Embedded Files
These are some bullet points taken from a talk by the Nature Publishing Group. Most of the points are general tips for manuscript submission, some of them may be specific to Nature journals.
Submitting a manuscript:
Selecting a journal:
Who do you want to read your work?
Where does it fit in the field?
How significant are the findings?
Prepare the paper well (the first time!)
Clearly structured and written
Aims and key messages clearly outlined
Every reader should appreciate your work’s significance
Avoid overselling your work – results should speak for themselves
Format isn’t critical (might be for other publishers)
As much detail as needed to reproduce a result
Cover letter:
Very important part of the submission
Should be a standalone document that complements the manuscript
It should introduce the work, discuss what has been done, why it is important, and why it is suitable for this specific journal
Should not be a copy of the abstract
It should be fairly short (~1 page)
Referee suggestions
Who might have useful insights into your work? What is their expertise?
Do not suggest former supervisors, recent/current collaborators, friends, or relatives
Referee exclusions
Who you would rather didn’t referee your paper and why (3 individuals max.)
Editorial Process:
Initial assessment within a week, most papers declined without review
At least one editor will read the paper thoroughly, and often discuss with other editors
Decision-based on editor expertise
2-4 referees per paper and aim for total turnover time of 4-6 weeks for first decision after review
Decision letters and what they mean:
NO: Reject
Rejection — the paper is not for us
MAYBE: Revisions
We may publish your paper… or we might still not
Important revisions needed
No decision until reviewers’ concerns are addressed
Your paper will go back to referees!
YES: Accept in Principle
Minor revisions — we will publish your paper
If there are no technical concerns, generally does not go back to review
Data availability:
Data available upon request (not upon reasonable request)
Presented at the end of the methods section
Accession numbers, other unique data identifiers, hyperlinks
Encourage depositing raw data in repositories
Minimum compliance statement:
“The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.”
Referee reports:
If invited to resubmit, only do so after you are able to comprehensively address all of the comments
Write a clear and concise point-by-point response to reviewers
Request for further experiments/calculations must be addressed
If you cannot address a particular point, state why
Take criticism as an opportunity not an insult
If an expert has not understood your work, this might be a problem!
Transfers between journals:
Intended to save you time
Find best home for your paper
Double-blind peer review:
Opt-in at time of submission
Blind to reviewers but not to the editors
Author list, acknowledgements, author contribution statement should be provided in cover letter
Ensure the manuscript is anonymized:
“Our previous work showed…”
Gratuitous self-citation
Acknowledgement
Photographs which display the logo of the University
Transparent peer review:
Publication of reviewer reports and author rebuttals as a supplementary file
You can opt-in/opt-out at time of acceptance
Reports can be edited to remove sensitive information
Reviewer identity remains confidential but reviewers can opt to be acknowledged by name
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse