John Blackwell’s scientific contributions

This book focuses mainly on writing peer-reviewed papers, since they are key elements of the primary literature, and every scientist who wants a successful academic career needs to write such papers. However, scientists communicate with each other in diverse ways nowadays, ranging from brief emails, letters, text-messages, blogs, Facebook profiles and Twitter ‘tweets’, through press releases, newsletters, oral communications and reports for funding bodies or investors, to grant proposals, short communications, full papers, theses, posters and reviews. The ways in which these communications are composed can have profound effects on scientists’ careers (both positive and adverse). Hence, this chapter discusses how the approach for writing scientific papers can be applied to other communications. The use of electronic communications is considered in some detail because it is all too easy to dash off an email without considering the implications of its content and presentation. A systematic approach to writing literature reviews is also presented.

In most of this guide the authors attempt to distil experience gained in many collective years of writing, editing and reviewing papers that they hope will help readers to maximize chances of their papers being accepted. The main focus in most sections is not on the grammar or construction of sentences in English (or any other language), partly because there are many good grammar books, and partly because readers will already have had many years of learning English. However, it is impossible to describe how to finalize drafts of papers without considering some linguistic aspects. Therefore, in this chapter selected linguistic points relevant to writing scientific papers are addressed, including jargon, tenses, active and passive voices, maintaining narrative flow, use of conjunctions to help present coherent arguments, and plagiarism.

Writing a paper can seem an overwhelming task initially, since there are many points to include, and it may seem very difficult to arrange the information coherently and appropriately. However, scientific papers follow a standard format, with minor variations, based on discrete sections (Abstract/Summary, Introduction, etc.), in which information on various aspects of the study should be presented in a strict order. This format provides a highly convenient template, allowing any paper to be composed by writing brief, simple statements about the rationale, objectives, what was done, the findings and the implications of the study to be reported. In conjunction with sub-headings, if necessary, these statements can provide a framework showing precisely the information (and references) that needs to be included and the order in which it should be presented in each section. Using two illustrative, fictional studies, this chapter details how this systematic approach can be used to draft a paper or short communication for a peer-reviewed journal describing any relatively simple study. The importance of highlighting novelties and anomalies and dealing strategically with limitations is also addressed.

Having completed a study and acquired all the data required to present it, you are ready to begin preparing a paper. However, before beginning to write, you have to take several critical preliminary steps: Your notes must be gathered, a suitable place for writing must be found, a selective literature review may be helpful, a target journal must be identified, linguistic limitations must be recognized, the study must be defined and delimited, and the information must be arranged. Failure to take these steps will make writing more difficult and seriously compromise the chances of publication. This chapter outlines what needs to be done in each of these preliminary steps.

The hypothetical case studies presented in Chapter 3 are relatively straightforward, in that they could be described as single-part investigations. Writing sections of papers describing such studies is also relatively straightforward. However, many investigations are inherently more complex, since several kinds of materials or processes have to be investigated, either sequentially or in parallel. Writing a paper describing such an investigation is also inherently more difficult. However, the same approach can be used, indeed it is more important to construct a robust framework to ensure that no key information is excluded (or unnecessarily repeated) and that it can be readily understood. Thus, this chapter illustrates how the systematic approach can be applied when drafting papers reporting complex studies, illustrating how it could be used to construct frameworks to compose one (or more) paper(s) describing two more elaborate fictitious studies. Key steps here are the use of flow charts and/or sub-headings to generate brief statements about the rationale (etc.) of the study; ensure that no key information is omitted; avoid unnecessary repetition; and present the information consistently (e.g., present and discuss results in the Results and Discussion sections according to the order the corresponding methodology is presented in the Materials & Methods section).

To maximize the chances of publishing scientific texts, such texts need to be clear and concise and provide all the necessary information, highlighting novel aspects of the studies they describe. Composing a scientific paper in this manner, whether in your native language or another language, can be challenging. However, the process can be greatly facilitated by approaching the task systematically, armed with knowledge of the order in which information should be presented and where references should be cited. Between them, the authors have written or edited more than 4,000 scientific papers. Using their combined experience, they provide a systematically structured way in which a paper can be composed, starting from brief statements about key aspects of any scientific study, regardless of its complexity. In addition, they cover other forms of written and electronic communication, including reports, reviews, e-mail, Twitter ‘tweets’, Facebook profiles and website material and dealing with referees’ objections. This chapter introduces the themes.

Having written a paper for a peer-reviewed journal to the best of your ability, the next step is to write a covering letter. This is a key document, since the editor of the target journal will obtain his or her first impressions of the study from it, and it is highly desirable that those impressions are favorable. Having received a paper, the editor will send it to referees, who may make highly constructive comments that substantially improve it. However, authors should always be aware that a paper may be rejected, or they may be asked to make changes to it before it will be accepted, regardless of how brilliant the study may be and how carefully experiments have been designed. This is because referees’ and editors’ opinions are not always correct, and they may reject papers for diverse reasons, some of which have little to do with pure scientific appraisal. Indeed, papers are rarely accepted with no revision. Hence, referees’ objections are the final obstacles that usually have to be overcome. This chapter considers how to draft a covering letter, discusses the nature of editors’ reactions and referees’ objections to papers, then outlines strategies for anticipating and dealing with them, suggesting responses to objections in various circumstances, such as when referees disagree with each other, when their suggestions are impractical, when you disagree with their objections, and when they are right. Possible ways to deal with rude or humiliating comments are also outlined, and the importance of being prepared and remaining calm is stressed.