Research Writing Roadmap: A Practical Guide to Structure, Language, and Publishing is a clear, practical guide for students, early-career researchers, and educators who want to write and publish academic work with confidence. Unlike many overly technical texts, this book bridges the gap between knowing research and communicating it effectively. It offers both a strategic roadmap for academic publishing and a hands-on language toolkit for writing strong journal articles, theses, and dissertations.
The book is divided into two accessible sections. The first covers the essentials of academic publishing—how to choose a research topic, understand journal types and rankings, navigate the peer review process, use digital tools and AI, and turn a thesis into a publishable paper. The second section focuses on the language of academic writing, offering practical templates and expressions for each section of a research paper, all supported by real examples from published work.
This book is ideal for anyone looking to improve their research writing. With its blend of theory, strategy, and authentic language support, Research Writing Roadmap makes the complex world of academic writing more approachable—and more publishable.
About the Authors
Preface
Section General Information on Article Writing and Journals
What Does “Q” Mean in SCOPUS-Indexed Journals?
Section Two: Language of Academic Writing
Section General Information on Article Writing and Journals
(This section is intended for researchers and students from all fields of study.)
Benefits of Research and Academic Writing
The benefits of conducting research and engaging in academic writing can generally be summarized as follows:
- Advancement of knowledge and addressing challenges within the academic community
- In-depth examination and critical exploration of concepts
- Access to better academic and professional opportunities
- Increased chances of university admission and immigration
- Enhanced academic ranking for university faculty
- Greater likelihood of PhD program acceptance for students
- Contribution to the transfer of advanced knowledge to future generations
- Gaining expertise and academic credibility as a scholar
- Stimulation of the mind and encouragement of critical and creative thinking
Ethical Principles in Conducting Research
- Avoid plagiarism by properly referencing all sources. Keep in mind that a higher number of references often reflects the depth and credibility of a study.
- Report data and results honestly, and refrain from fabrication or manipulation of findings (i.e., research misconduct).
- Protect the confidentiality and privacy of all research participants.
- Avoid any form of bias when interpreting data and findings.
- When involving human participants, ensure that their participation is voluntary. They should be allowed to withdraw at any time if they experience discomfort or personal issues.
- If animals are used in the research, treat them humanely and ensure their well-being throughout the study.
Key Differences Between a Research Article and a Thesis
A common question among students is: What are the main differences between a research article and a thesis? The two generally differ in three key aspects, as explained below:
1. Audience
A thesis is typically written for a specialized audience, such as university professors and academic experts. In contrast, a research article is often written for a broader readership and uses simpler, more accessible language.
2. Format
A thesis is usually written in a book-like format, often in accordance with institutional guidelines. An article, on the other hand, represents a condensed part of a thesis or a standalone study and typically occupies only a few pages in a journal after acceptance. Article formats vary from journal to journal and are usually outlined in sections such as "Instructions for Authors," "Guide for Authors," or "Submission Guidelines."
3. Length
There are generally no strict word limits for theses, which can extend up to around 25,000 words or more. Research articles, however, are usually subject to specific word limits set by journals—typically between 2,500 and 5,000 words. Articles falling outside this range are relatively rare.
Identifying a Suitable Research Topic and Research Gap
What is a Research Gap?
A research gap refers to an area or topic that has not been sufficiently or thoroughly investigated in previous studies. In such areas, the available information is often incomplete or fragmented, which in turn provides researchers with the motivation to explore the topic further. In academic writing, research gaps are typically addressed in the Statement of the Problem section, which is a subcomponent of the research introduction.
The Importance of a Research Gap
A well-defined research gap is essential because it provides justification for your study. In other words, it clarifies the purpose and rationale behind your research, making it easier for readers to understand why your study matters. The more clearly and effectively you identify relevant gaps in the literature, the more valuable and logical your research will appear to your audience. In fact, identifying an appropriate research gap often serves as the starting point for formulating a compelling research topic or idea.
How to Identify a Research Gap for Your Study
Once you have selected your general area of interest, the easiest and most common approach to identifying a research gap is to review the Suggestions for Future Research section found at the end of academic articles, typically located in the Conclusion. These suggestions are based on the limitations or findings of the study and often highlight areas that warrant further investigation.
In theses and dissertations, research gaps may also be identified under the Limitations and Delimitations section, usually found in the Introduction chapter. For example, a small sample size might be listed as a limitation. In such cases, a new study could consider using a larger and more diverse sample to address this gap.
Here is a sample excerpt from a published article:
Figure 1. Sample research gap (Reprinted from Dias-Broens et al., 2024)
Lack of Sufficient Prior Studies
At times, while reviewing books and articles related to your area of interest, you may discover that a specific topic has not been adequately studied. The reasons for this lack of research often fall into the following categories:
1. Geographical Limitations
In some cases, existing studies have only been conducted in specific regions such as the United States or European countries, and similar research has not yet been carried out in other parts of the world, such as Asia. This presents an excellent opportunity to conduct research that addresses this geographical gap.
2. Population Gaps
It may become apparent that most prior studies have focused on a particular age group. For instance, the effects of certain variables may have only been examined in younger learners. In such cases, researchers can address this gap by conducting similar research on a different population, such as adult learners.
3. Methodological Limitations
Sometimes, a research topic has been explored using only one type of method or statistical tool, such as quantitative surveys. This opens the door for researchers to apply alternative approaches—for example, qualitative methods such as interviews, or even mixed-method designs—to yield richer insights.
4. Temporal Gaps
There are instances where a significant amount of time has passed since a particular topic was last studied, rendering earlier findings outdated. In such cases, conducting new research may offer updated and relevant results.
