撰稿时需要记住的五个要点
Bruce D. McDonald III
研究很难，但发表更难。博士项目用大量时间教会学生如何做研究，却很少讨论如何发表。要知道，发表研究成果是学者的核心能力之一，知道如何发表对学者而言至关重要。幸运的是，发表研究的技巧和研究方法一样都是一种技能，并且是一种可以传授的技能。
作为Public Administration主编、Journal of Public Affairs Education和Public Finance Journal的联合主编，我的办公桌上每年都有数百份像您这样的作者的手稿。我的工作就是查看这些手稿，评判哪些需要被拒稿，哪些应该给予修改的机会，并最终决定那些研究应该被接受并发表。在审稿时，我重点关注的有五个方面，每一个标准都是您可以学会在研究过程中予以满足和做到的。
01
与期刊的契合度
论文与期刊的契合度是稿件发表过程中被考虑的首要且最关键的因素。因为每个期刊都有自己聚焦的重点和感兴趣的选题，这体现在期刊宗旨和关注领域上。契合度是指您的稿件与期刊的宗旨和关注领域的匹配程度。例如，Public Administration是我们领域的一本“多面手”期刊，专注于全球研究。如果一篇稿件在该领域内没有广泛的受众，那么它就不太可能适合该期刊。同样，假如一篇稿件无法和单个国家或地区以外的公共管理受众对话，那它可能也不太适合这个期刊。
一个快速决定您的稿件是否契合该期刊的方法是查看参考文献。您的参考文献中有多少来自该期刊？如果你的引用中没有，或者只有少数，那么它可能不是最合适的。当然，仅有参考文献并不能说明完美契合，但是您的参考文献可以让您快速了解哪个期刊可能最为契合。
另外，判断稿件与期刊的契合度时，您还要了解期刊随时间推移发生了哪些变化。每个期刊主编有他们想要推广的观点和研究议程。一本期刊曾就某一主题发表论文，并不意味着主编目前对该主题仍感兴趣。当您撰写稿件时，您需要确保您的稿件既能够连结既往刊发的论文，还对话了该期刊最近发表论文中的讨论。
02
理论的贡献
研究可从应用角度出发，也可从理论角度出发。应用研究致力于解决一个组织或个人面临的特定问题。一般来说，这种研究属于顾问、公务员和政策分析师的工作。
理论研究是一种寻求建立在该领域知识基础上的研究。其创造了我们对世界如何运作的理解，这样我们就可以把这些知识运用到不同的情况和背景中。这种研究通常属于学术环境下的研究范围。
了解您的稿件对该领域理论的贡献对于您的投稿方向十分重要。公共管理领域的权威期刊倾向于发表对理论有重大贡献的研究，但是有一些期刊偏好应用研究，也有一些期刊在发表上希望平衡两种研究。
在投稿时，您需要坦诚陈述您的稿件做出了那些贡献。例如改变一个单一变量或将以前发表的框架应用到一个新的国家，也许会提供有趣而重要的结果，但是它能对该学科的理论有什么补充呢？我并不是说这没有贡献，而是说您需要确保在您的研究中，能尽早且时时地将贡献表達得清晰明确。我从审稿人那最常看到的两种意见是，稿件的贡献不明确，以及稿件对理论的贡献不显著。这两种问题都是可以轻易避免的。
03
方法论的适当性
我们评判稿件的第三个组成部分是作者所选研究方法的适当性。高等教育中关于定性研究和定量研究的长期争论，导致许多人认为一种方法比另一种方法更为优越。但事实并非如此。相反，我们考虑的是，检验研究假设的方法是否是适合研究问题，以及是否是特定研究环境下的最优选择。
人们倾向于根据自己最了解或流行的东西来选择一种方法（我甚至见过一些学者以写论文为借口，使用特定的统计检验方法）。然而作为一名研究人员，您之所以需要采取一种特定的研究方法，是因为这方法对研究确实必要。什么方法合适，往往由您决定。但是您一旦做出选择，就必须在稿件的研究方法部分汇报该方法的适用性。
作为一名编辑，我在决定一项研究是否应送审时，总是会关注研究中使用的方法。我要看到这种方法是否检验了假设，以及是否有明显使用不当的情况。对于每一篇送审的稿件，我总是尽量确保至少有一名审稿人熟悉这种方法，确保该方法被正确的使用。作者、编辑和审稿人经常会争论稿件中使用的方法，通常这些争论是归因于方法不明确的部分。如果审稿人对您的研究方法提出质疑，可能是因为您不清楚为什么您选择的研究方法是最好的。
04
研究的质量
毋庸置疑，期刊希望发表高质量的研究，但高质量意味着什么？当然，一项研究的理论含义及其研究方法的复杂程度有助于人们评判稿件质量，但它们并不是质量的直接衡量标准。相反，研究质量指的是您如何开展研究。
