Bodo Stern seminar 02/07/2014

Why Publish

1. lay claims of priority (historic and present)
2. responsibility to communicate results back to the public
   • reach a broader audience than people in the same field

This talk

• not about tricks
• about editors and their task
• corresponding do’s and dont’s

Editor’s as judges

• Editor makes decision. Reviewers are purely advisors
• Editor’s are “not academics”,

Editors goals

• how significant is this advance
• How interesting is the paper across the fields — not just a quality of science judgement

Tips to get the message

• Take adventage of the cover letter!
  • not seen by reviewers: can be broader, can give a punchline that is not being criticized by scientists for accuracy
  • what was known before (more colloquial)
  • not bad to exclude reviewers (generally honored)
• presubmission inquery
  • can send to several journals at once
  • be prepared to accept their advice if you ask for it.
  • very often editor response will not be informative.
• Help the editor understand the logic
  • some non-expert should be able to read and understand the paper.
  • don’t just give it to people in the lab
• Make the figures self-explanatory and easy to understand
  • editors have ways to review quickly. Often look at figures before any of the text.
• biggest problem with papers is the logic.

Editors as Mediators

• Editors would rather be on the side of publishing something that’s incomplete if it will be cited.
• Reviewers will always point out where the story could go.
• Editor’s need to take risks, just because it’s published in cell doesn’t mean it’s wrong’.

Editorial letters: invitation to resubmit

• Look for we would be happy to consider or we would be prepared to consider. Anything else is a rejection, regardless of positive feedback.
• if you want to go further you better get in touch with the editor.
• If positive, get in touch with an editor early
• be positive in line-by-line responses. don’t be aggressive, be constructive.
• email first, can set up a time to call and adress

Rejections

• if rejected: don’t respond within 24hrs. this will not go over well
• stick purely to science. Can present facts for why reviewer is incorrect.
• Take-home message: Be Assertive. Easier to be assertive if you know the editors (this is an advantage of senior faculty).

Meet and talk to editors

• Editor’s like to meet people in science. More editors are going to conferences.
• Editor’s will recruit papers that they really want
• certainly want new reviewers.
• review for journals you want to publish in.
• Journals have pet projects they want to publish more in. Meet editors find out what they are looking for.
• Bodo Cell didn’t use to publish a lot of single molecule. Less competition at first.
• new interests of journals not advertised on web
• get a sense of the editor and their logic as a scientist. See how you relate. Find an editor you respect.

On reviewing papers

• easier to find the flaws and plus than make decision.
• Goals:
  • review the technical quality (this the editor wont overrule)
  • comment on significance / context / clarity (these are also up to editor)
  • don’t give a laundry list. At least sub-class them: critical, supporting, etc.
  • don’t keep all the signficance etc arguments in confidential comments. Keep it all in the open review if possible.
  • Ask people in your lab to help you and acknowledge in your comments to the editor who helped you.
  • either keep confidential or sign it.

After publication. Online presence of scientific work

• Work with Harvard communications office (Peter Reuell preuell@fas.harvard.edu)
• good to get a press release.
• Add ‘final author version’ (i.e. your format not their layout / copy-editing). You always own this copy.
• Add paper to PubMedCentral (required by NIH, need PubMedCentral ID#s). all program officers will check that the papers are there.

Copyright and open access

• Harvard keeps copyright to everything (since 2008)
• Nature, Science, Cell require Harvard to waive this copyright
• NIH requires final-author version on PubMedCentral within a year (many journals do this automatically, but you need to check).
• number of scientists has tripled in recent years, Cell, Nature, Science have flat rates