Presenter: Dr. Jim Jansen, Visiting Professor, Department of Information Management, Peking University, Beijing, China, jjansen@acm.org, https://www.bernardjjansen.com/
Format: 3-hour interactive tutorial
Abstract
Publishing a research article is a journey, and, like most journeys, those who know the terrain are most rewarded. This is what this tutorial does – we will map out the terrain for journal publishing, with insights helpful for conference publication also.
In this three-hour tutorial, we will walk through the lifecycle of a journal manuscript, from preparation and submission through review, revision, and final polishing, to materially improve their odds of acceptance at a top-tier journal.
Building on a preparatory lecture, the tutorial is structured around discussion, question-and-answer sessions, examples, experiences, short exercises, and open discussion, so that participants leave with actionable tactics they can apply to their own journal manuscripts.
The publication guidance draws on Dr. Jansen’s experience as editor-in-chief of three journals: Internet Research (Emerald, Impact Factor of 3.0 at the end of his tenure), the International Journal of Information Management (Elsevier, as interim editor), and currently Information Processing & Management (Elsevier, Impact Factor of 6.9). Participants will see the publication process from the “other side of the email”, from the viewpoint of the editor, gaining insight into how editors and reviewers read, evaluate, and decide on submissions.
What participants will learn
By the end of the tutorial, participants will be able to:
- Assemble a submission package manuscript checklist, including a cover letter that anticipates editor and reviewer expectations.
- Understand what happens to a manuscript after submission, from ‘hitting the submit button’, to desk review through peer review, to the decision
- Communicate effectively and professionally with the editor-in-chief and handling editors at each stage of the journal publication journey
- Craft a response-to-reviewers document that addresses concerns persuasively and increases the likelihood of a favorable decision outcome
- Revise and polish a manuscript with editorial standards in mind and long-term academic reputation
- Understand the role of citations and impact factors
- Seeing the peer-review system in the broader research ecosystem, including how serving as a reviewer strengthens one’s own writing and research
Tutorial structure
The session organization follows the manuscript’s journey, with each step featuring a short framing discussion, real examples (e.g., cover letters, checklists, reviewer responses), and, where possible, a hands-on exercise for participants’ own projects.
Step 1 — Pre-submission (≈60 min): Preparing the ‘right’ manuscript for the ‘right’ journal by matching scope and fit and writing a cover letter that gets your manuscript out for peer review rather than a quick desk rejection. Interactive session: questions and answers
Step 2 — During the journey (≈60 min): What actually happens once you hit “submit”: desk review, reviewer selection, the editorial workflow, and how decisions are made. We will demystify editor communication, including how and when to follow up, and what different decision letters really mean. Discussion: reading between the lines of an editor’s decision.
Step 3 — The journey continues (≈30 min): Journal publishing is not easy, from navigating the review process to revising the manuscript without overcorrecting and polishing the accepted article. We conclude with a discussion of citations, impact factors, and the role of reviewing in the research process. Exercise: turning a critical reviewer comment into a constructive, professional reply.
Target audience and prerequisites
The tutorial is aimed at graduate students, early-career researchers, mid-career researchers, and old timers. Anyone preparing to submit to, build a track record of publications, or understand better what happens at top-tier journals. No prerequisites are required. Participants who bring a manuscript in progress (or a recent decision letter) might get the most from the exercises. The session is intentionally discussion-driven, and questions throughout are encouraged.
Key takeaways
A practical toolkit of tactics, drawn from an editor’s perspective, for improving the chances of acceptance of your manuscript at a top-tier journal (or conference!).