Owan Valentine

COMPLEXITIES INVOLVED IN PUBLISHING IN REPUTABLE JOURNALS

Publishing in Reputable journals can involve various complexities that emerging researchers should be aware of. These include:

1. Quality Standards: Reputable journals typically have strict quality standards and peer-review processes. Getting accepted in such journals often requires high-quality research that meets the rigorous standards set by the journal's editorial board and reviewers. For instance, the Web of Science and Scopus databases consistently enforces their quality assurance policies on both newly accepted and previously indexed journals. Journals found wanting are discontinued from coverage, albeit they can be readmitted if it is evident that such journals have turned a new leaf.

2. Competitive Landscape: Reputable journals receive many submissions, leading to increased competition for publication slots. Researchers may face challenges in standing out among the numerous submissions received by these journals. Thus, there is a high rate of rejections among Reputable journals. Today, many journals advertise their rejection rates on their websites; the higher the rejection rate, the tougher it is to publish. Publishing in a journal with a high rejection rate is gradually gaining popularity as a sign of quality, even though the number has no intrinsic value.

3. Lengthy Review Process: Peer-review processes in reputable journals can be time-consuming. It may take several months or even longer for reviewers to evaluate the submission and provide feedback. This lengthy review period can delay the publication of research findings. Therefore, authors seeking to publish in reputable journals must start their journey early enough.

4. Revisions and Resubmissions: It is common for researchers to receive revision requests from reviewers, regardless of author status or affiliation. There can be minor or major revision requests from journal editors and/or reviewers. Addressing these comments and making necessary revisions can be time-consuming and may require additional experiments or analyses.

The world of academia is intricately woven with pursuing knowledge and disseminating research findings to a wider audience. Research dissemination is the most important aspect of the research process, and one way to achieve this is through the publication of scholarly output. For researchers, publication in reputable journals plays a pivotal role in shaping their academic careers, validating their work, and contributing to the advancement of their respective fields. Among the most esteemed platforms for scholarly publication are Scopus-indexed journals, renowned for their rigorous peer-review processes and high impact on the academic community.
However, navigating the complexities of research dissemination and securing publication in Scopus-indexed journals involves more than just scientific rigour and novelty. It requires a comprehensive understanding of the intricacies and politics that govern the publication landscape. In the next few days, we will have an opportunity of delving into the multifaceted aspects of research dissemination in action, shedding light on the challenges and opportunities researchers encounter when seeking to publish in Scopus-indexed journals. This series aims to equip aspiring authors with the insights necessary to navigate the path to successful publication and enhance their scholarly impact in the global academic arena by exploring the prevailing intricacies and the subtle political dynamics at play.

I've just reached 400 followers! Thank you for continuing support. I could never have made it without each one of you. 🙏🤗🎉
Those yet to follow my page should try and do so.

Social Media and Research Dissemination Technological innovation, especially web 4.0 and Internet developments, has made communication and networking seamlessly. Despite the benefits of using technological offerings, most scholars have yet to utilise these provisions to their advantage. Those in the entertainment industry have since adopted the Internet and moved their trade from traditional media to social media, generating seemingly more income than was previously recorded....

Social Media and Research Dissemination Social Media and Research Dissemination Technological innovation, especially web 4.0 and Internet developments, has made communication and networking seamlessly. Despite the benefits of using techn…

SALAMI SLICING: A HINDRANCE TO THE PUBLICATION OF ACADEMIC ARTICLES IN REPUTABLE JOURNALS

In my few years of interacting with academics seeking to publish in high-quality and well-respected publications, the issue of rejection is very pervasive. Most scholars have admitted to receiving as many as 40 rejections across their several articles in a Calendar. Nevertheless, facing rejections in the publication process is an academic culture that every scholar must get accustomed to since, as I used to say, "no one is bigger than a rejection." However, the reason(s) for specific rejections should be a cause for concern, and of course, receiving too many rejections from different publication attempts is another. When people come to me with frustrations over their rejections, I contextualize by looking at the paper to ascertain why they were rejected. As a reviewer for several leading journals in my field and other related areas, I also reject papers for many reasons. One common trend accounting for over 50% (An estimated value from intuition and not backed by any evidence) of the rejections these people get or that reviewers met out is the problem of "salami slicing".

