area, since the authors of relevant work are likely to be your
referees. Get long data or methodology sections out of the main
line of the text argument and put them into annexes, leaving
the key ‘bottom line’ results appropriately established and
framed in the main text. Many journals now are developing a
terser style and putting data and other annexes onto the Web
only, a trend that will probably develop further. Remember that
the ‘need to know’ criterion can be easily adapted to meeting
the needs of a professional readership. Applying the ‘Say it
once, say it right’ maxim can also help keep length minimal.
Because of the long time lags in papers being processed by
journals it is always a good idea to try and anticipate any criti-
cisms before you send the paper off, rather than afterwards.
Show your ‘paperized’ version of your chapter to your supervi-
sor and fellow students, and try to get a wider range of
comments by giving it at seminars and a conference. Much as
it is painful to do so, you should religiously note down and
carefully reflect upon the critical or bored/uncomprehending
comments that you get from these audiences and readers, and
then adjust your text to try and pre-empt or counter them. This
kind of feedback can also sometimes be helpful in reappraising
which is the best journal to send your work to.
Once you have submitted the piece and borne the frustra-
tions of waiting for a response, you need to be able to deal with
the referees’ and editors’ comments that you will get back. It is
best to anticipate that your paper will not be straightforwardly
accepted without any revisions, a rare achievement even for
senior academics. Instead you should expect to receive an edi-
tor’s letter which is either some kind of tentative acceptance or
a not complete rejection or a flat no. An attitude of making
changes to respond to all criticisms (recommended above) can
stand you in good stead again here. Any journal’s referees are
likely to make some criticisms of your work that will be unsym-
pathetic or misguided in some respects. But however infuriating
and unjustified some criticisms may seem, the referees nor-
mally could not have made them without somethingproblem-
atic in your analysis to latch onto. Constructively handled,
these pointers can help you make improvements in your work.
So if the journal comes back with an ‘acceptance subject to
revisions’ letter, you should congratulate yourself on having
PUBLISHING YOUR RESEARCH◆ 247