研究质量体现了作者开展研究和撰写稿件时的工作情况，表明作者已经确保他们的理论解释清晰、周全并且备有证明材料，保证了所有相关文献都已经被纳入考虑，还反映了作者是否为他们的数据选择了合适的样本，进行了合理的分析，并充分解释了研究结果。
审稿人常提到的一个质量缺陷是缺少相关文献，更糟糕的是部分文献被忽略。例如，初学者在辩护他们的研究时，经常提出公共管理领域从未有人研究过某个问题。这可能是真的，但学者们如何证明这种情况属实呢？该领域每年发表的文章数以万计，这使得某些学者容易遗漏掉某篇相关文献。总而言之，要想开展高质量研究，意味着您需要花时间充分研究和了解与您的稿件相关的文献。
05
稿件的交流
最后，当我们决定是否继续阅读一篇稿件或拒绝它时，通常会考虑一篇稿件能否顺利向读者传递其中内容。在阅读稿件，甚至在斟酌我自己的作品时，我总是会考虑以下三个问题：
1.稿件是否清晰易懂？
2.稿件是否完成了作者说要做的事？
3.稿件是否经过了编辑和润色？
虽然我们在公共管理方面的很多研究都是学者之间的对话，但我们还应该考虑到关注这门学科也有从事公共管理实践的人。研究的最大效用在于能够被学者和实践者阅读和应用。只有当我们在工作中能够成功进行沟通，才能实现满足上述要求。
教研究生如何写研究论文时，我经常推荐一种“母亲测试”。您的母亲不太可能是您所在研究领域的专家，但一篇成功的论文应该是任何捡起它的人都能跟上讨论，理解它的发现和贡献。母亲测试是想象您已经把稿件给了您的母亲，并问她是否能在阅读时跟上。如果它通过了母亲测试，那么对于任何想要阅读它的人来说，它很可能是清晰易懂的。
您还要考虑稿件是否完成了您提出的目标。这包括审查您的手稿，以确保所有的未解决的问题都得到了解决。例如，您应该确保您的稿件完成了您在摘要或简介中提出的承诺，或者修改稿件以删除未能实现的承诺。我们通常期望一篇稿件按照预期目标完成，但是伴随时间推移，一篇稿件容易走向一个新的方向，导致旧的陈述在写作过程中被遗忘。我们十分理解完成稿件令人感到兴奋，但是您还需要花时间回顾并确保所有细节都已得到解决。
大多数期刊在发表前都会对稿件进行编辑，但这种编辑注重寻找拼写和语法方面的一般问题。这个时候作者不适合对稿件进行重大修改或润色，相关工作应该在提交之前完成。一份精心打磨的稿件并不能保证被任何期刊接受，但是它确实有助于顺利通过审稿，毕竟审稿人更容易阅读和理解稿件及其研究目的。
发表很难，这会让身为作者的您感到受伤。当你开展研究并向期刊投稿时，重点是记住，评审过程并不是评价您和您的工作是否有价值。事实上，您有价值，稿件也有价值，审稿过程只是为了帮助提高待发表作品的质量，并且告诉编辑一份稿件在一段时间内可以得到改进的可能性有多大。作者应该充分利用这一过程，接受评审的意见，用于改进稿件，并从中学习。最后我想说，我们都曾有过被退稿的稿件，但是这个领域有上百种期刊，每一篇稿件总会有它的归宿。
Five Themes to Keep in Mind when Drafting your Manuscript for Publication
Bruce D. McDonald III
Research is hard, but publishing that research can be harder. Doctoral programs spend a significant amount of time teaching students how to conduct research, but they relatively little time talking about how to publish. Given that a central component of an academic career is the ability to publish our research, knowing how to publish is vital. The good news is that the art of publishing your research is as much of a skill as the research methods, and it is a skill that can be taught.