Salami slicing, also known as "slice and dice" or "least publishable unit" (LPU) publishing, is a practice where researchers break up a larger study into several smaller publications, often with minor variations, in order to increase the number of publications and boost their academic record. For instance, a fresh doctoral graduate once discussed the possibility of publishing eight papers from his dissertation with eight variables and/or hypotheses so that each hypothesis or research question would stand as a paper. The trend of salami slicing is pervasive in Nigeria; perhaps it was an inherited culture from the previous generation of scholars (where print publications were rampant). Most papers in many Nigerian journals (in my field) have been published under this framework.

However, most celebrated scholars are facing a torrid experience publishing in reputable journals, especially when publications in journals indexed in Web of Science or Scopus are now used for assessment, promotion and funding by some Nigerian institutions, aligning with global best practices. The salami slicing that once worked for local journal publications is now witch-hunting most scholars at the international level. In fact, it has unintentionally and indirectly prevented many academics from getting published with the "big guys" (top publishers or journals).

The question is, how can/does salami slicing prevent me from publishing in top journals? The simple answer is that this practice can lead to increased journal rejection rates for several reasons.

Firstly, salami slicing can lead to a proliferation of articles with similar content, which can be seen as redundant by journal editors and reviewers. This can be frustrating for journals, which have limited space and resources to devote to publishing articles, and readers, who may be exposed to the same content multiple times. As a result, editors and reviewers may be more inclined to reject articles that appear to be minor variations on previously published work.

Secondly, salami slicing can result in a lack of coherence and depth in each publication. When a larger study is broken up into smaller pieces, each publication may lack the necessary detail and context to stand alone as a complete study. This can lead to confusion and frustration for readers, who may have to read multiple publications to understand the research fully. In addition, editors and reviewers may be more likely to reject articles that lack a clear focus or fail to provide sufficient detail.

Thirdly, salami slicing can raise concerns about the integrity of the research. When researchers break up a larger study into multiple publications, they may be tempted to present the results in a way that is more favourable or sensationalized than if they were presenting the entire study as a whole. This can lead to accusations of selective reporting or data manipulation, damaging the researchers' reputations and leading to journal rejection.

Fourthly, salami slicing can be seen as a sign of a lack of originality or creativity in the research. When researchers resort to breaking up a larger study into smaller pieces, it may suggest that they cannot generate enough original ideas or data to support a full publication. This can be a red flag for journal editors and reviewers, who may be looking for innovative and groundbreaking research to publish.

Finally, salami slicing can also lead to a higher rejection rate because it can be seen as a violation of ethical standards in academic publishing. Some journals have policies against salami slicing and may reject articles that appear to be part of a larger study divided into multiple publications. This can be particularly problematic in fields where publication records are closely scrutinized, such as in academic faculty's tenure and promotion process.

In conclusion, salami slicing can lead to increased journal rejection rates for several reasons, including redundancy, lack of coherence and depth, integrity concerns, originality, and ethical concerns. Salami slicing also affects citation rates and other metrics, such as the journal's impact factor (at the journal level) and h-index (at the author level). As such, researchers should be cautious about resorting to salami slicing and instead strive to present their research in a complete, coherent, and innovative way.

Valentine Owan
Follow my page for more updates at https://web.facebook.com/VowanBoss/

Owan Valentine Researcher | Data Analyst | Psychometrician | Mentor | Teacher

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SCOPUS AND SCIMAGO DEMYSTIFIED

Over the last few years, there has been a proliferation in how scholars use the terms "Scopus" and "Scimago." I noticed that most academic institutions in some developing countries, especially African ones, are not using these terms appropriately. As an aftermath, most of these institutions have made grave mistakes that cost some people their promotion opportunities. It is common to hear scholars say, "I have about three Scopus and four Scimago papers" Really? Each time I hear this, I get pi**ed off. However, there are many instances where I have had reasons to sit some academics down and explain the relationship and differences between these two bibliographic databases. Today, I have decided to clarify the relationship between them in writing.