For example, if no substantial studies have been conducted on online speaking instruction for the past 15 years, a new study in this area would be timely—especially given the rapid growth of educational technology and the widespread use of online teaching platforms during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
5. Conflicting Findings in Previous Research
Sometimes, prior studies yield contradictory results. For instance, some studies may report that group work reduces learners’ speaking anxiety, while others suggest it has no significant effect.
To resolve these discrepancies, a researcher can conduct a more comprehensive study with a larger sample size or by using more robust statistical tools. This could help clarify inconsistencies in the literature.
It is important to note that identifying a meaningful research gap is not something that can typically be done in a matter of days. It often requires thorough reading, reviewing, and analyzing of numerous relevant studies. However, with patience and careful attention, researchers can identify valuable gaps that pave the way for high-quality research—potentially suitable for publication in top-tier journals.
Writing an Effective Research Article Title
The title of a research article plays a critical role in determining whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected. Therefore, crafting an appropriate and well-thought-out title is of great importance. The title is often the first element encountered by readers during article searches, and it significantly affects the visibility and readership of the article.
Typically, the first six to seven words of a title are crucial. When articles are retrieved through online search engines, the initial words strongly influence whether the article is considered relevant. If these early words are not clearly connected to the content of the paper, the likelihood of it being read decreases considerably.
Before selecting a title, ask yourself the following questions:
- What is the objective of the research?
- What is the narrative tone of the paper?
- What are the study variables?
- What methodology is employed in the research?
Common Types of Research Article Titles
Titles are often categorized based on their structure and purpose. The most common types include:
These titles state the topic, design, aim, or method of the research project.
Example:
“Effects of Natural Forests and Tree Plantations on Leaf-Litter Frog Assemblages in Southern Brazil” (Cicheleiro et al., 2021)
These titles present the main findings or conclusions of the study.
Example:
“A New Flight Style and Lightweight Wings Improve the Flight Performance of Tiny Beetles” (Farisenkov et al., 2022)
However, one concern with declarative titles is that they might imply a definitive conclusion. If future research refutes the findings, such titles may become problematic due to their absolute tone.
These are phrased as questions and can immediately engage the reader’s curiosity about the answer. They also provide a concise summary of the research topic.
Example:
“Does Adding Video and Subtitles to an Audio Lesson Facilitate Comprehension?” (Zheng et al., 2022)
These titles are often brief or slightly ambiguous, encouraging readers to explore the paper for clarity.
Example:
“Drawing to Improve Metacognitive Accuracy” (Thiede et al., 2022)
5. Humorous or Colloquial Titles
These titles aim to attract attention through humor, idioms, or metaphors. While they can be effective, cultural or linguistic differences may prevent them from resonating with all readers.
Example:
“One Ring to Multiplex Them All” (Torres-Company, 2017)
These titles combine two or more types, often linking a general topic with the main result.
Example:
“Plastic Pollution in the World’s Oceans: More than 5 Trillion Plastic Pieces Weighing over 250,000 Tons Afloat at Sea” (Eriksen et al., 2014)
Important Tips for Writing an Effective Article Title
- Choose the title after you have completed writing the full article and abstract, as this allows for a more accurate and reflective title.
- Include all essential terms relevant to your research in the title.
- Avoid unnecessary jargon or abbreviations that may confuse readers.
- Use keywords that clearly reflect the core content of your paper.
- Limit the title to approximately 10 to 20 important words.
- Formulate the title as a statement or question, depending on the tone and purpose of the study.
- Ensure the title creates a positive impression and communicates the significance of the research.
- Use discipline-specific terminology familiar to your academic audience.
- Aim to spark curiosity or interest in potential readers.
In scholarly writing, research articles are generally categorized based on their structure and purpose. The most common types include:
- Original Study.
- Review Article
- Clinical Study
- Case Report
- Book Review
- Conceptual Article
- Theoretical Article
- Classroom Explorations (Brief Reports)
- Editorial or Commentary
- Method Article
The first type of research article based on structure is the original study, also referred to as a research article. These are among the most common and widely published types of scholarly articles. An original study presents novel findings derived from research that has not previously been conducted by other scholars. In such articles, the researcher shares their results in detail, often after a considerable investment of time and effort on a new topic.
Original studies serve as primary sources and are frequently referenced by other scholars in their own research.
A standard original research article typically follows this structure:
- Title
- Authors and affiliations
- Abstract
- Keywords
- Introduction
- Theoretical background or literature review
- Methodology
- Findings and results
- Acknowledgments
- References
The second major type of academic article is the review article. These articles provide a comprehensive summary of existing research on a particular topic, offering a broad overview of the current state of knowledge and future research directions. Often, these articles are written by experts in the field upon the request of journal editors.
Review articles do not usually present new empirical data but rather synthesize findings from a large number—often around 100—of previously published studies. Although they are considered to be slightly less prestigious than original research articles, review articles are highly useful, particularly for students and early-career researchers. Depending on the topic, a well-developed review article can be quite long, sometimes reaching up to 40,000 words.
A well-structured review article typically includes the following components:
- Title
- Abstract
- Introduction
- Method of literature search and selection
- Key findings and discussion
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgments
- References
There are three main types of review articles:
- Literature Review – Offers detailed information about published works, including their methodologies, research questions, and findings within a specific topic.
- Systematic Review – Identifies and analyzes criteria across studies to answer specific research questions, combining results either qualitatively or quantitatively.