As the editor of Public Administration and co-editor of the Journal of Public Affairs Education and Public Finance Journal, hundreds of manuscripts from authors such as yourself cross my desk each year. It is my job to look at these manuscripts and decide what ones should be rejected, which ones should be given the opportunity to undergo revisions, and, ultimately, what research should be accepted and published in the journals. When looking at the manuscripts that cross my desk, there are five things that I look for, each of which is something you can learn to address and implement in your work.
Manuscript Fit with the Journal
The first and most crucial consideration in manuscript publishing is the fit between the paper and the journal. Each journal has its focus and topics of interest, which are reflected in its aims and scopes. The question of fit is one of how well your manuscript aligns with the journal’s aims and scope. For example, Public Administration is a generalist journal within the field that focuses on global research. If a manuscript does not speak to a broad audience within the field, it is unlikely to be a good fit for the journal. Similarly, suppose a manuscript does not speak to the state of public administration beyond the context of a single country or location. In that case, it is probably not a good fit for the outlet.
A fast way to decide if your manuscript might be a good journal fit is by looking at your reference list. How many of your references are from the journal? If none, or only a few, of your citations are from the journal, then it is probably not the best fit. Of course, the presence of references alone does not indicate a perfect fit, but your list is a quick way to understand who might be a good outlet.
In considering the fit between a manuscript and a journal, you do need to be aware of how a journal has changed over time. The editor-in-chief of a journal has their perspectives and research agenda that they want to promote. Just because a journal has published on a topic in the past does not mean it is currently interested in the subject. When you are writing your manuscripts, you need to be sure that you are not just connecting with the articles that a journal has published in the past but also with the recent debates that the journal has published.
Contribution of the Theory
Research can either take an applied perspective or a theoretical one. Applied research addresses a particular problem that an organization or individual faces. Typically, this research falls into the purview of work conducted by consultants, public servants, and policy analysts.
Theoretical research, however, is research that seeks to build upon the knowledge of the field. This kind of research creates our understanding of how the world works so that we can take that knowledge and apply it to different situations and contexts. This research typically falls into the purview of research conducted in an academic setting.
Understanding what your manuscript contributes to the theory of the field is essential in deciding where you will send your work. The field’s leading journals focus on publishing research with a significant contribution to theory. However, some journals are open to applied research, and others look to publish research that balances the two.
When submitting a manuscript, you need to be honest with yourself about what contribution your manuscript makes. For example, changing a single variable or applying a previously published framework to a new country may provide interesting and important results, but what does it add to the theory of the discipline? I am not saying that there is no contribution, but rather that you need to make sure that contribution is clear early and often in your research. Two of the most frequent comments I see from reviewers are that the manuscript’s contribution is unclear and that a manuscript does not significantly contribute to theory. Both of these comments can be easily avoided.
Methodological Appropriateness
The third component of a manuscript that we look for is the appropriateness of the methodological choices that the author has made. A long-standing debate between qualitative and quantitative research within higher education has led many to believe one approach is superior. This is not the case. Instead, the consideration is whether the methodology chosen to test a study’s hypotheses captures the research question and whether that methodology was the best choice given the circumstances of the study.
There is a tendency for people to choose a method based on what they know best or what is trendy. (I have even seen some scholars write papers as an excuse to use a particular statistical test.) As a researcher, however, you should take a specific approach because that is necessary for the study. The decision on what is appropriate is yours to make. Once you have made your choice, you must convey the appropriateness when writing the methods section of your paper.
