How to Get a Paper Published I . Prerequisite doing mass【B1】______【B1】______ collecting mass information and data II. Things y

How to Get a Paper Published
    Good morning, everyone! As college students, all of you. I believe, have the capacities to do researches by your own, and also have the basic knowledge of writing research papers. But do you know how to make your paper published? Today, I’m going to give you a lecture on this.
     (1)First of all, you should write your papers well on the basis of doing mass researches and collecting mass information and data. It’s the prerequisite. Then, please focus your minds on the following tips. After you have followed all the advice on how to write a paper, had it submitted to a journal of your choice, here are things you should do.
     (2)First, if the editor and the journal are established and responsible, you should receive an acknowledgement within two weeks. Otherwise, you should post an inquiry. Manuscripts do get lost at times.
    Then, once receipt is acknowledged you should wait patiently for a review decision.(3)I personally suggest that if you have not heard from the journal in four months, then you should politely write to the editor to inquire about progress on the review, since occasionally there arc irresponsible editors and reviewers. Once they agreed to process your paper, they owe you some timely response. But be polite and professional in your dealings. Remember reviewing a manuscript is a volunteer activity. As authors, "demanding" actions will get you nowhere.
    Finally, the reply comes back from the editor. If the editor accepts the paper without modification or with request for minor revisions only, congratulations!
    More likely than not, however, the paper is not accepted as is and the editor wants major revisions and re-review : or worse, the paper is rejected.(4)In either case, you have some decisions to make. Here I offer my own experience on what to do next.
    If the paper is rejected outright, then you need to decide if the decision is justified. Most of the time, this is done with good reason including value judgment. The author should accept and learn from the experience.(5)On the rare occasion when you think a real injustice has been committed and you want to protest, you had better do it with very strong evidence and well supported reasons. Furthermore, if you balance your action a-gainst the cost of protest some times you will realize it is not worth the trouble. For almost everyone, you will only have truly significant discovery a couple of times in your entire life. No one said the world is fair and most of the time, it is not worthwhile to get angry with the "small stuff".
     (6)Most reviewers are fair and have constructive things to say which you should consider carefully when attempting to revise your paper. Try not to get annoyed by the sometimes sarcastic remarks of the reviewer. Often it is their chance to payback when they were on the receiving end as authors. Thus, don’t be sarcastic and mean in responding to their reviews. Getting angry will only hurt your cause. As the saying goes "don’t get mad, get even by having your paper accepted".
    When responding to a reviewer with your revised manuscript and/or specific replies, remember that months probably has gone past since the reviewer read your paper and wrote his review. Make the job easy and pleasant for him.(7)First, write a general covering letter to each reviewer thanking him for his effort and comments. Then promise that you have considered each of his comments and what you have done and responded to each. Then, reproduce his review and give your reply side by side for each remark. Remember, by this time most reviewer probably has forgotten what he said about your paper. You need to make things easy and to remind him.(8)Also showing you took his comments seriously will impress him with your effort and sincerity.
    But you need not agree with everything the reviewer said. If you must disagree, do it professionally and with no discomfort. Above all, explain why you cannot do what he suggests with a good reason. Fair referees and editors will respect you.
     (9)Above all, remember your task is to win over the reviewer and not to fight with him. The playing field between a reviewer and an author is not level. You can seldom win a fight with an editor or a reviewer.
     (10)In addition to dealing with the relationship with an editor or a reviewer, another thing I need to remind you is that though currently quantity of publication is all important, conforming to established custom and traditions of academia is of great significance. The emphasis on quantity will soon pass and you will regret if you give in to some incentives for aberrant and unethical behavior. Therefore, I want to say that you should put correct eyes on the publishing of papers. Never copy anybody’s work!
    Well, in summary, when you contact a reviewer, remember to be patient and professional to him, learn from the experience rather than get annoyed if the paper is rejected, and furthermore, do something to remind a reviewer when you send to him your revised manuscript. If you follow my advice, chances are that you will have your paper published. OK, today’s lecture is over. Thank you very much!