- Meta-Analysis – Integrates and statistically analyzes the findings of multiple studies to answer research questions with aggregated data.
In the field of medicine, a clinical study is a type of article that reports in detail on the methods and outcomes of a clinical trial. These articles often follow a structure and length similar to original research papers.
Types of clinical studies include:
- Interventional vs. Observational Studies
- Prospective vs. Retrospective Studies
- Case-Control and Cohort Studies
A case report—also referred to as a clinical case study—is a concise original article that presents detailed information about a single patient case, and it is widely used in medical sciences.
Case reports typically include comprehensive data on the patient’s symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. The primary purpose of such articles is to raise awareness among researchers about the possibility of a specific condition or occurrence. These reports are considered fundamental to medical progress and often serve as the basis for new ideas and discoveries in the field.
Importantly, a case report does not necessarily need to describe a novel or rare condition; collecting and analyzing multiple standard cases can also be beneficial. In all studies involving human participants, it is ethically required to obtain informed written consent for participation and publication.
Many academic journals publish book reviews, which critically examine and evaluate a book based on its content, style, and scholarly contribution. Writing a book review can be an excellent entry point into academic writing, offering valuable experience before undertaking a full-length research article.
If you are interested in writing a book review, a good starting point is to search for journals that advertise available books for review. Simply introduce yourself to the editorial team and express your interest. You can also check recent journal issues to confirm whether they regularly publish book reviews.
Conceptual articles, often considered foundational or “base” articles, aim to provide conceptual clarity, understanding, or visualization of a topic. These articles often appear under headings such as Conceptual Model, Conceptual Framework, Proposed Model, Research Design, or Research Framework.
Their main purpose is to propose new relationships among constructs rather than to test them empirically. Conceptual articles typically develop a reasoned and coherent argument regarding a theoretical construct or approach.
Such manuscripts often discuss strategies, techniques, approaches, or practical methods from a conceptual or theoretical perspective. For example, an article may suggest instructional strategies rooted in motivational theory or techniques aligned with engagement principles. Conceptual articles generally range from 2,500 to 5,000 words.
Theoretical articles offer a critical review or analysis of a specific theory, concept, or research area. The author presents an evaluative and often constructive perspective, focusing on strengths, limitations, or implications of the theoretical or methodological approaches under discussion.
These articles tend to be shorter and do not require empirical data. However, like research articles, theoretical papers are subject to peer review prior to publication. Though they may not present original data, theoretical articles can provide important insights supported by existing empirical research.
An ideal theoretical article generally introduces and discusses abstract ideas or frameworks—whether novel or well-established—relevant to a particular academic field, with a focus on concepts formulated to explain, predict, or understand specific phenomena.
A well-structured theoretical article typically includes the following sections:
- Abstract
- Topic and research focus
- Purpose and article structure
- Sources referenced
- Conclusion
Classroom Exploration or Brief Report
This category is tailored specifically for teachers and classroom practitioners. It offers a platform for ESL/EFL educators and learners to share personal reflections, teaching experiences, challenges, successes, and practical stories. These narratives provide rich insights into English language teaching and learning from multiple perspectives.
Submissions may address a broad range of issues related to teaching English in primary, secondary, or post-secondary educational settings. Each article should clearly state its theoretical, conceptual, or research-based foundation in the opening paragraph.
The typical word count for classroom explorations ranges from 1,500 to 4,000 words.
Editorial and Commentary Articles
These types of articles are typically short opinion pieces written by members of a journal’s editorial board. They address editorial policy issues, public or academic concerns relevant to the journal’s scope, or reflect on previously published content. Editorials may also include letters to the editor, reader responses, discussions, and commentaries on current topics of general or political interest (related to the journal’s research field).
Editorial articles serve an important role in helping readers understand the purpose and direction of a journal. For example, when a journal is newly launched, an editorial may explain its mission. Later on, editorials may be used to inform readers about policy updates, editorial changes, or the introduction of new article types accepted by the journal.
Another structural category of research publication is the method article. These articles introduce a new research method, testing technique, or experimental procedure. The method presented can be an entirely novel approach or an improved version of an existing one.
For a method article to be considered for publication, it must demonstrate a significant advancement over current methodologies in terms of reliability, efficiency, or applicability. The structure of a method article typically resembles that of an original research article, including standard components like the abstract, introduction, methodology, results, and discussion.
It is essential to remember that each journal accepts only specific types of articles for publication. To determine which article types are welcomed by a particular journal, researchers should always consult the journal’s author guidelines or submission information section.
Best Methods for Finding New Concepts for Research Article Writing
In recent years, a large number of academic studies have been conducted and published across various disciplines by students and researchers alike. Despite this, one of the most common challenges for academic writers remains the identification of new and innovative concepts to explore in their writing. This section introduces effective strategies for discovering current and emerging topics suitable for research and publication.
We will explore how to incorporate new ideas and recent developments into your writing to ensure your article is relevant, current, and impactful. Broadly, there are two main pathways to achieve this:
1) Learning from Leading Experts in the Field
Renowned scholars in each discipline often serve as key sources for identifying trending and future-oriented research topics. These experts can be identified through their influence in the academic community and their high-impact publications. There are two practical ways to connect with them:
- Email Communication: Reach out to leading academics via email. Introduce yourself briefly and seek their insights by asking questions such as: “What are the most recent or practical topics worth exploring for publication in our field?”
- Social Media Platforms (e.g., Twitter, LinkedIn): Many researchers actively discuss their current work and engage in scholarly dialogue on platforms like Twitter and LinkedIn. By following these conversations, you can observe what topics are being debated or highlighted. These discussions often revolve around emerging issues and are sometimes accompanied by informal polls and expert commentary. As a result, these themes may evolve into major research trends in the coming months or years.
2) Exploring Reputable Academic Journals
Another effective strategy for discovering new research concepts is to analyze recently published articles in leading journals within your discipline. Some examples include:
- TESOL Quarterly – focuses on English language teaching and learning
- Information & Management – explores topics in information systems and management
- Computers & Education – emphasizes the use of technology in educational contexts
By systematically reviewing articles published in the most recent issues of such journals, you can identify emerging trends and hot topics in your field. For example, a search through Computers & Education might reveal a surge in studies related to virtual reality in education. This suggests that virtual reality is currently a trending topic and may be a fertile area for conducting original research in the near future.
3) Exploring the Literature Strategically
Systematic engagement with literature remains the cornerstone of idea generation.
Key Strategies:
- Thematic Reading: Focus on one theme at a time (e.g., “peer feedback in writing instruction”) to deeply understand what has been done.
- Backward & Forward Citation Chaining: Look at references cited by key papers (backward) and articles citing them (forward) using Google Scholar’s “Cited by” feature.
- Meta-Analysis Gaps: Identify meta-analyses in your field and examine their “Recommendations for Future Research.” These are excellent sources of promising topics.
Example: A meta-analysis on task-based language teaching might suggest further research on younger learners or under-represented contexts—an ideal starting point.
As an active member of the academic and educational community, engaging in research is often a necessary part of your work—whether independently or as part of a thesis or dissertation. However, presenting the results of your research to the scholarly community requires writing and publishing your work in the form of academic articles. More importantly, publishing in reputable journals can significantly increase your visibility and recognition at both national and international levels.
Publishing in respected academic journals paves the way for further study at top universities and research institutions around the world. It also opens up valuable opportunities to collaborate with scholars who share similar research interests. Since academic publishing is not a process that accommodates trial and error, submitting your work to low-quality or non-indexed journals may result in missed opportunities for career advancement. Therefore, it is essential to understand different types of journals and how to choose the right one for your research.
Below are some major indexing systems and journal categories:
1. Thomson Reuters (ISI Journals)
Thomson Reuters, a major international company, manages a widely used citation database that allows for extensive searches of high-quality scientific articles. Journals that are indexed in the Web of Science (WOS) database and recognized by this system are commonly referred to as ISI journals.
These journals fall into two main categories:
- JCR-indexed journals (Journal Citation Reports) – Highly prestigious journals with an official Impact Factor.
- ISI Listed journals – Journals that are indexed in Web of Science but do not yet have an Impact Factor.
Only articles with substantial novelty and high quality are typically accepted by JCR-indexed journals.
Impact Factor (IF) is a metric that reflects the average number of citations received by articles published in a journal over a given period. A higher Impact Factor generally indicates greater academic prestige and credibility.
Scopus is another major and reputable citation database that indexes information from over 5,000 international academic journals. If you aim to publish your article in a Scopus-indexed journal, you may need to pay a publication fee, depending on the journal's policies.
Scopus is highly respected and is considered one of the most comprehensive databases for tracking scholarly output across various fields of study.
3. Islamic World Science Citation Center (ISC)
Another major indexing platform is the Islamic World Science Citation Center (ISC). ISC journals are published within Islamic countries, and the ISC database aims to provide a central platform for indexing and promoting high-quality research produced in the Muslim world.
Currently, around 60 countries are represented in this index. After Thomson Reuters and Scopus, ISC is considered the third-largest international indexing system for scientific journals and publications.
PubMed is a specialized database that indexes journals in the fields of medicine and life sciences. It is a highly reliable resource for searching reputable and up-to-date scientific publications in these areas.
More than 4,000 peer-reviewed journals are indexed in PubMed. Articles published in PubMed-indexed journals are often considered equivalent in academic weight and credibility to those in JCR (Thomson Reuters) or Q1-ranked Scopus journals.
Turning Dissertations into Journal Articles
Many graduate students invest months or even years in crafting a thesis or dissertation that demonstrates their academic capabilities and research potential. However, once the degree is awarded, that valuable work often sits on a library shelf or institutional repository with limited reach. Turning a dissertation into one or more publishable journal articles is a strategic way to share research findings with a wider academic audience, build a scholarly profile, and contribute to the field. This chapter provides a practical guide to transforming a thesis into a journal article that meets academic publishing standards.
1. Understanding the Key Differences
A common mistake is assuming that a thesis can simply be submitted to a journal without major changes. However, the purpose, structure, and audience of a thesis differ significantly from those of a journal article.
Thesis Characteristics:
· Written to demonstrate knowledge to examiners.
· Includes extensive background, literature review, and methodology.
· Typically long and detailed (15,000–100,000+ words).
· Formal and often includes repetition.
Journal Article Characteristics:
· Written for a scholarly audience in a specific field.
· Concise and focused on a specific question or finding.
· Usually between 3,000–8,000 words.
· Requires a clear argument or contribution to the literature.
Understanding these differences is essential for deciding what parts of the thesis are suitable for publication and how they must be adapted.
2. Selecting the Most Publishable Content
Not every chapter of a dissertation is suitable for publication, but many can be developed into standalone articles.
Strategies for content selection:
· Choose the chapter with the most original data or compelling findings.
· Consider transforming the literature review into a review article if it synthesizes current debates.
· Develop the results and discussion chapters into empirical papers.
· If the dissertation covers multiple research questions or datasets, consider creating multiple articles.
Avoid trying to publish the entire thesis as one article. Instead, think about breaking it into manageable, coherent pieces tailored to journal formats.
3. Adapting Structure and Length
Journal articles have tight word limits and focused structures. Condensing your thesis content will be a major part of the process.
Steps to condense and restructure:
· Abstract: Write a new abstract that highlights the article’s purpose, method, key findings, and significance.
· Introduction: Rewrite to immediately present the research problem, why it matters, and how the article addresses it.
· Literature Review: Summarize only the most relevant sources. Avoid listing all references from your thesis.
· Methodology: Be concise but clear. Focus on what is necessary for replication and justification.
· Results: Present the most significant findings clearly. Combine or summarize smaller results.
· Discussion: Relate findings to existing literature. Explain the implications and limitations.
· References: Use current and relevant sources. Ensure the formatting matches the journal style.
Many students find it helpful to use the IMRaD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) as a model.
4. Choosing the Right Journal
Selecting a suitable journal is a critical step. A mismatch between the article and the journal’s scope is a common reason for rejection.
Tips for journal selection:
· Match the article’s topic with the journal’s aims and scope.
· Consider the audience, acceptance rate, and impact factor.
· Look at where similar studies have been published.
· Review recent issues to understand formatting, tone, and structure.
· Use journal finders provided by publishers (e.g., Elsevier Journal Finder, Springer Journal Suggester).
Aim for a realistic but reputable journal, especially for your first publication. Highly selective journals may be harder to access without prior publications.
5. Navigating Co-Authorship and Permissions
Theses are often written with support from supervisors, committee members, or research teams. It is important to clarify authorship roles before submission.
Ethical co-authorship considerations:
· If your supervisor made significant contributions to design, analysis, or writing, they should be included as a co-author.
· Always obtain written agreement from any co-authors before submission.
· Acknowledge other forms of support (e.g., data access, funding) in the acknowledgements section.
· If the thesis was published in a repository, some journals may require disclosure or permissions.
6. Revising for Academic Style and Audience
The tone of a thesis is often formal and exhaustive. Journal articles require a more concise and reader-focused style.
Key adjustments:
· Use clear and direct language. Avoid overly long sentences.
· Minimize passive voice and vague expressions.
· Focus on your argument or contribution, not just the research process.
· Write with the journal’s audience in mind: What do they already know? What do they want to learn?
You may also consider professional editing services, especially if writing in a second language.
7. Timeline and Process
Turning a thesis into a publication is a project in itself. Plan accordingly.
Suggested timeline:
· 1–2 months: Select content, choose journal, outline article.
· 2–4 months: Write and revise manuscript.
· 1 month: Co-author review and final edits.
· Submission and review: Varies (2–6 months or more).
Total time from thesis to published article can be 6–12 months, depending on the revision and peer review process.
8. Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them
Many first-time authors face similar challenges. Being aware of them can save time and frustration.
· Submitting too soon: Ensure your article is well-edited and aligns with journal expectations.
· Too much background: Limit theoretical background to what’s essential.
· Ignoring journal guidelines: Always follow formatting, length, and citation rules.
· Failure to adapt style: Avoid thesis-style narration. Aim for clarity and argument-driven writing.
· Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism): Even if you wrote the thesis, copying without citation can be problematic. Rephrase and cite as needed.
9. Sample Outline: Article Based on Thesis Chapter
Here is a simplified outline for converting a thesis chapter into a publishable article:
· Title: Clear, concise, includes keywords.
· Abstract: 150–250 words; summary of purpose, method, results, implications.
· Introduction: Define the problem, context, significance, and aim.
· Literature Review: 2–4 key themes or debates.
· Methodology: Participants, instruments, procedure, analysis.
· Results: Focused, organized by research question or theme.
· Discussion: Interpret results, compare with prior research, implications.
· Conclusion: Summary, limitations, future research.
· References: APA/MLA/Chicago/etc., as per journal requirement.
10. Final Checklist for Submission
Journal Classification Based on Peer Review Process
One of the most important indicators of a journal’s academic credibility is the nature of its peer review process. Journals are generally categorized into two broad types based on their review mechanism:
- Peer-Reviewed Journals
- Non–Peer-Reviewed Journals
Non–Peer-Reviewed journals do not follow a formal review process. As long as the submitted article meets the formatting guidelines and falls within the journal's scope, it may be accepted for publication. These journals often include general-interest magazines, which typically publish content without academic peer review. As such, these publications hold low academic value and are not considered credible sources for scholarly citation.
In contrast, peer-reviewed journals—which are regarded as more academically rigorous—employ a structured review process for each submission. Articles are typically sent to two or three expert reviewers who evaluate the work and provide feedback on its quality and relevance. This process ensures that published articles meet established academic standards. However, due to this thorough evaluation, the publication timeline in such journals is usually longer.
Once a manuscript is submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, it undergoes a formal evaluation by designated reviewers. These reviewers are expected to analyze the paper within a given time frame and provide objective feedback. Reviewers typically complete a standardized evaluation form, through which they assess aspects such as originality, methodological quality, and strengths or weaknesses of the paper.
To promote fairness and impartiality, some journals adopt a blind review system, in which the reviewers are unaware of the authors' identities. In most cases, the reviewers’ names are also kept confidential from the authors. However, certain journals allow or even require authors to recommend potential reviewers when submitting their manuscripts.
