Article Template & Journal Writing Rules↓ Template for Article in English & Journal Writing Rules*, or
|
Authoring (Tüm yazarlık işlemleri nasıl yapılır?)If you are an author, please; Refer to the following manual for author works: |
Editorial Workflow (Tüm Editörlük işlemleri nasıl yapılır?)If you are an Editor, please Refer to the following manual for editorial jobs: |
How to get published in an academic journal: top tips from editorsWriting for academic journals is highly competitive. Even if you overcome the first hurdle and generate a valuable idea or piece of research - how do you then sum it up in a way that will capture the interest of reviewers? There’s no simple formula for getting published - editors’ expectations can vary both between and within subject areas. But some challenges will confront all academic writers regardless of their discipline. How should you respond to reviewer feedback? Is there a correct way to structure a paper? And should you always bother revising and resubmitting? We asked journal editors from a range of backgrounds for their tips on getting published. The writing stage1) Focus on a story that progresses logically rather than chronologically Take some time before even writing your paper to think about the logic of the presentation. When writing, focus on a story that progresses logically rather than the experiments' chronological order. 2) Don’t try to write and edit at the same time Open a file on the PC, put in all your headings and sub-headings, and then fill in under any headings where you have the ideas to do so. If you reach your daily target (mine is 500 words), any other ideas down as bullet points and stop writing; then use those bullet points to make a start the next day. If you are writing and can’t think of the right word (e.g., for elephant), don’t worry - write (big animal long nose) and move on - come back later and get the correct term. Write don’t edit; otherwise, you lose flow. 3) Don’t bury your argument like a needle in a haystack If someone asked you on the bus to quickly explain your paper, could you do so in clear, everyday language? This clear argument should appear in your abstract and in the very first paragraph (even the first line) of your paper. Please don’t make us hunt for your argument as for a needle in a haystack. If it is hidden on page seven, that will make us annoyed. Oh, and make sure your argument runs all the way through the different sections of the paper and ties together the theory and empirical material. 4) Ask a colleague to check your work One of the problems that journal editors face is badly written papers. It might be that the writer’s first language isn’t English, and they haven’t gone the extra mile to get it to proofread. It can be tough to work out what is going on in an article if the language and syntax are poor. 5) Get published by writing a review or a response Writing reviews is a good way to get published, especially for people in the early stages of their careers. It’s a chance to practice writing a piece for publication and get a free copy of a book that you want. We publish more reviews than papers, so we’re constantly looking for reviewers. Some journals, including ours, publish replies to papers that have been published in the same journal. Editors quite like to publish replies to previous papers because it stimulates discussion. 6) Don’t forget about international readers We get people who write from America who assume everyone knows the American system - and the same happens with UK writers. Because we’re an international journal, we need writers to include that international context. 7) Don’t try to cram your Ph.D. into a 6,000-word paper Sometimes people want to throw everything in at once and hit too many objectives. We get people who try to tell us their whole Ph.D. in 6,000 words, and it just doesn’t work. More experienced writers will write two or three papers from one project, using a specific aspect of their research as a hook. Submitting your work8) Pick the right journal: it’s a bad sign if you don’t recognize any of the editorial board Check that your article is within the scope of the journal that you are submitting to. This seems so obvious, but it’s surprising how many articles are submitted to completely inappropriate journals. It is a bad sign if you do not recognize any members of the editorial board. Ideally, look through some recent issues to ensure that it is publishing articles on the same topic and similar quality and impact. 9) Always follow the correct submissions procedures Often authors don’t spend the 10 minutes it takes to read the instructions to authors, which wastes enormous quantities of time for both the author and the editor and stretches the process when it does not need to 10) Don’t repeat your abstract in the cover letter 11) A common reason for rejections is lack of context Ensure that it is clear where your research sits within the wider scholarly landscape and which gaps in knowledge it’s addressing. A common reason for articles being rejected after peer review is this lack of context or lack of clarity about why the research is important. 12) Don’t over-state your methodology Ethnography seems to be the trendy method of the moment, so many articles submitted a claim based on it. However, closer inspection reveals quite limited and standard interview data. A couple of interviews in a café do not constitute ethnography. Be clear - early on - about the nature and scope of your data collection. The same goes for the use of theory. If a theoretical insight is useful to your analysis, use it consistently throughout your argument and text. Dealing with feedback13) Respond directly (and calmly) to reviewer comments When resubmitting a paper following revisions, include a detailed document summarising all the changes suggested by the reviewers and how you have changed your manuscript in light of them. Stick to the facts, and don’t rant. Please don’t respond to reviewer feedback as soon as you get it. Please read it, think about it for several days, discuss it with others, and then draft a response. 