by Edmund Gettier about epistemology in philosophy, titled: 'Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?'

Without getting into the technical details, Gettier caused people to reconsider a long, established definition of knowledge with simple counterexamples. His paper spawned voluminous literature trying to explain and deal with the counter examples. Was this contribution cutting edge? Not really. Did it have a new angle? Definitely. Gettier did not publish anything else after this paper and his entire career was built on it. The point is, it is possible to build an academic career by publishing new insights, new twists, on current or existing debates.

Academic publishing advances scholarship and for this you cannot merely reproduce old ideas. Nothing matters more in the publishing game than having a unique angle. Your PhD should advance a new idea, but it needs to fit within current controversies in the literature to be published. But how can one ensure this happens?

You are a working academic with a reasonable career. Or perhaps you are a newly-minted PhD. Or perhaps you are near the end of your PhD journey and want to take the next step.

Here are some reasons to engage in academic publishing.

Boost your academic profile and add to your CV

This is an obvious reason. Academic careers do not progress far unless the person is publishing, and most academic jobs now have publishing as part of the performance appraisal criteria. Often this requirement is mandated in terms of the number of A*-ranked papers to publish in a 2-5-year period.

Set yourself apart from other PhDs

Many people have what it takes to get a PhD, but few follow through to the next step which is to get publications out of it. This is critical if you want an academic career.

Get better and longer-term jobs

Academics who publish get better jobs and have a better chance of obtaining tenured positions. Selection panels for academic jobs often only look at publications lists and teaching scores.

Promotion

Publishing means faster promotion. More papers, the faster and higher you rise.

Grant applications

Publishing leads to having a 'track record' which is valuable for obtaining competitive grants. Without a track record in publications, grants (especially Australian Research Council grants) are near-impossible to get.

Make yourself more employable in other universities

The ability to convince publishers and journal editors to publish you is a compelling argument for employers to take you on. It's a measure of your impact and influence.

Be more employable outside universities

Not everyone can get an academic job as the market is tight, but skills in publication are useful elsewhere such as corporate report writing, writing briefs for politicians, the public service, industry, etc.

Develop skills in academic writing and analysis

There is intrinsic merit in being able to hone your writing and literacy skills to the extent that they are acceptable to publishing houses. Not all PhD students reach this level. It 'caps off' your degree and is a concrete measure of your academic capabilities.

Be engaged in the debates in your profession

There is likewise intrinsic merit in being fully engaged in the debates in your professional area. Most PhDs sit on shelves unread. Being published means you are in the thick of debates with other professional academics.

Provide shoulders others can stand on

An altruistic reason for publishing is that your work is getting out there and being read and influencing others (as opposed to a thesis which generally sits on a library shelf unread). This leads to citations which are a proxy for influence and impact: the more citations you have the more influential you are. (Of course, you can be cited for the wrong reasons—e.g., a poor methodology—but citations are a good thing). Only getting published allows you to influence others. Few will read a thesis. The currency of academia are journal articles, book chapters and books. But other publication outlets are increasingly important too, e.g., articles for 'The Conversation', a media outlet that publishes journalistic-style articles written by academics.

Put your academic qualifications to use

It goes without saying that research is only useful if people can read it, and publication ensures that this happens.

Get that warm fuzzy feeling

It is a marvellous feeling to cap your education off by getting your work peer-reviewed in good quality journals.

Add to the sum of human knowledge

Another altruistic reason to publish is that you will be adding to human knowledge. This is an intrinsically good thing too.

Regardless of your motivation for publishing, it is a new skill you need to acquire as completing a doctorate does not automatically mean success in publication.

There are many kinds of publications and they are not all equally valuable. Some are not worth pursuing—academically-speaking—though they may have merit in other ways (e.g., self-published ‘vanity’ books can win prizes and awards). These less typical publications might also be valued in specific academic contexts, e.g., published poetry is valued in the discipline of creative writing but no other academic contexts, and technical manuals might have value in the context of engineering, but not outside that area. We only look at the traditional academic publishing outlets here.

Test your knowledge of each of the main publication formats by putting them into order of prestige, from most to least academically respectable.

The main publication types

Are you aware of the differences between their publication types? Which is more prestigious? Which is least prestigious? Why? Read on.

Book notes/announcements (editor refereed)

Short text (around 500 words) that advertises the appearance of a new book in an area. They are easy for beginners in the publishing game and are often requested by journal editors via discipline-specific email lists. Writing a book note is a useful way to get your first publication.

