My basic answer is:
1) Know your field. What are the top-tier journals? Mid-level? Which ones do researchers read? Which ones do practitioners read? Decide your audience and aim for the highest level.
2) Review what journals you most cite. If you are using them in your own research, you are probably interested in and writing for the same audience. Make a list of journals that seem to fit your ideas, style and intended audience.
3) Know the journal. Read several of the latest issues. Remember, editors change and then styles might change. Read the directions to authors - aim/scope, style, word count, special sections etc. Tailor your writing to fit the audience and journal. I usually print a few model articles so I can refer to them as a write for style and format ideas.
4) Revise and Resubmit is NOT a rejection! If the editor took the time to send the article out and compile the reviewers' comments, then the article is a fit for the journal with revisions. Do not shelve the article. Use the feedback to revise and resubmit ASAP. Only shop for a new journal if the revisions significantly change your interpretation of data or wildly misinterpret your argument. But, be open-minded to the feedback, the reviewers are experts in your field.
This is my basic advise. However, Nick Hopwood,a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), has a much more detailed blog post, A guide to choosing journals for academic publication, that is worth a read.
One of his first discussions is whether an author should pick the journal and then write, or write and find the appropriate journal. His answer, "Neither. Both." which is accurate. The journal influences how you might write it up, but your methodology and topic influences which journal to choose.
He also has a detailed explanation of rankings of journals. Although he is writing from an Australian perspective, much of his advise is relevant in the US.
No comments:
Post a Comment