(Download PDF) How To Get Published and Win Research Funding 1St Edition Abby Day Ebook Online Full Chapter
(Download PDF) How To Get Published and Win Research Funding 1St Edition Abby Day Ebook Online Full Chapter
(Download PDF) How To Get Published and Win Research Funding 1St Edition Abby Day Ebook Online Full Chapter
https://ebookmeta.com/product/how-to-get-published-and-win-
research-funding-1st-edition-abby-day-2/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/diversity-inclusion-and-
decolonization-practical-tools-for-improving-teaching-research-
and-scholarship-1st-edition-abby-day-editor/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/writers-artists-yearbook-2024-the-
best-advice-on-how-to-write-and-get-published-writers-and-
artists-117th-edition-bloomsbury-publishing/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/how-to-fight-arthritis-win-william-
l-fischer/
The Documentary Distribution Toolkit How to Get Out Get
Seen and Get an Audience 1st Edition Gordon
https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-documentary-distribution-
toolkit-how-to-get-out-get-seen-and-get-an-audience-1st-edition-
gordon/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/how-to-fight-prostate-cancer-win-
william-l-fischer/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/how-to-win-work-the-architects-
guide-to-business-development-and-marketing-1st-edition-jan-
knikker/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/how-to-get-revenge-on-your-ex-how-
to-rom-com-9-1st-edition-london-casey/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/empathy-why-it-matters-and-how-to-
get-it-krznaric-roman/
HOW TO GET PUBLISHED AND
WIN RESEARCH FUNDING
Most journal articles and research proposals are rejected. That represents a
waste of everyone’s time, energy, and spirit, especially now when, more than
ever, academic careers are precarious. In this practical book, Professor Abby
Day addresses these two inter-related and most challenging areas for aca-
demics and researchers in their professional careers: how to secure research
funding and how to get research published.
Reviewers, unpaid and often unappreciated, are over-stretched with their
regular academic jobs, and increasingly reluctant to spend time reading
poorly constructed papers or proposals. As fewer reviewers are available, the
waiting time for a decision increases. Everyone loses. It doesn’t have to be
like that. Professor Day’s ground-breaking strategy covers both publishing
and funding challenges in similar, yet distinct ways. Lack of time? Con-
flicting priorities? No idea where to start or what matters most? This book
explains how to overcome these and other common obstacles to successful
publication and funding. For the first time, one book covers both activities,
with practical guidance for setting your strategy and purpose, identifying
the right publisher or funder, and understanding your audience and the key
criteria for success, as well as helpful advice for writing and managing the
challenges of an academic career. This book draws on the first and second
editions of two international bestsellers, How to Get Research Published in
Journals and Winning Research Funding. Based on original research with
editors, funders, and successful academics, plus two decades of running
international workshops on publishing and funding, Professor Day has now
updated and merged these two critically acclaimed texts.
This book is essential reading for graduate students and early career fac-
ulty members, who will gain new and effective insights and strategies to se-
cure funding and publication opportunities to help develop their academic
careers.
Abby Day
Designed cover image: © Getty Images / elenabs
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
The right of Abby Day to be identified as author of this work has been asserted in
accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised
in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or
hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information
storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
DOI: 10.4324/9781003259718
Typeset in Garamond
by codeMantra
CONTENTS
Prefacevii
PART I
Setting a strategy 1
1 Introduction: a circle of success 3
2 Why publish (or not?) 20
3 Why look for research funding? 35
4 What is good research? 51
5 Diversity and inclusion in research 66
6 A sense of purpose 81
7 So what? implications 98
PART II
Knowing your audience 117
8 Choosing the right publisher or funder 119
9 Understanding editors, reviewers, readers 137
10 Criteria for success 153
PART III
Papers, proposals, and beyond 173
11 Writing better, writing faster 175
12 Managing relationships and academic careers 194
Index205
PREFACE
When the original book HGRPJ was published (1998), academics were
still reading journals in the library and therefore had a tangible, close under-
standing of what a journal is. Now, libraries don’t even stock paper journals
and few students or early career academics ever visit the online site, prefer-
ring instead to keyword search for a particular paper and download that.