Newsletters/newspaper articles (editor refereed)

Newsletters/newspaper articles (editor refereed) range in length and can be quite long, e.g., feature articles in the Higher Education section of The Australian. It is surprisingly difficult to get accepted into these forums, even for experienced academics, owing to the high-pressure deadlines of the media cycle, and the need for things to be topical (often focused directly on a daily issue or debate). They don’t carry much weight academically though they get your name out there.

Reviews (editor refereed)

Reviews (editor refereed) run to 1000 words or more and are of new books. These are easy for beginners in the publishing game and are often requested by journal editors via discipline-specific email lists. Writing them requires more experience than writing book notes. Again, writing these are useful for getting experience in the publication game.

Continuing commentaries/forums (editor refereed)

Continuing commentaries/forums (editor refereed) are sometimes called 'symposia' and are written in response to a target article or book. They often appear in special issues of a journal. A great deal of expertise is required to write these, and they are often solicited, not open to all scholars.

Conference papers

Conference papers can be refereed (i.e., vetted for quality by experts or peers) or non-refereed. They are typically written versions of papers read at a conference and later published in the conference proceedings. Note that not all published conference papers are accepted later in a journal. For more on this see 'Presenting your work at an academic conference'.

Journal articles (refereed, single blind or double blind)

As the name suggests, these are papers published in dedicated journals in the field. There are tiers of journals, from the highest ranked (A or A*) to the lowest unranked journals. Some journals are 'predatory' and produced for money by unscrupulous people. For more on this see Publishing journal articles.

Journal articles (editor refereed)

Journal articles (editor refereed): some journals do not adopt the practice of blind peer reviewing and merely vet articles via the editor or via several editors.

Systematic reviews/meta-analyses

Reviews of an entire body of literature to ascertain an answer to a specific research question. They are common in the health sciences and they follow different publication processes than journal articles. Instead, they are published in databases such as Cochrane and JBI. 

Chapters in books (solicited/commissioned and refereed)

Chapters in books (solicited/commissioned and refereed): are parts of a larger edited book. Typically, an editor solicits chapters (sometimes authors are paid for their contributions) from experts around the world. The editor compiles the book by deciding on order and arrangement and topics covered. The editor considers the thematic unity of the book and often insists on a peer-review process for submissions. Clearly, publishing a chapter in a book requires considerable expertise and indicates reputation, i.e., being known by one’s peers.

Books

Academic respectability differs across the various academic books:

• Scholarly (editor reviewed and refereed): are published via major scholarly publishing houses likes Oxford, Cambridge, MIT, Harvard, Palgrave, Springer, etc. They require a publishing proposal to be submitted and accepted by means of peer review before a publishing contract is offered. These are increasingly an online form. They advance new knowledge in the field of expertise of the author. Sometimes these are called scholarly monographs.
• Textbooks (editor reviewed and refereed): are also published via major scholarly publishing houses likes Oxford, Cambridge, MIT, Harvard, Palgrave, Springer, etc. They require a publishing proposal to be submitted and accepted by means of peer review before a publishing contract is offered. These are increasingly an online form. Unlike scholarly books they do not advance scholarship. Students are the audience for textbooks, both undergraduate and graduate.

Poetry/creative writing anthologies

Poetry/creative writing anthologies are assessed differently from standard academic publications. Note that papers critiquing creative works are written as formal journal articles and are not considered ‘creative’ works.

Self-published work

As the name suggests, this neither peer-reviewed nor published by a scholarly publishing house. It’s a publication you pay for and distribute. These publications are sometimes disparagingly called ‘vanity’ publication.

This depends on what you are publishing. Publishing a conference paper is different from publishing a journal article, and publishing a book chapter is different from publishing a book, however, the process has similar elements.

The process for publishing a journal is roughly as follows:

Target a journal

Choose the journal you want to publish in. This is important. There is no point sending a paper with a qualitative methodology to a journal that publishes mainly empirical work; there’s no point sending a theoretical paper to a journal interested in case studies, and so on. If you do, your paper will get rejected at first base. Either write a paper and look for a journal that publishes that kind of paper (the usual process); or find a journal and write a paper to suit their aims and objectives. To do this, study the journal in your field closely. Read the Aims of the journal /Aims and Scope section on their website. Are the focus areas of the journal the same as yours? Study the names of the editors, review editors, reviewers, and so on. Are they people you recognise from your reading of the literature? If so, the journal may be sympathetic to your work.