Scopus and Scimago are two popular bibliographic databases widely used by researchers, librarians, and academic institutions. While they are related, they serve different purposes and have distinct features.

Scopus is a bibliographic database that indexes scholarly literature in various fields, including science, technology, medicine, social sciences, and humanities. It is owned by Elsevier and is one of the largest citation databases, containing over 75 million records of scholarly articles, conference proceedings, and books. Scopus provides tools for citation analysis, allowing researchers to track the impact of their work and identify influential publications in their field.

Scimago, on the other hand, is a web platform that uses data from Scopus to provide metrics and rankings of academic journals, research institutions, and countries. It was developed by the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) and is freely available to users. Scimago uses a range of indicators, such as citation counts, h-index, and SJR (Scimago Journal Rank), to rank journals and institutions based on their scientific output and impact.

You can now see that it is Scopus journals that are, in fact, housed on the Scimago website. However, how Scimago uses the data obtained from Scopus differs from how Scopus uses it. Now, let us look at this relationship from an analogical perspective. Let us liken the Scopus database to INEC and Scimago to the iRev portal. INEC determines who is qualified to contest in an election, accredits voters, collects data about how many people voted who and so on. On the iREV portal, the results of all contestants cutting across different offices are published. The ranking is based on the number of votes each contestant receives in a given category. Therefore, it is wrong to think that the iREV portal contestants differ from those cleared by INEC. It is INEC that feeds the iREV portal with information. Therefore, anything INEC upload is what iREV will publish or display and nothing more.

Back to the main gist, Scopus curates and validates all the journals before deciding which to index (accept) or otherwise. Scopus determines which journals are no longer complying with the minimum standards and discontinues them on three bases - radar, metrics or publication concerns. Scopus is also responsible for tracking all the citations garnered by a journal over time and computes metrics such as h-index, citescore, etc. Scimago only receives these data from Scopus and uses them to compute other metrics such as journal ranking, institutional ranking, and quartile placement (such as Q1, Q2, Q3 or Q4) relative to journals in specific disciplines. I.e., journals are only ranked within disciplines such as Education, Public Health, Mental Psychology and so on. When Scopus discontinues a journal, the journal also stands discontinued in Scimago, and if the former readmits a journal, the journal also stands readmitted in the latter. Therefore, start now to see Scopus and Scimago as one entity operating in different forms, such as the holy trinity.

Owan Valentine
Follow my page at https://web.facebook.com/VowanBoss for more exciting academic updates directly from the source.

Owan Valentine Researcher | Data Analyst | Psychometrician | Mentor | Teacher

TYPES OF ARTICLES PUBLISHABLE IN ACADEMIC JOURNALS

Scholarly works are written to communicate research findings, theories, and arguments to an academic audience. These articles are published in different forms in journals or even books. Most academic articles typically undergo a peer-review process in which experts in a given field evaluate the work for quality and originality. However, it has been observed that most young and even seasoned scholars do not understand the types of scholarly articles that can be published in journals. Consequently, some are only conversant or limited to publishing research articles and opinion/position papers. This post discusses different types of academic articles that are commonly published in academic reports. This list is non-exhaustive but extends beyond the commonly known types.

1. Research article: These articles report the results of original research studies. They typically follow a standard structure that includes an introduction, methods section, results section, discussion section, and conclusion. Research articles can be further classified into experimental, quasi-experimental, correlational, and descriptive. Word counts for research articles can vary but are often between 5,000 to 10,000 words. Research articles are an excellent way to disseminate original research findings to a wider audience. They provide a structured framework for presenting research and can help researchers communicate their work to other scholars in their field. Research articles are often necessary when presenting new research, especially when the results are complex or novel. The advantage of research articles is that they provide a detailed account of the study's methods, results, and conclusions.