As an editor, I always look at the methods used in a study when deciding whether it should be sent for review. I look for whether the approach tests the hypotheses and whether there are glowing concerns about its appropriateness. If a manuscript is sent out for review, I always try to ensure that at least one of the reviewers is familiar with the approach to ensure it was correctly implemented. Authors, editors, and reviewers often quibble about the methods used in a manuscript, but often, these quibbles come back to an unclear methods section. If reviewers are raising concerns about your methods, you were probably unclear why your choices were the best.
Quality of the Research
It should go without saying that journals want to publish high-quality research, but what does high quality entail? Of course, the theoretical implications of a study and its methodological sophistication contribute to a perception of the quality of a manuscript, but they are not direct measures of quality. Instead, quality of research refers to how you have undertaken the research process.
Quality reflects the author’s work when conducting the research and writing the manuscript. It reflects that the author has ensured their theoretical explanations are clear, well thought-out, and documented. It is the assurance that all relevant literature has been included in the study. And it reflects whether the author has chosen appropriate samples for their data, conducted the analysis, and adequately interpreted the findings.
A pitfall of quality that reviewers often bring up is that some of the relevant literature is missing or, worse, ignored. For example, new scholars frequently justify their research by saying that nobody in public administration has examined a particular issue. Sometimes this may be true, but have the scholars taken steps to ensure that is the case? Tens of thousands of articles are published each year in the field, allowing for lots of opportunities for someone to have missed a piece here or there. Conducting quality research means you will have spent time fully studying and understanding the literature related to your manuscript.
Communication of the Manuscript
Finally, we consider how successful a manuscript communicates to the reader when deciding whether to move forward with a manuscript or reject it. When looking at manuscripts, and even when considering my own work, there are three questions that I always consider. These are:
1.Is the manuscript clear and accessible?
2.Does the manuscript accomplish what you said it was going to do?
3.Has the manuscript been edited and polished?
Much of the research we conduct in public administration is done as part of a dialogue between academics, but the discipline also has those who engage in the practice of public administration. The greatest utility that research can have is when it can be read and applied by academics and practitioners. This can only be achieved when we successfully communicate in our work.
When teaching graduate students how to write research papers, I often recommend what I call the “mother test.” Your mom is not likely an expert in the area you are conducting research in, but a successful paper is one that anyone picking it up would be able to follow the discussion and understand its findings and contributions. The mother test is imagining that you have given the manuscript to your mother and asking her if she could follow it as she read it. If it passes the mother test, then it is likely clear and accessible for anyone else who wants to read it.
You must also consider whether the manuscript accomplished what you said it would. This involves reviewing your manuscript to ensure all loose ends have been addressed. For example, if the abstract or introduction says you will do something, you should ensure it has been done, or you need to revise the manuscript to remove the reference. The expectation that a manuscript does what it says it will do is a given, but research is conducted over time. It is easy for a paper to take a new direction or for old statements to be forgotten as it is being written. While the thrill of finishing a draft is exciting, it is important to take the time to look back and ensure all details have been resolved.
Most journals have manuscripts copy edited before publication, but this copy editing looks for broad issues with spelling and grammar. It is not a time for the author to make significant revisions or polishes to a manuscript. Instead, this should be done before submission. A well-polished manuscript does not guarantee acceptance at any journal, but it does help to smooth the review process as reviewers will have an easier time reading and understanding the manuscript and its aims.
Publishing is hard, and it leaves you vulnerable as an author. As you engage in research and submit your manuscripts to journals, it is important to remember that the review process is not there to say whether you and your work are valuable. You are, and it is. The review process is there to help improve the quality of the work being published and to tell the editor how likely it is that a manuscript can be improved within a period of time. Use the process to your advantage. Take the reviews, apply them to your manuscript, and learn from them. We all have manuscripts rejected, but with hundreds of journals in the field, there is always a home for every piece.
转自课题洞见微信公众号，仅作学习交流，如有侵权，请联系本站删除！