This means that the latest generation of academics have a disconnected,
disembodied engagement with journals and are ill-prepared for publishing
when they know so little about the journal or its community.
Further, there are many technological developments concerning paper
and proposal submission, publicity, production, and collaboration, as well
as name changes and new important bodies in the field. This has required
chapter-by-chapter updating and revision. Open Access and proliferation
of publishing sites provide new opportunities and also hidden dangers for
those not prepared for the sometime unscrupulous activities.
There are primarily four new developments with which this volume
engages:
Abby Day
London 2023
PART I
SETTING A STRATEGY
1 INTRODUCTION
A circle of success
Introduction
Becoming a published academic is both a dream and necessity; being funded
these days may be a way to increase visibility and value for some, or the only
means of doing academic work for others. Since the first edition of How to
Get Research Published in Journals was published in 1986, its second edition
in 2008 and Winning Research Funding published in 2003, I have engaged
with academics worldwide, in many disciplines, and at different stages in
their careers. Some people I first met as my students, others as my mentors,
and many more as participants in workshops and webinars. For many years
I hosted separate events – one for getting published, and another for getting
funded. Increasingly, it became less coherent to separate those two strands.
At a writing workshop, people often asked my advice for getting funded,
and at funding workshops, people wanted to know how to increase their
chances of publication.
As academic life changed from an expectation of steady work and ten-
ure to something now much more precarious, becoming a well-published
author and a funded researcher was no longer options for those who had
the time and inclination to write yet another paper and submit yet another
funding proposal. For many early career scholars, their only hope for em-
ployment was a series of short-term, funded projects for which evidence of a
good publication record was a necessary part of their proposal and any hope
for success.
Many novice academics are unaware of one of the most important aspects
of their publishing career: anything they send to a journal must be original.
This means that if in their haste to be published following a PhD they have
already published their thesis as a book, they have likely ruined their chances
of being published in a top journal.
And so, as I introduced key points and answered questions at separate
publishing and funding events it became obvious that much of my advice
DOI: 10.4324/9781003259718-2
4 SETTING A STRATEGY
was the same, whether they were asking about being published or funded.
The detail, of course, differed: which journals I might recommend or what
funding body seemed most appropriate for them would change depending
on their career stage or discipline. But those details were, I knew, necessary
but insufficient conditions for success. What they really needed to know,
and to practise, were the fundamental principles that governed both activ-
ities: how and where in their overall strategy did those options fit? And,
yes, we were all impressed that they could list all their methods, show how
their research fit into a wider body of literature, itemize their findings, and
demonstrate their validity, but so what? Why did it matter, and to whom?
How well did they understand their own originality and contribution to
their fields? Who did they want to reach? Who really mattered and why?
Who cared?
That is why this current book needed to be written. Those stories needed
to be told. I knew that only by combining the shared principles of both pub-
lishing and funding, and then diving deeper into the detail each required,
would the needs of early, mid- and even later career academics be met. Most
importantly, only by bringing together the different aspects of publishing
and funding could I provide the full picture of what, for every academic, is
an inter-locked, inter-dependent Circle of Success.
As an academic gets published, that success feeds into a research pro-
posal and increases the chances of funding; those two activities increase
Research
Research funding
publishing
Research
reputation
1. Pressures to publish.
2. Places to publish.
3. Profitability of publishing.
Pressures to publish
One major change over the last ten years has been an increased pressure from
funders, government, and universities to disseminate more widely. It has
become increasingly apparent during the last decade or so that, one way or
other, academics must publicize their research. Publicly and privately funded
research comes with certain conditions, such as conducting the research eth-
ically, completing it on time and within budget, and – most importantly –
disseminating the results. Research councils, charities, and the private sector
all stipulate that their funding is linked to dissemination. Some funders may
even ring-fence a specific amount of money to pay for dissemination when a
project ends. Research councils often tie end-of-award decisions to dissemi-
nation. Indeed, specifying how you will do that is one of the most important
critical success factors in any funding application.