2. Review articles: Review articles are an excellent way to synthesise existing research on a particular topic. They are useful for researchers who want to understand the current state of research on a topic and for scholars who want to develop new research questions or hypotheses. Review articles can be either systematic or narrative and provide critical literature analysis. The advantage of review articles is that they provide a comprehensive overview of the topic and can help researchers identify gaps in the literature. Review articles can also be a good way to sustain publication without funding, laboratory equipment or other challenges limiting the conduct of empirical lab or fieldwork. Review articles also attract many citations and are mostly recommended for people seeking to increase their citations. However, these articles are mostly written by highly experienced individuals knowledgeable about their field. Review papers are usually solicited by journal editors from experienced scholars, although they can also be written at will. The word counts for review articles can range from 3,000 to 8,000 words. There are three types of review articles - Scoping reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. These types of literature reviews help synthesise existing research on a particular topic. However, their research questions, methodology, and analysis techniques differ (I will do another post differentiating these three). Note: A review article is different from an opinion or position paper (I have heard many people misunderstand them).
Theoretical articles: Theoretical articles are useful for proposing new theories or providing critical analyses and evaluations of existing theories. They can help researchers develop new hypotheses and guide future research. The advantage of theoretical articles is that they provide a framework for understanding a particular phenomenon or topic. The word counts for theoretical articles can range from 4,000 to 8,000 words.

3. Opinion articles: Opinion articles are useful for presenting the author's perspective on a particular topic. They can critically analyse existing research or propose new research questions or hypotheses. The advantage of opinion articles is that they can provide a platform for different perspectives and stimulate debate in the field. The word counts for opinion articles can range from 1,000 to 3,000 words.

4. Case studies: Case studies are useful for providing detailed descriptions and analyses of specific cases or examples. They can help researchers understand a particular phenomenon or topic in-depth and provide insights not available through other research methods. The advantage of case studies is that they provide rich, detailed data that can help researchers develop new hypotheses or understand complex phenomena. The word counts for case studies can vary, but they are typically between 2,000 to 5,000 words.

5. Brief reports: Brief reports are concise documents that summarise a research study or project. They are useful for quickly disseminating new findings or highlighting important but preliminary results. They can help researchers share their work with a wider audience and provide a platform for early-career researchers to present their findings. The advantage of brief reports is that they are short and concise, which makes them easy to read and understand. They are typically shorter than technical reports, ranging from one to ten pages. The word counts for brief reports are typically between 1,000 to 2,500 words. Brief reports are used in various fields, including healthcare, education, and business, where a quick and informative overview of a project or study is needed. Brief reports typically include an introduction, methods, results, and conclusions in a more condensed form.

6. Technical reports: These articles provide a detailed description of a specific project or research study. Technical reports are often used in industry or government settings to communicate findings to stakeholders. They may include technical specifications, data tables, and other supporting materials. Word counts for technical reports can range from 2,500 to 10,000 words, depending on the level of detail required. A technical report includes background information, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Technical reports are typically longer than brief reports, ranging from a few to hundreds of pages. They often include technical drawings, graphs, tables, and a bibliography or references section. Technical reports are commonly used in engineering, science, and other technical fields where detailed analysis and explanation of results are required. The intended audience of technical reports is usually experts in the field, and the reports are used to communicate findings and make recommendations for further research or actions.

