The lifecycle of an article: The literature and how I can contribute to it

1
The life-cycle of an article- The literature and
how I can contribute to it

• Michael Hal Sosabowski
• School of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences
• University of Brighton

2
Aka Pressure to publish from above? - if
youve got a deadline weve got the lifeline

• Michael Hal Sosabowski
• School of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences
• University of Brighton

3
Context- todays agenda

• preamble the current focus on excellence in
  teaching research
• the literature process what is it and how does
  it work?
• some generalisations
• why do research?
• issues with academic research
• demotivators to new research in any field
• a model for the new researcher in any field
• examples

4
Context

• 1987 - 1991 - Ph.D. London Royal Holloway
• 1991 - 1993 - Metropolitan Police, Hammersmith
• 1993 -1995 - University of Natal, Durban SA
• 1995 - present - University of Brighton

5
Why do we need to publish here and now?

• RAE (Research Assessment Exercise) dictate
  government research funding
• assesses research outputs i.e. publications,
  funding (grants), patents etc.
• QAA Subject Reviews mean that even excellence in
  teaching requires research output

6
How is knowledge archived disseminated?

• initially, conferences these may have outputs
  called proceedings (proc.) or abstracts which can
  be publishable
• rapid communications in JOURNALS
• normal articles in journals
• review articles look at a focused topic
• knowledge eventually ends up in books

7
Background - what is The Literature?

• the literature is the means of disseminating
  archiving knowledge
• Standard, quality research is submitted to
  journals
• to be peer-reviewed by referees (aka reviewers)
• ..for potential publication in the journals

8
Background - what is a Journal?

• A journal is a serious periodical, the content of
  which is ultimately decided upon by.
• .an editor
• who is accountable to the Editorial Board..
• who are experts in the field
• they ensure the integrity of the Journal
• editors need articles as much as authors need
  publications

9
Background - what is a Journal?
10
Background - what is a Journal?
11
How much is there? example

• In biomedical science two million journal
  articles are currently published annually
• a clinician needs to read 17 articles a day every
  day of the year simply to remain current in their
  field of practice
• The National Library of Medicines Medline
  archives 31,000 new citations per month
• 20,000 biomedical journals available approx.
  6000 articles are published every day

12
The paradox of publishing

• editorial boards, reviewers, contributors and
  often editors are academics who are unpaid for
  these services
• the publishing houses effectively charge
  academics for reading their own work
• move toward publishing on-line to bypass the
  publishing houses

13
The Process why?

• do you remember George Taylor ?
• why did George Taylor get so upset?
• heres a clue..
• it was something to do with
• the Eloi and the Morlocks..
• well - the Eloi actually.

14
The Process why?
15
The Process (1)

• researcher decides they have a quantum for
  publication (in science an articles worth of
  work /- 1 years laboratory work)
• must be unpublished, noteworthy and innovative
  i.e. make a new contribution to the knowledge
• (may initially report at a conference)
• if earth-moving, may submit a rapid communication
  (e.g. Tetrahedron Letters or JCS Chem. Comm.)

16
The Process (2)

• .otherwise chooses a normal journal (see later
  slide) prepares an article in the House Style
  according to The Instructions for Authors (not
  advice to)
• a brief comment about order of authors.
• you will see more fights about this than anything
  else
• can depend on the house style, a general model
  is

17
The Process (3) authorship protocols

• M H Sosabowski, K Herson, A W Lloyd and P Bell
• School of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences,
  University of Brighton,
• Cockcroft Building, Moulsecoomb, Brighton, BN2
  4GJ, United Kingdom.
• An evaluation of information technology use among
  
• first-year pharmacy students
• Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 62 4 433-438 1998

18
The Process (4) authorship protocols

• MH Sosabowski, K Herson, GWJ Olivier, AW Lloyd
  and P Bell
• Wrote paper, other contributors
  may be elder statesman
• first, starred of group (often
• or corresponding supervisor or
• author grant holder)
• An evaluation of information technology use among
  first-year pharmacy
• students
• Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 62 4 433-438 1998

19
The Process (6) reference protocols

• M H Sosabowski, K Herson, A W Lloyd and P Bell
• An evaluation of information technology use among
  first-year
• pharmacy students
• Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 62 4 433-438 (1998)
• volume pages
• Abbreviated journal title part (year)

20
The Process (7) collaboration

• Implementation Strategies for Educational
• Intranet Resources
• Katie Herson, Michael H Sosabowski, and Andrew W
  
• Lloyd
• School of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences,
  University of Brighton,
• Cockcroft Building, Moulsecoomb, Brighton, BN2
  4GJ, United Kingdom.
• Stephen Flowers, Cameron Paine and Becci Newton
• Business School, University of Brighton, Mithras
  House, Lewes Road,
• Brighton, BN2 4AT, United Kingdom.
• (British Journal of Educational Technology 31 1
  47-55 2000 )

21
The Process (8)

• any-way multiple copies of paper sent to journal
  editor
• . article received by editor, author sent a
  dated letter of receipt with MS (cf. being
  scooped)
• editor sends to /- 3 referees (experts in the
  field) for review commentary

22
The Process (9)

• referees read and assess according to
  Instructions for Referees
• referees decide to
• accept without change(s)
• accept with change(s) (expand Hal)
• reject (but with commentary as if the article
  will eventually be published)
• .based upon novelty, relevance and (to a lesser
  degree) adherence to IFA length
• editor has final decision
• If refs accept, (s)he may correct minor
  grammatical typographical matters

23
The Process (10)

• editor informs corresponding author of decision
• if accept will often request article on disc
  authors may now consider their article to be in
  press
• galley proofs sent to corresponding author,
  checked, corrected (see next slide) returned
  (major changes are chargeable to author)

24
The Process (11)

• galley proof changes require meticulous pedantism
  
• e.g. Suppose you annotate an MS with
• insert and
• do you mean insert and
• or insert and ?
• best to explain each change on MS AND spell it
  out on an accompanyment

25
The Process (11)
26
The Process which journal?

• try The Journal of Whatever it is youre doing
• or, which journal appears most in your
  references?
• start realistically i.e. local bottom-shelf
  journals
• try not to be driven by impact factors these
  skew the direction of articles from their
  intended readership

27
The Process why?

• attempt to ensure the integrity of the literature
• ensures that experiments are consistently
  repeatable and data is properly scrutinised
• prevents flawed, inaccurate or made-up data from
  being published
• (although some slips through the net e.g. Cold
  Fusion papers, recent retraction in Nature)

28
The Process why?

• Transgenic DNA introgressed into traditional
• maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico.
• Quist D, Chapela IH.
• Nature 2001 Nov 29414(6863)541-3

29
The Process why?

• Biodiversity (Communications arising) maize
• transgene results in Mexico are artefacts.
• Kaplinsky N, Braun D, Lisch D, Hay A, Hake S,
• Freeling M.
• Department of Plant and Microbial Biology,
• University of California, Berkeley, California
  94720, USA.

30

• Editorial note
• In our 29 November issue, we published the paper
  "Transgenic DNA
• introgressed into traditional maize landraces in
  Oaxaca, Mexico" by David
• Quist and Ignacio Chapela. Subsequently, we
  received several criticisms
• of the paper, to which we obtained responses from
  the authors and
• consulted referees over the exchanges. In the
  meantime, the authors
• agreed to obtain further data, on a timetable
  agreed with us, that might
• prove beyond reasonable doubt that transgenes
  have indeed become
• integrated into the maize genome. The authors
  have now obtained some
• additional data, but there is disagreement
  between them and a referee as
• to whether these results significantly bolster
  their argument.
• In light of these discussions and the diverse
  advice received, Nature has
• concluded that the evidence available is not
  sufficient to justify the
• publication of the original paper. As the authors
  nevertheless wish to
• stand by the available evidence for their
  conclusions, we feel it best
• simply to make these circumstances clear, to
  publish the criticisms, the
• authors' response and new data, and to allow our
  readers to judge the
• science for themselves.