That is why, as I outlined above, the two activities of funding and pub-
lishing are best reviewed together. Even research that is indirectly funded as
part of an academic’s salary comes with the expectation to publish, which
then feeds into an assessment process that determines promotion, or some-
times how much money an institution will receive from government. In the
UK, for example, the Research Excellence Framework (REF) is carried out
by the UK’s higher education funding bodies: Research England, the Scot-
tish Funding Council (SFC), the Higher Education Funding Council for
Wales (HEFCW), and the Department for the Economy, Northern Ireland
(DfE). Research publications are part of what are known as ‘outputs’: a pub-
lication, a performance, or an exhibition. These are considered according to
three criteria: their quality, their impact beyond academia, and the research
environment (usually the department or wider institution) that supports the
research. The people who make those judgements are academics and mem-
bers of the wider public who sit on panels of 34 subject areas called ‘units
of assessment’.
The Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) which score best on the REF
receive more funding than those that do not. Indeed, one quarter of central
Introduction 7
Popular media
Radio, magazines, newspapers, television, and newsletters all offer excellent
opportunities for academics to publicize their research. Many funding bod-
ies and universities require researchers to issue press releases and co-operate
with in-house public relations experts.
Reports
Most funders expect the Principal Investigator to write a publicly available,
final report summarizing the project’s key findings. These are usually pub-
lished in the funder’s own newsletters or websites. It may also be appropriate
to produce reports for government or other bodies if there are policy issues
to be considered.
Social media
People communicate their research via numerous means, from Twitter and
Meta to personal and institutional blogs. Here, discussion is largely unme-
diated, unedited, and seen to be free from more overt forms of commercial
or political controls.
Predatory journals
Academics are increasingly receiving unsolicited invitations to publish in
journals or edit special issues of journals. If you are an Early Career re-
searcher, receiving such an invitation should be your first clue that some-
thing is not quite right. A reputable journal would never approach an
unknown academic with a direct invitation to publish or edit a special issue.
Any such invitations are made directly from the Editor to a named academic
of considerable reputation. So-called ‘predatory journals’ are concocted by
non-academics in order to lure – prey on – unsuspecting authors to send in
their manuscripts, for which they will be charged a fee. The result may be
something looking like an online publication, with one important differ-
ence: no one respects it, or you for being there.
To flesh out more detail about what constitutes a predatory journal,
scholars and publishers met in 2019 to discuss this worrying trend and de-
cide what could be done about it. As reported in Nature, Grudniewicz et al.
(2019), the group agreed with the following definition:
They also found that there were few ways to immediately spot the predator,
as many have infiltrated reputable databases and have cloaked themselves
with an aura of respectability. To help potential authors recognize a preda-
tory journal, the group agreed that there were several revealing characteristics
including false information on their websites about, for example, composi-
tion of editorial boards and incorrect claims of membership of organizations
or indexing systems; lack of transparency; inconsistency and often incorrect
spelling or use of grammar; aggressive, indiscriminate, repeated, excessively
flattering solicitations. One of their other ‘warning signs’ is, to me, the most
obvious: there is a clear mismatch between the purported scope of the jour-
nal and the expertise of the author. This problem easily occurs when the
Introduction 9
journal and author are not in the same academic community. That is why,
as I discuss in detail throughout this book, it is important to develop a co-
herent and sustainable strategy about who the main audiences are for your
work, and where you are most likely to find them.
Books
Many academics want to publish a book, either as a result of their PhD or
other major research project. This can be an excellent way to publicize a
large project and can give a satisfying feeling of ‘closure’ to a lengthy piece
of research. Before rushing to write your book, remember that all publishers
require detailed proposals: you can visit their websites and look at their tem-
plates and helpful suggestions. If they accept your proposal, they will then
send it for review to judge from external assessment whether or not there is
a market for your proposed book.
