In our last installment on sensitivity in writing, we looked at the general importance of considering your audience and how your work is presented. We also covered specifics on how to spot inadvertent bias or prejudice in your work, and how to keep your language gender-neutral. In this post, we look at some more subtle details of inclusive writing.
The way people write, along with the way people speak, is constantly evolving. Although at times there may be debate over the degree to which language should be reined in to consider of the sensitivities of various groups, a consensus has emerged in recent decades that the language we use in communicating with the public should be inclusive and free of bias.
Like everything in life, open access has its good and bad sides. As part of open access week, we’ll give a brief rundown of some of the positive and negative aspects of publishing open access.
Advantage 1: Free for all
In a previous post, we talked about the importance of avoiding verbiage and using overly long words for their own sake, to keep the expression in your paper clear, simple, and readable. While simple, concise expression is key to communicating your research clearly, it’s also important to use language that maintains the right tone for a scientific publication that will be read by a highly accomplished audience of researchers.
Shakespeare wrote that brevity is the soul of wit. When writing a manuscript, the complexity of your research may not always make it easy to keep your text brief, but it is still important to express ideas clearly and succinctly, with a minimum of unnecessary words.
There are a lot of journals out there to choose from and, unfortunately, not all of them are reputable. So how do you know which journals are good to submit to or have sent you a legitimate request for peer review? We’ve provided here a short guide to help you distinguish reputable journals from non-reputable journals. These items are some of the important factors to look for that can help you identify whether a journal’s practices are likely to be trustworthy.
Signs of a non-reputable or predatory publisher: