[gunadi.rustian@upi.edu]

Purpose:

This activity aims to help you develop empathy and insight regarding the publication process by understanding the expectations, challenges, resources, and evaluation criteria used by journal editors and reviewers when assessing scientific articles.

In this assignment, each group will conduct a field interview with a journal editor, reviewer, or lecturer who has extensive publication experience.

Purpose

The purpose of this activity is to help students gain deeper understanding of the publication process by exploring the expectations, challenges, resources, and evaluation criteria that are commonly applied in reviewing scientific articles.

Instructions

1. Prepare a set of interview questions based on the following categories:
   a. Process: Steps in writing and submitting a scientific article.
   b. Quality: Characteristics of a high-quality scientific article.
   c. Challenges: Common obstacles faced by authors during writing and submission.
   d. Resources: Support, tools, or resources needed for writing.
   e. Structure & Content: Main components that must be included in a research article.
2. Arrange a schedule and conduct the interview in a professional manner.
3. Take detailed notes during the interview, highlighting important advice, suggestions, and observations.
4. Summarize the findings by identifying patterns, recurring feedback, and practical recommendations.

Assignment Report

Each group (represented by the group leader) submits a written report in the following discussion form that includes:

1. Names and the student ID numbers
2. Key insights from editors or reviewers.
3. Frequent challenges faced by authors.
4. Recommended resources and support for improving scientific writing.
5. Suggestions for improving manuscript clarity, structure, and content.

[Lukman]

That’s an excellent, comprehensive plan for conducting research interviews on the complex topic of scientific publishing. Since I can’t physically conduct the interview, I will provide the refinement and finalization of the interview questions, a professional interview schedule, and a template for summarizing the findings.

📝 Finalized Interview Questions
The following questions are designed to be open-ended, encouraging detailed and reflective responses from experts (professors, experienced researchers, journal editors, or peer reviewers).

a. Process: Steps in Writing and Submitting ➡️
“Can you walk me through your typical process, from ‘final data analysis’ to ‘first journal submission’? What are the non-negotiable steps you always follow?”

“At what point in the research lifecycle do you usually select your target journal, and how does that early selection influence your writing style and structure?”

“Describe the key differences in how you prepare the manuscript for the first submission versus how you revise it after receiving ‘Major Revisions’ feedback.”

b. Quality: Characteristics of a High-Quality Article ⭐
“In your opinion, what is the single most important element that distinguishes a ‘publishable’ article from a ‘rejected’ one, assuming the research is technically sound?”

“When reviewing, what tells you immediately that an article is well-written? Is it the clarity of the Methodology, the rigor of the Results, or the strength of the Discussion?”

“How critical is the ‘novelty’ or ‘originality’ of the findings compared to the clarity and elegance of the writing itself?”

c. Challenges: Common Obstacles 🚧
“From an author’s perspective, what is the most common time-consuming or mentally taxing hurdle faced during the writing phase, and how do you overcome it?”

“What are the most frequent reasons—other than ethical violations—for rejection letters you see or write? Is it primarily issues with English quality, statistical interpretation, or lack of scope?”

“What challenges do you face when trying to simplify complex data or highly technical procedures for a broad, interdisciplinary audience?”

d. Resources: Support and Tools 🛠️
“What specific tools, software, or support systems (e.g., statistical consultation, language editing) do you consider essential for a new researcher aiming for high-impact publication?”

“In your experience, what is the value of seeking pre-submission peer review or feedback from non-authors before formally submitting the manuscript?”

“What kind of training or mentorship should universities prioritize to improve the scientific writing skills of Ph.D. students and early-career researchers?”

e. Structure & Content: Main Components 🏗️
“In the Introduction section, what is the optimal strategy for moving from the broad context to the specific research gap and finally to the thesis/objective?”

“What are the most critical pieces of information that must be included in the Discussion section beyond simply restating the results, and how should they be structured?”

“How should authors approach the Limitations and Future Work section to make it sound constructive and not merely defensive?”

[Author]

Posts