Conform to the guidelines

Ensure your paper meets the journal requirements in terms of length and style. Journals are ruthless in terms of these requirements. If they want no more than 7000 words, provide just that; if they want US spelling, provide it; if they want APA6 referencing, provide that; if they want a Structured Abstract—as opposed to a conventional Abstract—provide it. Anything that does not conform to their requirements will be picked up on by the Administrator of the journal and your paper will either be declined or returned to you for reworking. Many journals require a not-for-review copy (with your name and affiliation), and a for-review copy (de-identified) with your self-citations removed from both in-text and reference list citations. Again, you must completely conform to their requirements. (Normally this is done as follows: (XXXXXXX, 2019), and similarly for the reference list.) Sometimes journals require figures and tables to be placed at the end of the document with a line item in the text for where each figure or table is placed (e.g., [Figure 3 about here]). Again, you must comply exactly.

Submitting the paper

Follow their requirements exactly. Normally, there is a process for uploading to their websites. There is typically an online submission portal that is separate from the journal website (ScholarOne Manuscripts is an example of this). They will require you to register and login, provide your name and institutional affiliation, a list of key terms, the broad research area, an abstract, names of co-authors, and possibly even require the names of potential reviewers (these will almost certainly not be used though). There will be upload areas for the for-review document and the not-for-review document. They may require specific filenames, and/or request PDF uploads. They may ask you to be a part of their list of peer reviewers for other manuscripts. It is normal to consent to this.

After submission

These stages of review will follow (though this process varies among journals):

• Administrator sign-off: the administrator does not read the paper but ensures adherence to the guidelines in terms of length and style.
• Initial read: this is usually done by the Editor or Co-editor or Screening editor. They merely skim the paper to decide if it is up to standard. First round rejection occurs here if the paper is poorly written or not on an area of interest for the journal. Assuming it passes this stage, it goes to the next step.
• Associate Editor vetting: this role reviews the paper closely and decides if it is worthy of peer review. If it is, they will allocate a few peer reviewers (normally three or more) to read the paper and provide comments. Peer review is a gratuitous labour or love for no fee, so peer reviewers are hard to find. Associate Editors will therefore send the paper to several reviewers expecting some to back out or decline.
• Peer reviewer vetting: this role is critical. They are an important gatekeeper to publication. The review process is double-blind (the reviewer is not known by the author of the paper, and vice-versa). The reviewer can say what they really think. Often the comments are harsh and critical, and authors need to be prepared for this. They will write lengthy reports on the paper and choose either to accept the paper outright (most unusual); accept it with major revisions (normal); accept it with minor revisions (normal) or reject the paper (common). 

Associate Editor assessment

Armed with three or more reports from blind peer reviewers, this role then reads the paper and makes a judgement. If the reports conflict, they will often seek an additional reviewer. When reviewers are unanimous it doesn’t necessarily mean the AE will not take a contrary view (however, it is unlikely). The AE is required to make their own comments on the paper and call for revisions and changes.

Editor assessment

The Editor reviews the reports from the AE and the reviewers and either recommends publication or rejects or requests revisions of the paper.

Revisions

Once the review process is completed, authors will have to revise the paper by a certain deadline. They will then have to re-submit the paper following the same procedure as before. If the paper is accepted subject to major or minor revisions, it is important to submit a document outlining how the revised paper has catered for the reviewers’ comments.

Use these resources to learn more about publishing and how to prepare your scholarly work to interest a publisher. 

Belcher, W. L. (2009). Writing your journal article in twelve weeks: A Guide to academic publishing success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 

Becker, H. S. (2007). Writing for social scientists: How to start and finish your thesis, book, or article (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 

Berger, A. A. (2008). Writing a journal article. Academic writers’ toolkit: A user’s manual (pp. 111-120). Walnut Creek: California: Left Coast Press. 

Craswell, G. (2005). Journal article and book publication. Writing for academic success: A postgraduate guide (pp. 235-241). London: Sage. 

Day, A. (2008). How to get research published in journals (2nd ed.). Aldershot: Gower. 

Day, R. A. (1998). How to write and publish a scientific paper (5th ed.). Westport, CT: Oryx Press. 

De Lange, P. (2005). The long road to publishing: A user-friendly expose. Accounting Education, 14(2), 133-168. 

Derntl, M. (2005). Basics of research paper writing and publishing. http://egr.uri.edu/wp-uploads/nld/meth-se.pdf 

Hartley, J. (2008). Choosing where to publish. In Academic writing and publishing: A practical handbook (pp. 137-141). New York: Routledge. 

How to get published in an academic journal: Tips from top editors. (2015). The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/jan/03/how-to-get-published-in-an-academic-journal-top-tips-from-editors 

Murray, R. (2005). Targeting a journal. Writing for academic journals (pp. 36-66). New York: Open University Press.