Following the peer review, the manuscript and reviewers' comments are passed on to the editor-in-chief, who plays a central role in making the final decision. Based on this review, the editor may issue one of the following outcomes:
- Accepted for publication
- Accepted with minor revisions
- Accepted with major revisions
- Re-review required after major revisions
- Recommended for publication as a letter to the editor or short report
- Rejected
The duration of the review process varies across journals. Authors can usually estimate the expected timeline by consulting the journal’s website or by checking the average review periods of previously published articles in the same journal.
Responding to Reviewers and Revising Your Manuscript
Receiving reviewer comments on a submitted manuscript is a crucial moment in the academic publishing process. Whether the feedback is favorable, critical, or somewhere in between, how an author responds significantly influences the chances of eventual publication. Reviewer comments are not only assessments but also opportunities for improvement, clarity, and refinement. This chapter aims to equip researchers, especially novice scholars and graduate students, with the practical tools and strategies to respond effectively and professionally to peer review feedback.
1. Understanding the Peer Review Outcome
After submission, a manuscript typically undergoes peer review, and the editorial decision generally falls into one of the following categories:
· Accept as is: Rare and typically reserved for exceptionally well-prepared manuscripts.
· Minor revision: Requires small changes such as clarifications, additional references, or minor language edits.
· Major revision: Involves significant content changes, possibly including restructuring, adding new data or analyses.
· Revise and resubmit (R&R): Not a rejection, but an invitation to substantially revise and resubmit as a new submission.
· Reject: Indicates the manuscript is not suitable for publication in its current form or does not fit the journal’s scope.
It is natural to feel defensive or discouraged when faced with critical comments. However, it is essential to read the feedback objectively, identify the reviewers’ main concerns, and use their insights to strengthen the manuscript.
2. Writing a Professional Response Letter
A response letter, sometimes called a rebuttal letter, accompanies the revised manuscript and details how the author has addressed each of the reviewers’ comments. A well-crafted response letter demonstrates respect, diligence, and academic maturity.
Structure of a Response Letter:
· Opening paragraph: Thank the editor and reviewers for their time and comments. Briefly state that you have revised the manuscript accordingly.
Example: “We sincerely thank the editor and reviewers for their insightful comments. We have carefully revised the manuscript in response to the suggestions and believe the changes have improved the paper.”
· Point-by-point response: List each comment from the reviewers, followed by your response and a summary of the changes made.
Example: Reviewer 1 Comment: The explanation of the methodology lacks clarity. Response: We agree and have revised the methodology section (pages 4-5) to provide a clearer explanation of the procedures, including more details about participant selection and data collection.
Best Practices:
· Quote or paraphrase each reviewer comment clearly.
· Be polite and appreciative, even if the comment seems harsh.
· If you disagree with a suggestion, explain your reasoning respectfully.
· Clearly indicate where changes were made in the manuscript (page and line numbers).
3. Revising the Manuscript
When revising your manuscript, approach it as an opportunity to elevate the quality of your work. Here are important strategies:
· Use track changes or highlight edits: Many journals prefer visible edits to facilitate re-review.
· Create a revision log: Summarize the changes in a table format with reviewer comments, your response, and corresponding manuscript sections.
· Ensure consistency: After changes, check for consistency in citations, terminology, formatting, and tables/figures.
Be thorough and meticulous. If one comment suggests a change in a particular section, consider whether the same issue may appear elsewhere in the manuscript.
4. Dealing with Rejection
Manuscript rejection is a normal part of academic publishing. Even experienced researchers frequently face rejection. If your manuscript is rejected:
· Review the feedback carefully: Sometimes, even a rejection contains valuable insights for future improvement.
· Revise the manuscript: Based on the feedback, improve the manuscript before submitting to another journal.
· Select a new journal wisely: Ensure better alignment with the new journal’s aims and scope.
· Stay motivated: Rejection does not reflect the value of your research but rather its fit for a specific journal.
5. Common Reviewer Comments and How to Respond
· "The literature review lacks recent sources." Response: We appreciate this observation and have added six recent references published between 2021 and 2023 to strengthen the literature review (pages 2-3).
· "The sample size is small." Response: We acknowledge the limitation. We have added a paragraph in the discussion (page 10) explaining the constraints and justifying the chosen sample size in light of the research design.
· "The discussion section is weak." Response: Thank you for this comment. We have rewritten the discussion section (pages 9-11) to provide a more in-depth interpretation of the findings and relate them to previous studies.
6. Dealing with Conflicting Reviewer Feedback
Sometimes, reviewers offer contradictory advice. In such cases:
· Choose the suggestion that best aligns with your study goals and justify your decision in the response letter.
· You may address the editor directly to clarify the rationale behind your choice if needed.
Example: “While Reviewer 1 suggested expanding the theoretical framework, Reviewer 2 recommended a more concise approach. We opted to expand the framework slightly to enhance clarity while maintaining conciseness (pages 3-4).”
7. Sample Response Letter (Excerpt)
Dear Editor,
We thank you and the reviewers for your thoughtful and constructive comments. We have revised the manuscript accordingly and believe the changes have significantly improved its clarity and quality. Below, we provide a detailed point-by-point response to each comment.
Reviewer 2 Comment: Please clarify how the participants were selected.
Response: Thank you for highlighting this issue. We have revised the Methods section (page 7, lines 16-19) to provide more details about the participant selection criteria and recruitment process.
8. Final Advice for Authors
· Always maintain a professional and respectful tone.
· Be specific and transparent about your revisions.
· View the review process as a collaborative effort to improve your work.
· Learn from each experience to refine your writing and submission strategy.
Finding a Suitable Journal for Article Publication
Before submitting an article, it is essential to carefully consider how to choose the right journal. Selecting an appropriate journal increases the likelihood of publication and ensures that your work reaches its intended academic audience.
