In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

CHAPTER 15 Publishing Most . . . professors are very good at helping their graduate students see their thesis work into publication. There are, unfortunately, some exceptions to this general rule. Although not commonplace, we [The Journal of Wildlife Management] do receive manuscripts that are largely unedited versions of a thesis. —Michael L. Morrison (2005:1313) The scientific paper presents an immaculate appearance which reproduces little or nothing of the intuitive leaps, false starts, mistakes, loose ends, and happy accidents that actually cluttered up the inquiry. —Robert Merton (cited in Peters and Waterman 1982:48) Although scientists typically insist that their research is very exciting and adventurous when they talk to laymen and prospective students, the allure of this enthusiasm is too often lost in the predictable, stilted structure and language of their scientific publications. —Kaj Sand-Jensen (2007:723) Why publish your thesis or dissertation research? I think the reasons might be classified as egotistical, practical, and noble. Egotistically, the publication of your work is a source of pride. This is not at all important to the world, but it is important to your world. It simply feels good to be published, in the same sense it feels good to succeed at any chancy or competitive endeavor. On the practical side, preparation and submission of manuscripts show you have character, and publications strengthen your vita. If you submit a manuscript to a technical journal, you have shown initiative. You have taken a step that separates you from many if not most of your peers, whose findings vanish except as fusty volumes in library stacks. You have recognized and resolved debts to the entity that funded your work, the university that housed it, and the major professor who mentored it; you have shown integrity. You have had the courage to bare your person to a merciless (if metaphorical) rib kicking from referees and editors. You have, in sum, shown that you aspire to be a professional of high standard. These outcomes might tip the balance in your favor in competition for continued graduate study or permanent jobs. If the job is a career in science, publications are crucial. I think publishing has a noble aspect, too. A published article is a contribution to all the knowledge that humankind has accumu- 158 Practice lated or will ever accumulate. That knowledge is the source of progress in understanding and explaining nature. That is what science is all about; science would collapse without a more or less permanent record of research findings. It is one thing for me to extol the act of publishing, quite another for you to consummate it. Peer review and publishing are harsh processes, as they should be, because it is counterproductive to knowingly let error or nonsense adulterate the permanent record (error and nonsense unknowingly slip in, as we have seen). The obligation of referees and editors is to try to keep the permanent record minimally tainted with error and farce. As a result, mainstream journals typically reject 60%–70% of submissions. The purpose of this chapter is to give you some general guidelines on actions you can take to increase the probability of getting a manuscript accepted, given that you have data worth publishing. The actions begin with selecting a journal and preparing a manuscript. Manuscript preparation involves issues of writing and style. If you are skilled or lucky, you will have the opportunity to revise the paper, and I offer some guidelines here. If you are unskilled or unlucky (e.g., draw harsh referees), you will suffer rejection, but that does not mean a manuscript is dead. There are different ways of dealing with a rejection. Did you notice that I used the words lucky and unlucky in addressing acceptance and rejection? Those words hardly seem appropriate for the purportedly dignified and objective process of peer review and editing, yet there is luck involved in publishing. Selecting a Journal The rote recommendation here is to select the leading journal in your field. For example, if you do a thesis in range science, Rangeland Ecology & Management might be your choice. If your work is sufficiently meritorious for a leading journal, it is to your benefit to publish there. Articles in leading journals receive wider distribution and more frequent citations than articles in other journals. On the downside, a leading journal might have high rejection rates. Although it is not supposed to happen in science, technical journals have slants (biased perspectives) just like popular outlets...

Share