Apart from a book you’ve written, you might also consider contributing
a chapter to someone else’s book. This usually happens because someone ap-
proaches you and invites you to do so. In that event, you must bear in mind
that the editor will expect your chapter to fit into the collection as a whole
and you may therefore have to adapt your work considerably.
Book publishing does have several disadvantages. It is time-consuming,
with little financial compensation unless you’ve written a best-selling text-
book. It will also not reach a large audience, given that academic books sell
in the hundreds and low thousands at best, and its content may be digitized
and made freely available through the internet. Academic books are often not
reprinted once they sell out, and therefore your book may disappear forever.
More worryingly for many academics, books are not subject to the same
rigorous review process as are journal papers. And, once the book is pub-
lished it may become more difficult to publish the content in journals be-
cause it is no longer original. Journal websites are clear about the need for
originality and exclusivity. Originality: The Brazilian Journal of Physics (Sub-
mission Guidelines n.d.), for example, states clearly that ‘submission of a
manuscript implies: that the work described has not been published before;
that it is not under consideration for publication anywhere else’.
The Legon Journal of the Humanities (Promoting Access to African Re-
search 1974) makes a similar point, and also calls attention to the practice
of self-plagiarism: when authors duplicate their own material they have pub-
lished elsewhere:
For all its issues, LJH only publishes original contributions (i.e., papers
that have not been published elsewhere) and therefore, disapproves of
10 SETTING A STRATEGY
Profitability of publishing
In the mid-1990s, people were accessing research mainly through reading
paper-based journals and occasionally by finding journal papers on the in-
ternet. Today, the reverse is more likely: we read paper-based journals less
and download the electronic version more.
It may be helpful here to summarize briefly the process from submission
to publication. An author usually submits a paper to a journal via an elec-
tronic platform, enters their personal information, submits an abstract, pro-
vides a title and keywords, and attaches the paper. The editor (or assistant)
is notified by email that a paper has been submitted and the author receives
an automatic email acknowledgement. If the editor concludes that the pa-
per meets the editorial objectives of the journal (and much more about this
Introduction 11
later), then the editor, often with an assistant, selects referees and sends the
paper for review. Referees receive an email notifying them a paper is available
for review. Referees download the paper, review it, and send their comments
through the system to the editor, who makes one of only three possible deci-
sions: accept, revise, or reject. The editor notifies the author.
If the paper is accepted outright – which rarely happens – then the au-
thor celebrates, signs forms regarding copyright and warranties, and awaits
publication in several months or a year’s time. In the case of ‘revise’, the
author should also celebrate (but often sulks – and more about this later)
revises, resubmits the paper and, (subject, sometimes, to further review and
revision), eventually receives the final paper, known as a ‘proof ’ in the form
of a PDF file to check. The journal is then assembled according to its pag-
ination budget and mix of papers, book reviews, research notes, and so on,
and signed off by the editor. Many publishers then send their journals to a
printer that produces a paper-based version and mails the final copies to sub-
scribers. Numbers are small because most subscribers to academic journals
are university libraries, not individuals. Most publishers today are seeking to
reduce their print copies as libraries are clearing their shelves and relying on
digital versions.
There are also, apart from paper-based traditional academic journals,
peer-reviewed digital journals which have only ever existed in digital format
and offer added benefits to authors not found in the traditional model. For
example, digital journals can be timelier, shortening the interval between
submission and publication. Because they are not constrained by space
and cost factors, many allow longer papers than would be possible in paper
journals – although some editors of electronic journals still maintain word
limits in the interest of coherence. Publishing in a digital journal allows
more interesting ways to present data in a flexible, electronic format, which
may make it more attractive to authors using tables and graphs and wanting
to link to other internet-based sources.
Whether existing first as a digital journal or a paper-based, traditional
journal, journal content available on the internet is digitally encrypted so
that the content is accessible only to subscribers. This is when the perception
of ‘the journal’ may begin to be obscured. Most people accessing a paper
on the internet find it through keyword searches, not through navigating
through the journal’s home page and browsing through the most recent is-
sue. The practice of key-word access may hide the paper’s source and, con-
sequently, the means by which it was produced. What is not obvious to
the researcher using search engines is that the source of the paper is most
often a traditional journal, created initially through the traditional means
12 SETTING A STRATEGY
become part of a research project’s budget, and therefore the funder (often a
government research council) pays the fees on behalf of the researcher.