7. Corrigendum: A corrigendum is an academic article used to correct errors in a previously published paper. These errors may be due to mistakes in data, analysis, or interpretation, or they may result from errors in the production or printing of the original article. Corrigenda are usually brief articles that list the errors and their corrections. They may also explain how the errors occurred and how they were discovered. Corrigenda are published in the same journal as the original article and are linked to the original article to ensure that readers are aware of the corrections. The length of a corrigendum can vary, but it is typically less than 500 words. The purpose of a corrigendum is to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record by correcting errors and ensuring that the correct information is available to readers. These articles may be written by the original author(s) of the previous work or by a new author(s) that observed the error. Corrigenda are treated as articles in their own right, with unique digital object identifiers or weblinks linked to the previous publication. For example, Owan Valentine makes a mistake in his "structural equation modelling" paper, but Dr Eunice Akuru notices the error. She can write a corrigendum to the journal where Owan published his work. The editors will go through the corrigendum and publish it in Dr Akuru's name. The corrigendum will be assigned its unique DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and will reflect in Dr Akuru's Scopus, Web of Science or Google Scholar profile as her publication. The good thing is that journals do not charge fees to publish corrigenda, and they do not also undergo formal peer review. You can see that it is one of the fastest means of getting a publication. However, you would not want to be the whistle-blower always, do you? This explains why you do not see us using this means to publish frequently, but I know some scholars that live and sleep in writing corrigenda.

8. Editorial letters: These are academic articles written by the editors of a journal or by invited experts. They are typically published alongside other articles and can serve various purposes. One common purpose of an editorial letter is to provide commentary or analysis on a particular issue or topic. Editorial letters may express an opinion, offer insight, or provide context to help readers better understand the subject. They may also highlight new research or trends in a field. Another purpose of editorial letters is to update the journal's policies and procedures. These letters may announce changes in the editorial board, submission guidelines, or review process. Editorial letters are usually short, ranging from a few hundred to a few thousand words. They are typically written in a less formal style than research articles and may be more accessible to a wider audience.

9. Data articles: These are academic articles that provide detailed descriptions of research datasets rather than presenting original research findings. They are intended to make research data more accessible, shareable, and discoverable. They may be published in journals specialising in data management, data sharing, or a specific research field. Journals that publish data articles include Scientific Data (Nature), Data Science Journal (CODATA), Data in Brief (Elsevier), F1000Research (Taylor and Francis), Data Intelligence (ACM) and others. Data articles may also include data visualisation and analysis tools, as well as a discussion of the potential uses and limitations of the data. One advantage of data articles is that they provide a means for researchers to receive credit and recognition for their data contributions, which can incentivise data sharing and encourage more open and collaborative research practices. Data articles are typically shorter than traditional research articles and may be accompanied by the actual dataset or a link to the dataset repository.

10. Methods articles: A methods article is an academic article that describes research methods used in a study. It provides a detailed description of the research design, data collection and analysis methods used and can promote standardised research methods, ensuring replicable and reliable research findings.

Owan, Valentine

Becoming a published author in a high impact journal: Tips for beginners

Becoming a published author in high impact journals is a challenging but rewarding task. Most people keep indicating interest to communicate their findings to the public, but do not follow the right practices or exude the right attitude needed to navigate the challenging process. I must confess that becoming published (in a top journal) is not rosy as some people like Collins Edet make it seems. In fact, academic writing is the most difficult form of writing on earth relative to writing scripts, songs, poetry etc. One reason is because of the rigorous peer review process that other forms lack.

Nevertheless, there are some things you must know to enable you get published in a respectable journal. Below are some tips that should help, albeit the list is non-exhaustive.

1. Choose the right journal: It is essential to choose the right journal that aligns with your research interests and fits the scope of your research. You can start by reading the guidelines and aims of the journal to ensure that your work meets the requirements. Also, ensure that you have specific journals you follow and read their output issue-by-issue. That way, you stay abreast with the current issues and interests of the journal. People get most rejections because their topics misalign with the journal's interests.

2. Conduct thorough research: Conducting thorough research is crucial to ensure that your work is original, relevant, and adds value to the existing literature. You should also consider the quality of your data and the validity of your conclusions. A good paper takes months and in some cases, years to complete. You cannot write a good paper in a day, few days and expect it to command the quality desired by editors or compete with other papers on their desks. Be warned.

