Publication Processes and Strategy 20121109, Chalmers, Gteborg - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Publication Processes and Strategy

20121109, Chalmers, Göteborg Robert Feldt

Based on slides by Claes Wohlin, Mary Shaw, Axel van Lamsverde and Xindong Wu

måndag 12 november 12

Why should you publish?

Communicate your findings

publication = ultimate/finished result of scientific research “Research is never finished until published”

Let community know about your work

recognition, contacts, collaboration

Get useful feedback from peers

external, independent, frank (anonymous)

Strengthen CV and career Show that you have learnt the skills of research

måndag 12 november 12

Where should you publish?

Journal Conference Workshop

Research article Research paper Research paper Short articles Experience reports Experience reports Letters/Comments/ Reviews Industry paper Industry paper Magazine article Poster Position paper Poster

måndag 12 november 12

Where should you publish?

Journal Conference Workshop

Research article Research paper Research paper Short articles Experience reports Experience reports Letters/Comments/ Reviews Industry paper Industry paper Magazine article Poster Position paper Poster

12-40 4-8 1-4 2-15 4-10 4-8 2-10 4-10 4-8 2-10 1-4

A1/A2 A1/A2

# Pages

måndag 12 november 12

Where should you publish?

måndag 12 november 12

Where should you publish?

Journal Conference Workshop

More impact

(especially long-term)

Faster process

(sometimes)

Fastest process More highly rated (except by some/CS) Direct contact & discussions Direct contact & (more) discussions (Much) deeper reviews More community awareness More tentative / preliminary results More space Sometimes more selective Work in progress Wider target audience (often) Best papers for journals Early feedback Fast-track special issues

måndag 12 november 12

Where should you publish?

Journal Conference Workshop

More impact

(especially long-term)

Faster process

(sometimes)

Fastest process More highly rated (except by some/CS) Direct contact & discussions Direct contact & (more) discussions (Much) deeper reviews More community awareness More tentative / preliminary results More space Sometimes more selective Work in progress Wider target audience (often) Best papers for journals Early feedback Fast-track special issues 5-18 4-7 2-5 # Months

måndag 12 november 12

Where should you publish?

Journal vs. Conference - Not Exclusive

Expanded version of conf paper sent to journal Specify additions clearly and up front Rule of thumb: at least 30-50% new material/results/insights

Avoid

Poor-quality journals/conferences Check impact factors, rankings, history, peer experience

måndag 12 november 12

Where should you publish?

Check

Previous papers in the fora Ensure that your paper is within scope (formal scope always listed on journal home page or conference “Call for Papers” (CfP))

For conferences check

“Topics of interest” in Call for papers Who is in the PC (suitable reviewer for your paper? are they well known?)

måndag 12 november 12

Who should be an author?

Each author should have contributed Order of authors should reflect weight of contribution

In producing results and/or idea In writing the paper But often considered best to be among first 2 or to be last. First two should be mentioned when cited (“Feldt and Torkar showed...”,

• therwise “Feldt et al showed...”)

Better to be inclusive than exclusive

You can get enemies if you disregard contributions Never disregard the importance of the basic idea

For Empirical SE, authors from industry can add “relevance”

måndag 12 november 12

Who should be an author?

måndag 12 november 12

Who should be an author?

måndag 12 november 12

Who should be an author?

måndag 12 november 12

Whom are you publishing for?

For the reader, NOT for you

(Or really for the reviewer :) )

Paper = Pedagogical explanation of the results

“You and me together” A journey from where the reader currently is (knows) to the place where you are (understands)

måndag 12 november 12

Whom are you publishing for?

Golden rules:

Know your readers and their background Imagine yourself as a reader Ask yourself questions

Is this interesting? Is this relevant? Is this comprehensible? Does this follow from what I have already said? What questions are coming to the readers mind?

Do not speak highly of yourself or your work

Leave that to the reader

Avoid “strong” adjectives like ”extremely”, use balanced language

måndag 12 november 12

What to claim in a paper?

Typical claims:

First time...:

Solves a problem for the first time Describes a common problem/process for the first time

Improves / Extends existing results/alternatives in 1-2 of dimensions:

Behavior: X has (Higher quality output / Higher success rate / Easier to understand) than Y+Z... Coverage: X applicable in more situations than Y+Z... Efficiency: X is faster or uses less resources than Y+Z... Useability: X is easier to learn/use than Y+Z...

