-
Join 35,128 other subscribers
Follow me on Twitter
My Tweetspatter on facebook
-
Recent Posts
- can you cut and paste early text into your thesis?
- developing a research agenda
- getting to grips with PSA – Pre Submission Angst
- writing on the fly
- on alt writing
- does the find-a-journal beta service work?
- academic writing knowhow – setting the scene
- the end of AcWriMo – now what?
- revising drafts – #AcWriMo
- Are long sentences always bad? #AcWriMo
- not writing as usual #AcWriMo
- Ten quick ideas for refreshing your writing #AcWriMo
Copyright
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
SEE MY CURATED POSTS ON WAKELET
LOOKING FOR POSTS ON WRITING FOR JOURNALS? REVISING AND EDITING? GIVING FEEDBACK AND REVIEWING? READING? GIVING A CONFERENCE PAPER? VISIT MY WAKES ON https://wakelet.com/@patter- abstracts academic blogging academic book academic writing acwrimo argument authority in writing blogging blogging about blogging books book writing chapter co-writing conclusion conference conference papers conference presentation contribution data data analysis doctoral research early career researchers editing examiner feedback introduction journal journal article literature mapping literature review literature reviews literature themes methods chapter peer review PhD publishing reader reading research research methods revision revision strategy starting the PhD supervision Tate Summer School theory thesis time Uncategorized voice
Top Posts & Pages
- aims and objectives - what's the difference?
- avoiding the laundry list literature review
- writing a bio-note
- I can't find anything written on my topic... really?
- can you cut and paste early text into your thesis?
- 20 reading journal prompts
- why is writing a literature review such hard work? part one
- collective free writing - inkshedding
- concluding the journal article
- recycling your thesis text - is it self plagiarism?
Meta
Tag Archives: rejection
why journal articles get rejected – #3
Every journal article is expected to make a contribution. The writer has to say something that adds to the conversation about the particular topic in the target journal. And through this addition, they participate in the discussion in the field. … Continue reading
Posted in contribution, journal article, peer review, rejection, significance
Tagged contribution, journal article, Pat Thomson, peer reveiw, rejection, significance
1 Comment
why journal articles are rejected #2
Here’s the thing. Journal Editors say that one of the major reasons that papers are rejected is when the writer is not clear about their point, and their argument. Accepted journal articles have a point to make. They work with … Continue reading
Posted in argument, journal article, rejection, the point
Tagged argument, journal article, Pat Thomson, rejection, structured abstract, the point
Leave a comment
dealing with rejection
This is a guest post from Dan Cleather. Dan is a strength coach, educator, scientist and anarchist. His latest book, “Subvert! A philosophical guide for the 21st century scientist”, was published in May. Being an academic requires a thick skin. Very … Continue reading
Posted in academic writing, peer review, rejection, research funding
Tagged Dan Cleather, peer review, rejection, research funding
4 Comments
the appraisal and rejection of conference abstracts
I had an email recently from an early career researcher who’d just had an abstract for a conference knocked back. When they asked for feedback, they were shocked by what they read. Presumably assuming that the writer would never see … Continue reading
Posted in abstracts, conference papers, early career researchers, peer review, rejection, reviewing
Tagged conference abstract, Pat Thomson, rejection, reviewing
8 Comments
the cruel reviewer
It’s funny how the bad stuff sticks with you. I was thinking about this last week as I was giving feedback after a viva and hoping that the candidate was hearing all the good things and not just the small … Continue reading
Posted in feedback, journal, rejection, revision
Tagged bad review, Hugh Miller, Pat Thomson, rejection, Steven Mumford
16 Comments
what’s at stake for an early career researcher in going for publication in a top ranked journal ?
I often get asked in workshops whether early career researchers should aim to get into a top journal. I want to give the first two parts of my answer in this post. My first response – WHO IS SAYING THIS … Continue reading
patter 