3. Write a clear and concise paper: Writing a clear and concise paper is essential to ensure that your work is easy to understand and provides a clear message. You should follow the guidelines of the journal and pay attention to the structure, language, and formatting of your paper. Follow the writing conventions in the field. Avoid all forms of malpractices related to citations or references. Make sure you cite more of sources from top journals too. E get why.

4. Get feedback and revise: Getting feedback from colleagues, mentors, and peers is crucial to improve the quality of your work. You should also revise your paper several times to ensure that it meets the standards of the journal and is of high quality.

5. Submit to the right journal: Once you have completed your paper, you should submit it to the right journal. You should carefully follow the guidelines of the journal and ensure that you have included all the necessary information.

6. Be patient: The process of publishing in high impact journals can be long and challenging. You should be patient and persistent and be prepared to face rejection. You should also use the feedback you receive to improve your work and increase your chances of acceptance.

7. Network: Networking with other researchers and experts in your field can be helpful to gain insights and receive feedback. You can attend conferences, workshops, and seminars, and participate in online forums and discussion groups.

8. Accept rejections as part of the process and everyone (including the editor rejecting your paper) gets it. No one is above rejection, so you can never be above it. Reasons for rejections are sometimes subjective, explaining why you can never be above it. Deal with rejection and be strong enough to rise up and face the challenge.

In summary, becoming a published author in high impact journals requires dedication, hard work, and persistence. By following these tips, you can increase your chances of success and achieve your goals.

CITATION AND REFERENCING: THE REFERENCE LIST PT2

B. Works with two authors
i. Book
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. (2014). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

ii. Journal article
Bassey, B. A., & Owan, V. J. (2018). Innovation management and effectiveness of educational research in tertiary institutions in Cross River State, Nigeria. EPRA International Journal of Research and Development (IJRD), 3(13), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4320509

iii. Chapter in Book
Bassey, B. A., & Owan, V. J. (2020). Higher-ordered test items as assessment practice in higher education during Pandemics: Implications for effective e-learning and safety. In V. C. Emeribe, L. U. Akah, O. A. Dada, D. A. Alawa, & B. A. Akuegwu (Eds.), Multidisciplinary issues in health, human kinetics and general education practices (pp. 395–409). University of Calabar Press. https://bit.ly/31J4Zil

C. Works with three to twenty authors
i. Book
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-67-2

ii. Journal article
Aduma, P. O., Owan, V. J., Akah, L. U., Alawa, D. A., Apie, M. A., Ogabor, J. O., Olofu, M. A., Unimna, F. A., Ebuara, V. O., Essien, E. E., & Essien, C. K. (2022). Interactive analysis of demographic variables and occupational stress on university lecturers’ job performance. Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 10(2), 88–102. https://doi.org/10.18488/73.v10i2.2952

iii. Chapter in Book
Owan, V. J., Ekpenyong, J. A., Asuquo, M. E., Okon. J. R., & Agurokpon, D. C. (2022). A digital library for researchers, scientists, and scholars: Mendeley desktop application. In T. Masenya (Ed.), Innovative technologies for enhancing knowledge access in academic libraries (pp. 89–104). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-3364-5.ch006

D. Works with more than twenty authors
Owan, V. J., Bassey, B. A., Arop, F. O., Alawa, D. A., Akah, L. U., Ekpenyong, J. A., Asuquo, M. E., Agurokpon, D. C., Owan, M. V., Ojong, C. O., Beshel, C. A., Mbon, U. F., Osim, R. O., Emanghe, E. E., Ekuri, E. E., Asuquo, P. N., Chuktu, O., Okon, S., Ogar, J. O., …, Owan T. J. (2022). Development and standardisation of research funding questionnaire. Global Journal of Research Practice, 23(2), 302-314.

A Digital Library for Researchers, Scientists, and Scholars: Mendeley Desktop Application This chapter discusses the application of Mendeley desktop in academic and research libraries. The features of Mendeley were used to justify it as a digital library for researchers, scientists, and scholars. The importance of Mendeley desktop application as a digital library was also compared with a...