One consequence is that authors who are neither funded nor can afford
author submission fees are increasingly denied access to places to publish.
See, for example, Paige Mann (2022) for more discussion, and Chapter 5
in this volume. Another consequence is that the pressure to receive research
funding increases as academics realize that this is, increasingly, the only way
their research papers can be published.
The battle for the rights and profits of publishing will continue to rage.
For academics wanting to publish their work, the questions will always be
the same: what is the best route to those I need to reach, how will it benefit
them and me, and how do I do it in the least amount of time with the most
chance of success?
This book has been written to make researchers’ tasks easier and more fruit-
ful, to understand ‘luck’ for what it really is – careful positioning and astute
judgement. That, more than anything, is what takes the researcher to the
right place and the right people at the right time. The book’s central propo-
sition is that there is poor, good, and best practice in research funding today.
In exploring best practice, we need to go further than our ten top tips. Those
are, indeed, the structural components of research best practice, but not its
foundation.
Winning research funding consistently depends on concepts like value
and partnership. These concepts turn a one-off experience into a long-term,
mutually satisfying relationship where both partners benefit equally. The
benefits extend far beyond money to prestige, knowledge, and influence.
While the top ten tips may seem components of obvious good practice,
these success factors are often ignored by people who fail to win funding.
This may reflect their inexperience or time pressures. We will be discussing
these factors in detail and offering the benefit of many people’s experiences.
Yet beyond those process-related issues is another question: why, all other
things being equal, are some researchers more successful than others? It does
not seem enough to simply do well: it is necessary to do better than that.
What is the meaning of that ‘better’? In other words, what, in research, is
best practice?
• Themes are designated each year by research councils – how can you
know in advance what they will be?
• A proposal just may not have the right ‘fit’ with the funder.
• Referees may not like you! You may have offended them previously.
It’s a small world and even so-called blind refereeing processes may
be transparent. As one referee remarked: “It’s easy to tell who the
authors are – they’re the ones most frequently referenced”.
Several people, as mentioned earlier, told me that their success was a matter
of ‘luck’. But what is luck? Should we abandon the quest for best practice in
favour of astrology? The following is a typical response to my question – ‘but
what is luck?’. In this case, she was discussing research into a hotly contested
topic that had received a lot of public attention:
Introduction 15
Well, I mean, there’s always a bit of luck. You can never, you know, you
haven’t got a sort of magic ball to see in the future. You can actually
anticipate that this has got the conditions which is likely to lead to con-
troversy, but it doesn’t mean that controversy is likely to occur. I mean,
of course you can’t, but you can have good hunches and our hunches in
fact were correct at the time.
aims to help you create a context, a process, and an approach which will
make those partnerships worthwhile and enjoyable.
One of the strongest temptations challenging those who want funding
is to jump into the application stage without thinking through what they
are doing and why. I examine in more detail the question of why research
funding is important. Not everyone needs it and not everyone wants it. We
therefore need to look at research issues, not only from your perspective but
also from that of the funders and other stakeholders.
The research may, for example:
Even when the themes and priorities have been articulated by the funding
body, it is the researcher’s task to identify the implications and the result.
Funding bodies, public or private, want to see value for money. The re-
searcher who receives funding needs to demonstrate that it will be used ap-
propriately and that the investment will be worthwhile.
Sometimes, applications fail because the budget is beyond anything the
funder can meet, but they also fail because the cost estimates are unrealis-
tically low. Those who fund research do not evaluate proposals based on
a notion that ‘cheapest is best’. They are, by and large, experienced and
committed people with good judgement about likely returns on investment,
likelihood of successful completion, and the right balance of costs and ben-
efits. Poor budgeting – either too high or too low – may suggest that the
applicant has not reviewed the project carefully or is too inexperienced to
complete it successfully.
