Choosing where to submit your manuscript
Selecting the most appropriate journal or publisher to approach to publish research depends on the subject area and the specific research topic. Mentors, line managers and colleagues from the relevant disciplinary area are best placed to offer expert advice. However, Section 3.7 of the Code of Good Practice in Research offers the following guidance:
Section 184.108.40.206: ‘Aim for the venue with the widest audience you can expect to attract. Nearly all research requires financial investment, and honouring that investment implies publication of the research by a journal or publisher that reaches the largest number of interested parties. Some journals/publishers have a better track record for making research visible than do others.’
Section 220.127.116.11: ‘For one’s most significant work it is advisable to select a journal/publisher that devotes the time of both professional editors and expert referees to provide critical feedback. This external input can result in a final manuscript that is better expressed and argued than the original submission.’
Seek a journal/publisher that will uphold the highest standards of rigour, for example by ensuring that data and methodologies (as appropriate to the discipline) underpinning your research are made available alongside the publication itself.
How can I identify trusted journals?
Researchers seeking to publish their work can choose from a wide range of journals.
However, please note that some publishers do not deliver the rigour of academic scrutiny expected of scholarly publishing nor provide appropriate standards of service. Publishing your paper in these "predatory" journals may also limit the visibility of your publication, as these journals are typically not indexed in literature databases.
It is not in your interest to publish your research findings in these journals. An Arxiv article from 2019 says:
‘We studied citation statistics over a five-year period in Google Scholar for 250 random articles published in such journals in 2014, and found an average of 2,6 citations per article and that 60% of the articles had no citations at all. For comparison a random sample of articles published in the approximately 25,000 peer reviewed journals included in the Scopus index had an average of 18,1 citations in the same period with only 9% receiving no citations. We conclude that articles published in predatory journals have little scientific impact.’
Use expert knowledge of the field. We recommend that researchers use their disciplinary knowledge — or that of an experienced colleague — to gauge the trustworthiness of a journal. One approach is to check the editorial board for names of known and respected researchers. Be especially vigilant of journal editors that approach you with unsolicited communications.
Use a practical checklist: Think Check Submit provides guidance and an online checklist to help researchers identify trusted journals.
Contact your subject/College librarian. They will be able to advise on the trustworthiness of journals.
Relevant publications on this topic
- Predatory journals; no definition, no defence – Nature 2019
- Articles in 'predatory' journals receive few or no citations – Science 2020
- How Frequently are Articles in Predatory Open Access Journals Cited – Arxiv 2019
- Committee on Publication Ethics Discussion Paper – COPE 2019
Before submitting your manuscript
Open Access Costs
Authors are strongly advised to familiarise themselves with the Open Access options available from their chosen publisher, and to contact the library ahead of submission with any queries.
Block funds can only be used to meet the Open Access requirements of the relevant funder. Not all costs can be covered. To find out if block funds cover costs for your funder and chosen publisher please contact us at: email@example.com
The University promotes a positive research culture, in which colleagues are recognised and valued for their varied contributions to a research activity. Ensuring that collaborators get due credit for their activities is good practice: it promotes fairness, supports careers, and increases the transparency of, and trust in, our findings.
Authors should familiarise themselves with the guidance in the Code of Good Practice in Research.
The University expects authorship credit to be based on:
i. substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; and normally
ii. drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
The policy also recommends that colleagues agree on the contribution that each author has made to the output, and document these contributions in the manuscript itself, whenever possible.
Please use the CRediT list of contributor roles to select appropriate roles for each author.
Many journals allow you to include authorship roles as part of the submission process. If they do not request this, we suggest that you try to include the role descriptors in the text of the paper.
If you have an agreed list of Glasgow author roles that are cannot be submitted with the paper, then we can record these in Enlighten. Example Enlighten record where roles are not in published version.
You may use the form below or email details of the roles to firstname.lastname@example.org. Note that the corresponding author at the University of Glasgow is responsible for ensuring that roles for all Glasgow authors are agreed.