31
From paper to e-journals
32
From paper to e-journals - advantages

• accessibility
• flexibility
• less cumbersome
• quicker

33
From paper to e-journals disadvantages

• if you stop your subscription you lose your
  archive
• potential for copying/collusion/plagiarism etc.
• not everyone has a computer

34
Pt II The Paradox of being a researcher who
teaches or a teacher who does some research

• Bob the Builder, Dentist, TV repairman,cardiac
  surgeon Audi repairs a speciality
• Do you want your loft extension done by Bob ?
• Then why do we ask ourselves to be excellent at
  two discrete activities requiring separate skill
  sets?

35
University research - generalisations

• Hitherto teaching staff have been (are?)
  measured by research outputs
• research prestige
• teaching routine
• staff are required and assumed to be competent at
  teaching
• ...and therefore often dont see the point in
  enhancing their teaching
• except during Subject Reviews?
• promotion is rarely offered or sought on the
  basis of excellence in teaching alone

36
Moreover-

• the above often ensures that poor teachers remain
  so
• staff can be divided roughly into
• the excellent teachers and
• the excellent researchers
• few excel at both (focus)
• (empty vessels often make most noise)

37
Why do research?

• we are supposed to
• (scholarly activity)
• personal development
• if teaching staff are up-to-date with the
  literature and contributing to it, this is
  apparent in their teaching
• i.e. the students see the difference

38
Science research

• has a long lag time between concept and
  application
• is very focused
• said focus can obscure whatevers happening to
  one side
• when focused, researchers often become too
  absorbed and unobjective

39
Motivating for research outputs

• one approach toward fostering a research-oriented
  climate is to encourage entrepreneurism in
  research
• seeing and seizing the opportunities
• by which we mean looking for opportunities in
  hitherto unlooked places for publishing and
  driving research forward
• research output from ones teaching is such an
  opportunity
• and opportunities can exist in the most unlikely
  of circumstances

40
Research getting started for the new researcher

• M H Sosabowski and P Powell Preparation and
  reaction of some 2-thienyl and 3-thienyl-pyridazin
  ones and -pyridazines
• J. Chem. Res. (S) 8 314-315 1995, J. Chem. Res.
  (M) 1901-1912 1995
•  
• M H Sosabowski and P Powell Coupling of
  organotin reagents with aryl, acyl and
  heteroaryl halides synthesis of pyridazine and
  quinoxalone derivatives
• J. Chem. Res. (S) 10 402-403 1995, J. Chem. Res.
  (M) 2422-2434 1995
• M H Sosabowski, and P Powell Coupling of
  organotin reagents with aryl, acyl and heteroaryl
  halides Part 2 preparation of derivatised
  thienylpyridines J. Chem. Res. (S) 5 156-157
  1997, J. Chem. Res. (M), 1064-1074 1997

41
Research getting started for the new researcher

• research neednt necessarily require large
  funding, or particularly profound ideas
• new researchers are often put off by the apparent
  requirement for the above
• the first research paper is always the most
  difficult

42
Research demotivating factors

• fear of failure
• non-acceptance that we are all different
• apparent complexity of obtaining funds
• cant get funding without papers, cant get
  papers without funding
• pressure to publish from above
• RAE protocols esp. impact factors

43
Research getting started for the new researcher
a model

• find an idea/experiment neednt be profound,
  preferably related to teaching
• measure that which is measurable
• do it - write it up
• write a note to a realistically-placed journal
• expect to have it rejected first time around
• persevere
• opportunities exist in the most unlikely of
  circumstances

44
Teaching from research

• M H Sosabowski J Sosabowski and J Zweit
• Labelling of deferoxamine-folate with
• zirconium-89 a potential tumour targeting
• PET radiopharmaceutical
• J. Label. Comp. Radiopharm. 37 372-374
• 1998

45
Teaching from research
46
Teaching from research
MDP-Tc-99m scan
47
Teaching from research
CT scan
48
Wheres the opportunity?