One of the first steps is to identify journals that have previously published similar work. To do this, search the keywords from your article in databases such as Google or Google Scholar.
For example, if your article title is:
“The Effect of Using Flash Cards on Students’ Vocabulary Learning,”
you might search using keywords like “vocabulary learning” or “using flash cards.” By reviewing the published results, you can identify which journals frequently publish on topics aligned with your own.
Alternative Strategies for Finding Relevant Journals
- Follow Leading Scholars in Your Field
Search for prominent researchers in your area of study and check where they have published their articles. These journals are likely to be reputable and thematically relevant. - Use Online Tools like Journal Guide
You can search “Journal Guide” in Google to access a platform that helps match your manuscript with relevant journals based on your article’s topic and scope. - Use Journal Finder Tools from Major Publishers
Well-known publishers such as Wiley, Elsevier, Springer, and Taylor & Francis offer journal finder tools. These tools allow you to paste your article title and abstract, and then generate a list of journals that might be suitable for your manuscript.
For example, to find a suitable journal through Wiley, search:
“Wiley Journal Finder” or visit:
https://journalfinder.wiley.com - Check the Journal’s Aims and Scope
Remember, not all journals accept all types of articles. Always read the “Aims and Scope” section of a journal’s website to ensure your article aligns with the journal’s objectives and areas of focus.
Checking Journal Details and Metrics
Several websites offer detailed information about academic journals. These tools are especially useful for checking a journal’s scope, ranking, impact factor, and indexing status:
- https://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php
- https://www.scopus.com/sources
- https://www.journal-metrics.com
The International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) is an eight-digit code that uniquely identifies a serial publication, such as a journal. The ISSN acts as the official identifier for a journal and is often used to verify its authenticity and indexing status.
Typically, journals have two types of ISSN:
- Print ISSN
- Online (Electronic) ISSN
Some journals may only have a print ISSN. The ISSN consists of eight digits, with the first seven being unique to the journal and the eighth acting as a check digit. It is usually written with a hyphen for readability, such as:
ISSN 1234–1234
Using the ISSN is one of the most accurate and efficient ways to confirm a journal’s legitimacy and indexing status.
Key Factors for Identifying a Suitable Journal
After shortlisting a journal based on the general criteria previously discussed, it is crucial to further evaluate whether the selected journal is truly appropriate for your research. The following factors can help determine journal suitability:
Indexing refers to whether a journal is listed in recognized databases or indexing services, such as Scopus, ISI (Web of Science), or Q-ranked classifications (Q1, Q2, etc.). A journal’s indexing status indicates its visibility, credibility, and scholarly impact. Always confirm where the journal is indexed before submission.
Review speed refers to the time taken by the journal to review and respond to submissions. Some journals provide a decision within a few days, while others may take several months. It’s important to verify this timeline—especially if you are working with academic deadlines or scholarship applications.
The acceptance rate indicates the percentage of submitted manuscripts that are accepted for publication.
- A low acceptance rate often signifies a highly selective journal, which is typically more prestigious but harder to publish in.
- High-ranking journals tend to have lower acceptance rates, reflecting more rigorous editorial and peer-review standards.
Sample Journal: European Financial Management (Wiley)
As an example, the journal European Financial Management, published by Wiley, generally focuses on articles related to finance and behavioral economics (not psychology as previously mentioned). You can find important metrics for this journal, such as:
- Indexing information (e.g., SCOPUS, Web of Science, etc.)
- Review speed
- Acceptance rate
These details are usually available on the journal’s official website under the “Journal Metrics” or “About This Journal” section.
Figure 3. Sample journal metrics (Extracted from the journal of European Financial Management, 2025, Wiley Online Library)
Before submitting your article, it is important to check the journal’s open access policy. If your paper is accepted, you should be aware of whether the journal requires an open access fee or offers optional open access publishing.
In some cases, journals may charge authors to make the article openly accessible. In other cases, they may only assign a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and publish the abstract on their website—restricting access to the full text unless the reader or their institution has a subscription. This limited accessibility can significantly reduce the citation rate of the article.
In most cases, high-impact journals do not charge authors for publication (standard submission and peer-review are free). However, if authors wish to make their article open access, a fee may apply.
Information about publication charges—including article processing charges (APCs) and open access options—is usually listed under the “Fees,” “Open Access,” or “Author Guidelines” section of the journal’s website.
Finally, it is critical to ensure that your article aligns with the journal’s aims and scope. Even if your article is of high quality, a mismatch in scope can lead to immediate rejection.
The “Aims and Scope” section of a journal defines the types of topics, methodologies, and disciplines the journal accepts. Submitting outside of this scope reduces your chances of publication, regardless of the article’s academic merit.
As an example, the journal Animal Cognition, published by Springer, is focused strictly on perception and cognitive processes in animals and humans. If you were to submit an article on an unrelated topic—such as game-based learning in education—it would likely be immediately rejected, as it falls outside the journal’s defined subject area.
Figure 4. Sample journal scope (Extracted from the journal of Animal Cognition, 2025, Springer)
Scientometric researchers continuously strive to convert qualitative aspects of scholarly work into quantitative indicators that reflect academic impact and performance. These quantitative metrics, known as scientometric indicators, are crucial for evaluating research productivity, influence, ranking, comparison, and career advancement within academic environments.
Below are some of the most widely recognized indicators, most of which are based on citation analysis and citation metrics:
The H-index is one of the most widely used and practical indicators due to its simplicity and effectiveness. It is popular among researchers because it yields a single numerical value that reflects both productivity and citation impact of an individual scholar. The H-index answers a key question:
To what extent has a researcher contributed to the advancement of knowledge in their field?