14) Revise and resubmit: don’t give up after getting through all the major hurdles You’d be surprised how many authors who receive the standard “revise and resubmit” letter never actually do so. But it is worth doing - some authors who get asked to do major revisions persevere and end up getting their work published, yet others, who had far less to do, never resubmit. It seems silly to get through the major hurdles of writing the article, getting it past the editors and back from peer-review only to give up. 15) It is acceptable to challenge reviewers with good justification It is acceptable to decline a reviewer’s suggestion to change a component of your article if you have a good justification or can (politely) argue why the reviewer is wrong. A rational explanation will be accepted by editors, especially if it is clear you have considered all the feedback received and accepted some of it. 16) Think about how quickly you want to see your paper published Some journals rank more highly than others, so your risk of rejection will be greater. People need to think about whether or not they need to see their work published quickly - because certain journals will take longer. Some journals, like ours, also do advance access, so once the article is accepted, it appears on the journal website. This is important if you’re preparing for a job interview and need to show that you are publishable. 17) Remember: when you read published papers, you only see the finished article Publishing in top journals is a challenge for everyone, but it may seem easier for other people. When you read published papers, you see the finished article, not the first draft, the first revise and resubmit, or any intermediate versions – and you never see the failures. Philip Powell, managing editor of the Information Systems Journal Source: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/jan/03/how-to-get-published-in-an-academic-journal-top-tips-from-editors |
How to index your article in ERIC db?You may have your article indexed in the ERIC database by yourself as an author if you want to. In some cases, as a field index, the ERIC indexing would be an official requirement. Some articles published in the Journal of Human Sciences are indexed in the ERIC database. The ERIC database requires articles in the English language to index. If your article is in English, you may submit it to ERIC for indexing. Fill this form with your article information and submit it here: |
Impact Factor and rank percentage of Journal of Human SciencesImpact factor and rank percentage for Journal of Human Sciences from various sources independently monitored is reported in this page |
Invitation to JHS Editorial BoardWould you like to join us on the editorial board? You may participate as "Section Editor" in the JHS for every field of social sciences. Section editors must be academic and supervised at least three graduate-level theses. They are responsible whole reviewing process. If you are interested, please submit your résumé with a brief cover letter that shows your willingness (to editor@J-HumanSciences.com). |
Invitation to Referee Board
|
Plagiarism Detection Report and UploadReport file must be uploaded as a supplementary file during the submission process, or upload here before the review process begins: Workflow>Submission>Add discussion>[Subject: similarity report] [Upload file] The similarity percentage must be less than 10%. The iThenticate or Turnitin, etc. software may be used. The report should carry the following conditions:
|
REFEREE ASSESSMENT and DEVELOPMENT FORMPlease download the following document and fill out your report and upload it to the referee page:REFEREE ASSESSMENT and DEVELOPMENT FORMIf you experience any difficulties please report Support@j-HumanSciences.com |
Requesting for DOI number for old publicationsTo obtain a DOI number for your previously published article, please remit the "Article Processing Charge (APC)" and then send your DOI request, the receipt and the published article's title to ‹Editor@J-HumanSciences.com› |
Reviewer / Editor CertificateDear Reviewer / Editor, Thank you for your contribution to scientific works as a Reviewer or Editor at IJHS.
https://forms.gle/Y8WGUSGhqmBgAkoX6
|
ReviewerCredits membershipDear Colleague, We are pleased to inform you that the International Journal of Human Sciences has joined ReviewerCredits, the most comprehensive platform to certify, measure, and reward the activity of scientists as Peer Reviewers and as Conference Speakers. Each review you will perform for the International Journal of Human Sciences will be validated by the Editor and will entitle you to virtual credits, which can be used to obtain benefits offered by ReviewerCredits partners. We invite you to register on the ReviewCredits platform and claim reviews performed for the International Journal of Human Sciences. This service is provided free of charge. This innovative collaboration represents a crucial effort and a great step forward for higher recognition of editorial activities, contributing to a comprehensive re-thinking and a global innovation of the academic editorial world. About ReviewerCredits ReviewerCredits is a startup company, accredited to the University of Milan-Bicocca, launched in 2017 by enthusiastic, active researchers and scientists. ReviewerCredits is an independent platform dedicated to scientists, Journals, and Publishers addressing the peer-review process. |
Reviewing (Hakemlik işlemleri nasıl yapılır?)If you are a reviewer, please; Refer to the following manual for reviewer works: |
The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) / (İntihal ve etik problemlerde ne yapılır?)In any ethic or plagiarism case, we use the following guidance: What guidance is available on this website (for members and non-members)?
|