Author AID Workshop on Research Writing Nepal March

Author. AID Workshop on Research Writing Nepal March 2011

A Researcher’s Experience Writing and Publishing His First Paper Ravi Murugesan, MS, ELS Training Coordinator Author. AID@INASP

Academic Qualifications • Bachelor of Engineering, University of Madras, India • Master of Science (Electrical Engineering), University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA

Motivation for Research • Research was not a mandatory component of my master’s program in Wisconsin • After completing many courses, I wanted a different experience of graduate studies • I wanted to engage in experimental or laboratory research – Not research that would require extensive modeling or simulations

Getting Started • I spoke to a professor in the applied physics division, for whom I had been a teaching assistant • He put me on an interdisciplinary research project, involving these exciting things: – Biocompatibility – Plasma treatment – Scanning electron microscopy – Testing with human blood

But I Didn’t Know… • Much about plasma physics (my coursework was in computer engineering) – My advisor’s response to my concern: “Do you have a pulse? ” • That there would be a “publication requirement” – I was familiar with research papers, but I knew nothing about scientific writing and publication

Some Months Later… • Lots of results from various experiments • My advisor told me that to graduate I’d have to write a paper for a journal – And I nearly fainted • I began to write. . .

The First Draft • My advisor’s response: “This does not read like a research paper. ” – Pointed out how the paper should be structured, how I should adjust the tone of my writing (I think I wrote like a businessperson and not a researcher), and so on • I revised the tables and figures and rewrote major parts of the text

A Fundamental Problem • Too much data from too many experiments • The data and results did not funnel into a compelling discussion and conclusion • My advisor said that the paper was not “journal worthy”

A Phase of Regret • All that work – doing so many experiments in different labs, learning to use complex equipment, spending so much time writing the paper – was a waste! • Maybe I should have just finished my degree program in the “course option”

A New Beginning • After a break, I resumed work on the project with a new partner; I was the lead researcher this time – The last time, I was working with a more senior student researcher • I was armed with a greater knowledge of scientific writing, following my experience in editing scientific papers – I could see how my initial drafts were far from being journal worthy

Focused Research • Identified the key analysis stage for the research and decided to focus only on that – Not on gathering data from multiple experiments • Planned the experiments in great detail before conducting them • Interacted with researchers in the university who had done similar work • Carefully analyzed the data and compared them with past research

The Writing Stage • Started writing the paper when about 80% of the study was completed • Wrote the paper in the sequence of the sections – Later on, I revised the abstract extensively • Spent a considerable amount of time on the tables, figures, and references

Internal Peer Review • My advisor felt that the draft of the paper held promise • After reviewing it, he sent it to my co-authors (3 or 4 of them) and asked them to review it – All of them had comments; one of them thought that the paper was not good enough and suggested new experiments – My advisor required that I respond to all their comments (it was difficult)

A Pause • We felt that some images from scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were not clear enough, and we had to do the SEM work again – Thankfully, the SEM results did not change!

Success and Setback • My advisor submitted the paper to the journal “Biomaterials” and approved my degree on the same day – He was confident that it would be published • Two weeks later, the editor of the journal rejected the paper! – He felt that it did not fit fully in the journal’s scope and so did not send it for peer review

The Second Option • My advisor had initially wanted to publish the paper in the Journal of Applied Physics (JAP), but he wanted to try out a new journal • But maybe all along the paper was really more about applied physics than biomaterials – All of us in the research group had read many papers in the JAP and it was the standard target journal for the group’s researchers • We reformatted the paper for the JAP and submitted it there

Success (More Real)

A Minor Revision

Paper – Submission and Publication

What I Learned • It’s not easy to get a paper published in a good journal • The greater the accountability in the research project, the better are the chances of success • Publication is not just about good research but about knowing what to include in the paper and how to present it • Familiarity with the target journal is important • The joy of publication success is worth the trials and tribulations!

Thank you!