An H-index of h means a researcher has published h papers, each of which has been cited at least h times.
The H-index is calculated by several major databases, including:
- Web of Knowledge (Web of Science)
- Google Scholar
- Scopus
The Impact Factor is one of the most widely known citation-based indicators, originally proposed by Eugene Garfield in 1955. It is a purely quantitative measure used to assess journal performance—specifically, how influential a journal is in comparison to others. It is not intended to measure the quality of individual articles or the academic standing of authors.
The Immediacy Index measures how quickly articles published in a journal receive citations. It is calculated by dividing the number of citations received by articles in a given year by the total number of articles published in that same year. This indicator reflects the timeliness and relevance of the journal’s content.
The Eigenfactor Score is calculated using citation data over a five-year period, as reported in Journal Citation Reports (JCR). It not only considers the number of citations received by a journal, but also the source of those citations, giving more weight to citations from influential journals. Thus, journals that receive more citations from highly ranked sources are deemed to have a greater overall influence.
The SJR indicator, or SCImago Journal Rank, measures the scientific prestige of academic journals by accounting for both the number of citations received and the reputation of the citing journals.
SJR is calculated by dividing the weighted number of citations received in a particular year by the total number of articles published in the previous three years. It reflects not just how many times a journal is cited, but how impactful those citations are.
The G-index was introduced by Leo Egghe to provide a more accurate quantitative measure of a researcher's scientific output—particularly in physics and other scientific disciplines.
Unlike the H-index, the G-index gives greater weight to highly cited articles. It is calculated by comparing the square of the number of publications with the cumulative number of citations, highlighting the researcher’s most impactful works more prominently.
The Cited Half-Life reflects the role of time in the usefulness of scholarly information. This indicator shows how long literature continues to be cited after publication.
In simple terms, it refers to the median age of the articles cited in a given journal in a particular year. A longer half-life suggests that articles from the journal remain relevant for an extended period, while a shorter half-life may indicate rapid obsolescence.
CiteScore is a straightforward citation metric used to evaluate the citation impact of journals. Unlike the traditional Impact Factor, which includes only specific article types (e.g., original research, reviews, technical papers) in its calculation, CiteScore includes all document types published in the journal.
One important distinction: articles that are “in press” (not yet assigned to an issue) are not included in CiteScore calculations. This is because Scopus does not consistently index in-press articles from all publishers, and excluding them helps to reduce potential bias in the metric.
CiteScore is calculated by dividing the total number of citations received in a given year to documents published in the previous four years, by the total number of documents published during that same four-year period.
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)
SNIP was proposed by Leiden University to adjust for differences in citation practices across disciplines. It normalizes citation impact by weighting citations based on the total number of citations in a given field.
In other words, a citation in a field where references are generally fewer may carry more weight than a citation in a field with higher citation frequency. SNIP is built upon the same conceptual foundation as the journal Impact Factor but accounts for disciplinary context.
The SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) is a widely used metric that recognizes that not all citations are of equal value. SJR considers both the number of citations a journal receives and the prestige or scientific influence of the journals from which those citations originate.
SJR is used for comparing the scientific influence of journals across disciplines. It is calculated in two stages and is based on the idea that citations from highly reputable journals contribute more to a journal's score than citations from less prestigious sources.
What Does “Q” Mean in SCOPUS-Indexed Journals?
The term “Quartile”—commonly abbreviated as Q—refers to a metric used to rank academic journals by dividing them into four quartiles based on their performance within a specific subject category. These quartiles include: Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4.
Unlike the Impact Factor, which provides a numerical score but does not indicate a journal’s relative position within its subject area, the Quartile system offers a categorical ranking that reflects the journal’s standing within its specific academic field (category).
In this system, the top 25% of journals within a subject area are classified as Q1. This ranking provides a clearer understanding of a journal’s impact and quality within its discipline.
Both SCOPUS and JCR (Journal Citation Reports) use quartile rankings based on their respective impact metrics, but the classifications are specific to each database.
SCOPUS Journal Quartile Rankings
The Q-score or Quartile Score is one of the primary indicators used by SCOPUS to classify journal performance. Based on the subject category (e.g., Education, Sociology, Medicine), each journal receives a rank from Q1 to Q4, similar in function to the Impact Factor (IF) used in ISI-indexed journals—but with a fixed scale from 1 to 4.
This score reflects a journal’s relative performance within its academic category:
- Q1 = Top 25% of journals in the category
- Q2 = Between 25% and 50% (upper-middle tier)
- Q3 = Between 50% and 75% (lower-middle tier)
- Q4 = Bottom 25% of journals in the category
Quartile scores provide a standardized way of ranking and comparing journals, helping researchers identify high-quality publication venues.
In many academic evaluation systems, Q1 and Q2 journals are considered high-impact and prestigious. Researchers—particularly those seeking admission to international graduate programs or applying for academic positions—are strongly encouraged to publish their work in Q1 or Q2 journals.
A journal such as Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, published by Taylor & Francis, typically focuses on research related to sociolinguistics and cultural studies. Metrics such as its Quartile rank can be found on the journal’s website, usually in the Metrics or Journal Performance section. Below, you can find the metrics and other information of this journal.
Figure 5. Sample journal metrics (Extracted from the journal of Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 2025, Springer)
- Quote paper
- Alireza Maleki (Author), Fatemeh Mazloumikenari (Author), Maryam Lamizadeh (Author), 2025, Research Writing Roadmap, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1619096