I also take a closer look at how funding bodies work and what motivates
them, to help you assess which may be a well-suited partner. Too many
researchers rush around looking for a funding partner in a panic-stricken at-
tempt to find money. Many do not find one or, worse (in the long run), find
one who is not suitable. What do you really want, and who will want you?
This is the time to think about what you can gain from a research part-
nership and what you can give. Funders talk more about ‘value’ than they
Introduction 17
do about money. The need to deliver value applies to all potential funders,
not just the corporate sector. We look in more detail at particular kinds of
funders: government, research councils, the European Community, charita-
ble foundations, and professional bodies. Getting to know these people and
how they work is a necessary step in forging long-term relationships.
A theme running throughout this book is about creating the relationship.
How will you know if this is the right partner, and you can meet their expec-
tations? Assessing a potential partner’s needs does not need to be a difficult
task. Unfortunately, it is one most often ignored and said to be the most
common cause of application rejection: ‘we often wonder if academics can
read’, one funder said bluntly. One successful researcher explained:
researchers satisfy the need to publish within this complex context? This
becomes increasingly difficult in an environment where contract research is
more prevalent. Here, every moment counts, every day is billed. Research-
ers who successfully manage both research and writing plan for publication
from the outset. It is easier to think through prospective publication routes
when the research is fresh and thriving than when it is finished and grow-
ing stale. As I described at the outset, publishing and funding decisions are
usually intertwined and co-dependent and therefore a thoughtful, strategic
approach is most beneficial.
Great Britain, 18
France, 11⅔
Prussia, 5½
S. D.
Great Britain, (average,) 1 6
France, (do.) 1 0¾
East Prussia, 0 4⅔
“During the continuance of the last war, many things had conspired to stimulate
to the highest extent the exertions of every class of the people of England. Cut off
by the decrees of Buonaparte from direct intercourse with some of the richest
countries of Europe, the policy which England had adopted in revenge of this
exclusion, had greatly increased the action of those many circumstances which
naturally tended towards rendering her the great, or rather the sole entrepot, of the
commerce of the world. In her the whole of that colonial trade which had formerly
been sufficient to enrich, not her alone, but France and Holland also, had now
centred. The inventive zeal of her manufacturers had gone on from year to year
augmenting and improving branches of industry, in which, even before, she had
been without a rival. The increase of manufactures had been attended with a
perpetual increase in the demand for agricultural produce, and the events of the
two years of scarcity (as they were called) lent an additional spring to the motion of
those whose business it was to meet this demand. The increase which took place in
the agricultural improvements of the island, was such as had never before been
equalled in any similar period of time. Invention followed invention, for
economising labour, and increasing production; till throughout no inconsiderable
part of the whole empire the face of the country was changed. ‘It may safely be
said,’ asserted Mr Brougham, ‘that without at all comprehending the waste lands
wholly added to the productive tenantry of the island, not perhaps that two blades
of grass now grow where one only grew before, but certainly that five grow where
four used to be; and that this kingdom, which foreigners were wont to taunt as a
mere manufacturing and trading country, inhabited by a shopkeeping nation, is, in
reality, for its size, by far the greatest agricultural state in the world!’”
“The flight of the population from the south is thus described by the Clonmel
Chronicle:—‘The tide of emigration has set in this year more strongly than ever it
has within our memories. During the winter months, we used to observe solitary
groups wending their way towards the sea-coast, but since the season opened, (and
a most beautiful one it is,) these groups have been literally swelled into shoals, and,
travel what road you may, you will find upon it strings of cars and drays, laden
with women and children and household stuffs, journeying onward, their final
destination being America. In all other parts of the country it is the same. At every
station along the rail, from Goold’s Cross to Sallins, the third-class carriages
receive their quota of emigrants. The Grand Canal passage-boats, from Shannon
harbour to Sallins, appear every morning at their accustomed hour, laden down
with emigrants and their luggage, on their way to Dublin, and thence to Liverpool,
whence they take shipping for America.’”