Cargando…
Strong and Ethical Scholarly Writing for Multidisciplinary Audiences
This presentation will emphasize the importance of plain, good writing. Editors of high impact journals read 10 or more manuscripts per week, and are under pressure to reject 80-90% of them. Regardless of scholarly quality, if the point and contribution are not clear in a quick scan of the paper, it...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7742921/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igaa057.3161 |
_version_ | 1783624099836198912 |
---|---|
author | Meeks, Suzanne |
author_facet | Meeks, Suzanne |
author_sort | Meeks, Suzanne |
collection | PubMed |
description | This presentation will emphasize the importance of plain, good writing. Editors of high impact journals read 10 or more manuscripts per week, and are under pressure to reject 80-90% of them. Regardless of scholarly quality, if the point and contribution are not clear in a quick scan of the paper, it likely will not be reviewed favorably. I will provide tips for strong scientific writing that are commonly violated in manuscript submissions, and provide references for additional writing support. I will also discuss some common publication ethics issues that arise during the review process, including author contributions and embedding your scholarship in the context of prior work. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7742921 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77429212020-12-21 Strong and Ethical Scholarly Writing for Multidisciplinary Audiences Meeks, Suzanne Innov Aging Abstracts This presentation will emphasize the importance of plain, good writing. Editors of high impact journals read 10 or more manuscripts per week, and are under pressure to reject 80-90% of them. Regardless of scholarly quality, if the point and contribution are not clear in a quick scan of the paper, it likely will not be reviewed favorably. I will provide tips for strong scientific writing that are commonly violated in manuscript submissions, and provide references for additional writing support. I will also discuss some common publication ethics issues that arise during the review process, including author contributions and embedding your scholarship in the context of prior work. Oxford University Press 2020-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7742921/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igaa057.3161 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Abstracts Meeks, Suzanne Strong and Ethical Scholarly Writing for Multidisciplinary Audiences |
title | Strong and Ethical Scholarly Writing for Multidisciplinary Audiences |
title_full | Strong and Ethical Scholarly Writing for Multidisciplinary Audiences |
title_fullStr | Strong and Ethical Scholarly Writing for Multidisciplinary Audiences |
title_full_unstemmed | Strong and Ethical Scholarly Writing for Multidisciplinary Audiences |
title_short | Strong and Ethical Scholarly Writing for Multidisciplinary Audiences |
title_sort | strong and ethical scholarly writing for multidisciplinary audiences |
topic | Abstracts |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7742921/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igaa057.3161 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT meekssuzanne strongandethicalscholarlywritingformultidisciplinaryaudiences |