• MPharm Program
• Dr Sosabowskis radioimaging modalities course
  with almanac of sporting injuries ?
• (Hals 100 greatest sporting injury moments)

49
Research learning whilst teaching

• Registering for a degree out of ones field
  widens the spectrum of experience
• 1994 -1997 MBA, University of Durban-Westville,
  then University of Brighton
• Dissertation, IT in the University Learning
  Experience

50
Research learning whilst teaching

• M H Sosabowski, K Herson, A W Lloyd and
• P Bell
• An evaluation of information technology use
• among first-year pharmacy students
• Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 62 4 433-438 1998

51
Research - learning whilst teaching

• M H Sosabowski, K Herson and A W Lloyd
• Identifying and overcoming staff resistance
• to computer based learning and teaching
• methods - shedding millstones to achieve
• milestones
• Active Learning 9 26-31 1999

52
Research- taking advantage from necessity
53
Research from teaching

• M H Sosabowski, K Herson and A W Lloyd
• Implementation and student assessment of
• intranet-based learning resources
• Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 62 3 302-306 1998

54
Research from teaching

• K Herson, M H Sosabowski and A W Lloyd
• Intranet-based learning a one-year study
• of undergraduate utilisation
• Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15
• 4 269-278 1999

55
Research output doesnt have to be about what
works - can be about what doesnt work, and why

• M H Sosabowski, K Herson and A W Lloyd
• Hurdles to successful implementation of
• knowledge trees
• British Journal of Educational Technology
• 30 1 61-64 1999

56
Research can focus on the wider issues of the
organisation

• K Herson, M H Sosabowski, A W Lloyd, S
• Flowers, C Paine and B Newton
• Implementation strategies for educational
• intranet resources
• British Journal of Educational Technology
• 31 1 47-55 2000

57
Research taking advantage from necessity
58
Research taking advantage from necessity

• George W J Olivier, Katie Herson and Michael H
  Sosabowski
• WebMark a fully automated method of
  submission, assessment, grading and commentary
  for laboratory practical scripts
• J. Chem. Ed. 12 1699-1703 2001

59
Research draw the students in as stakeholders

• M H Sosabowski, S Aljawhiri, K Herson, and G W J
  Olivier
• Enhancing learning and teaching quality
  intranet hierarchy optimisation and application
  of stereochemical molecular representations
• Information Services Use 2001 (in press)

60
Research draw the students in as stakeholders

• Michael H Sosabowski, Rachel Sawers, Anne-Marie
  Zahoui, Tina Burton, Sally Eynon, Louise Noble,
  Caroline Ansell, Catherine Murphy, Ajay Patel,
  Jane Anne OConnor, Gail Healey, Alison Penna,
  Kate Woodrow, Nadine Ryan, Jaimini Patel, Una
  McPartlan, Chris Aljawhiri, Sally Pearce, Sue
  Taylor, Anna Thorell, Vanessa Hill, Lynn Martin,
  Steven Bradley, Morgan Reidy, Tommy Butler,
  Diane-Marie Barton, Debbie Baker, John Fallon,
  Caroline Metters, Mary Boucher, Andrew Jukes,
  Nick Reid, Jenny Hodgson, Emma Glover, George W J
  Olivier and Stephen P Denyer
• Student focus groups as an element of the
  M.Pharm. quality management programme
• Pharmacy Education 1 2 125-135 2001

61
Research teaching a model
62
Acknowledgement

• University of Brighton Education
• Research Strategy Group for funding
• 1999/2000
• 2000/2001
• George W J Olivier

63
Opportunity for questions

• Michael Hal Sosabowski
• mhs_at_bton.ac.uk
• Tel [phone]