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Before submission)

Check:

Ensure that your paper is within the scope Check guidelines and use checklist (often only for journals) Check formatting and follow them! Use the given templates or stylesheets! (Latex makes it much easier to switch templates) Ensure relation to your previous related papers is clear (if any)

Inform all authors and send the final submission version to them a few days before deadline At submission: Inform co-authors and attach pdf and confirmation letter or number

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (IST - At submission)

Web-based submission system Upload you paper pdf, fill in all info about authors, abstract, keywords etc Then system generates a complete PDF (dl and save) IST: 1 “Editor in Chief” (EiC) & 3 “Associate editors” (AE) Complete PDF forwarded to EiC

EiC checks for sanity and scope (within 1 hour - 7 days) Article then divided between EiC and AEs => One “Handling Editor” (HE)

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (IST - 1st Screening)

Within scope of journal? Fulfills basic requirements on article (abstract, conclusions, overall structure, length)? Already published same or too similar? If in doubt, EiC quickly reviews paper EiC has lot of power and possibility to take decisions

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Scope of journals)

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Scope of journals)

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Scope of journals)

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Finding reviewers)

Finding a reviewer:

IST internal database ScienceDirect or other DB searches within field Reference list in paper People EiC or HE knows or that are well-known (not too well- known is often best) Web search

Reviewer is invited via an email from web system

Try to personalize emails to motivate

Normally 2 reviewers at this point (some have 3)

måndag 12 november 12

måndag 12 november 12

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Finding reviewers)

Reviewers hopefully replies Reminder is sent if no response within a week Response: “Yes”, “No”, or “Yes with later deadline” Normal is to get 6 weeks for a review

IEEE SW typically gives 3 weeks (SW has shortest papers) TSE gives 4-6 depending on length

Reminders are sent if reviewer is late Delays in feedback to author often because reviewers do not respond or are late to deliver

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Decision on paper)

Reviewer recommends:

Accept (almost never) Minor revision (best case, quite rare) Major revision (quite common) Reject (~70% of papers for IST in -08, journals typically in 60-80% range)

Handling Editor:

Looks at all review comments and severity of comments Weighs different reviewers’ comments against each other Weighs the different recommendations Can take decision? Decide or invite one reviewer more

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Revision)

Authors get 3 months to:

Revise paper (must indicate willingness within 1 month) Write a rejoinder

Rejoinder:

Respond to comments Be positive and polite; reviewers are never completely wrong Explain what has been done, motivate what has not Document changes in revised paper based on each comment

Resubmit paper in web system If revision was minor: Try to be quick, HE wants to finish!

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Selection)

Really good articles are always published Really bad articles shall never be published Large number of articles eventually will be published

No major loss if they are not published No major harm if they are published

Published or not means a lot to individual but not to journal

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Statistics)

Journals collect statistics:

Mean time between events Time to first decision is in focus (Goal: 4 months) Acceptance level (currently around 30%) Reviewers’ behavior (response time, recommendation and each review is graded by HE) Authors’ behavior (time for revision, number of submissions to IST and corresponding decisions)

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Misc)

Often at least one per year Guest editors are invited and EiC talks to them directly Editorial board is frequently used for reviews

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Editorial board)

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Editorial board)

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Editorial board)

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Editorial board)

måndag 12 november 12

Process of publishing (Other journals)

Not one model for all journals Empirical SE Journal and RE journal:

EiC (Lionel Briand for EMSE) selects HE from editorial board

SW Quality Journal:

EiC sends general call for HE to editorial board

måndag 12 november 12

Process of Conference/WS

Selecting a general chair and venue

Venue selected 1-3 years before depending on size of conf/WS Steering group selects or email discussion with previous GCs/ PCs Smaller WS: GC often one of the previous years PC Whole organization around GC+PC depending on size: Local arrangement chairs, Industry chair, Web/PR chair, ...

GC and PC decides on theme/topics

Static for the top/strong conferences, more varying for WS For stronger conferences: Steering group must give ok

måndag 12 november 12

Process of Conference/WS

Stronger conferences often have a charter/rules Example: http://www.cs.gmu.edu/icst/icst-charter.html Main points in ICST charter:

Max 3years * 2 in Steering Group Max 3 years in Program Committee Max 50% new TPC members per year TPC: Diversity of gender, geography/location, experience, industry vs academic Balance between research and practice, distinct programs

måndag 12 november 12

Process of Conference/WS

PC chairs invite PC member Creates EasyChair account Sets up any specific rules for the reviews Invites Keynote speakers (this can take a long time) Creates Call for Papers Timing:

CfP sent out 3-6 months before deadline Deadline 3-11 months before conf Reviewers get 2-20 papers each, 1-5 months

måndag 12 november 12

Process of Conference/WS

EasyChair example

måndag 12 november 12