Scientific writing 3.0: A reader and writer's guide - Jean-Luc Lebrun, Justin Lebrun 2021

The editor
Strategic writing
The reading toolkit

Up until now, we’ve focused on reviewers as the key readers of your paper. But what about the editor? Arguably, the editor is the most important reader your paper will ever have. If this one reader decides that the paper is not worth reading, no other readers will ever get the chance to evaluate it for themselves (not even reviewers!). So who is this mysterious person, what does he or she care about, and how can you use the halo effect to your advantage?

The first step to understanding how to please editors is to understand their role. While in your eyes editors may appear to be at the top of the publishing food chain, they too have responsibilities and a body to which they answer. Editors have a mission to accomplish. The better you help them fulfil that mission, the more likely they are to accept your paper. So what is that mission?

Unceremonious as it may sound, scientific journals do not exist solely for the dissemination of research. Journals are businesses built upon the dissemination of knowledge, but they remain first and foremost businesses. They do not receive public money, rarely operate as nonprofits, or act selflessly (why aren’t reviewers, an essential cog in the publishing process, paid?)²². The editor’s job is to make sure that the papers accepted by the journal are of a high quality and likely to garner citations. The more citations, the higher the impact factor for the journal. The higher the impact factor, the more reputable it appears. This reputation translates into a larger source of revenue from a growing readership: individual and academic subscriptions. And finally, the enlarged readership also enables the sale of increasingly valuable ad space. In short, more high quality science = more money.

Fortunately, the publishing industry’s goals mostly²³ align with those of researchers: both want to see high quality research published and shared, regardless of the differences in their underlying motivations. But this shared vision only extends so far. For the researcher, scientific merit is the top priority. For the editor, readership takes the spot. How does caring for the readership differ from caring about scientific merit?

The first consideration of the editor is the length of each journal issue. Depending on the amount of money available from advertising, each printed journal issue is limited to a set number of pages. If you submit an article that is considerably long, the editor must decide whether it makes more sense to publish your paper or two other shorter papers, each of which could satisfy the needs of the journal’s readers. An increase in article length equals a decrease in editor appetite. So keep your papers as short as possible without compromising on clarity. Look through the last issues of the journal and take note of the average article length. Aim to write at that length, or slightly shorter. Alternatively, you may choose to adopt a format that corresponds to a shorter publication, such as a letter.

Secondly, the editor must consider the paper’s target audience. Let’s imagine you’ve submitted a paper to the Journal of Nephrology²⁴. Who reads that journal? If you thought of nephrologists, you are correct. But nephrologists are only a subset of the total readership. Who else reads the journal? Think about kidney disease researchers, dialysis machine manufacturers, membrane research scientists, patients with a specific kidney disease (and their families), drug manufacturers, etc. The editor’s job is to be mindful of these various readers and publish a range of articles that cater to their diverse needs in each issue. If you can present your work as valuable to more than just a subset of the journal’s readership, you multiply the worth of your paper in the editor’s eyes.

Fair enough, you might think, but where can you plead your case to the editor? No journal article starts off with a paragraph in the introduction stating “We believe the research conducted in this paper would be of value to membrane specialists and sufferers of Nephritis…”

The cover letter

Writing the cover letter is often the very last step in the months-long process of writing a manuscript. Some even see it as a necessary, but peripheral and unimportant task. What a mistake they are making! Whereas reviewers build their first impression from browsing the manuscript, the halo effect starts to affect editors before any browsing begins. Their first impression, and a strong one, is built while reading the cover letter.

Many cover letters are written in the style of a scientific paper. In fact, we’ve seen many letters that are word-for-word copied and pasted from different parts of the paper! One sentence from the introduction here, and a few from the abstract and/or conclusion. How do you think the editor feels when they stumble upon some of these same sentences just minutes later while reading the abstract? The image the author portrays by writing the cover letter from cannibalized parts of the paper shows a lack of care towards the reader. And when editors are frustrated by the cover letter, the halo effect whispers that this expediency may also permeate other parts of the paper (even if it does not). Remember, the editors are the most important readers of your paper. You cannot afford to frustrate them. So aside from the earlier copy-paste behaviour, what are other common pitfalls that frustrate editors?

1. The cover letter is incomplete. Every cover letter will follow the same general structure, but blind reliance on a template can lead to trouble. In their instructions to authors, each journal details what elements the cover letter should contain, including some mandatory statements (e.g. this paper is not under consideration by any other journal, etc.). Make sure none of these parts are missing or formatted differently from the instructions.

2. The cover letter isn’t formatted as a letter. Without reading a single word, you can easily tell a letter apart from a report due to its distinctive format. The first words should be “Dear editor” or “Dear Dr. ____”. You should also end the letter with a closing line such as “Thank you for considering our manuscript, we look forward to your response”, and a signature line such as “Kind regards”. Finally, you should sign off with your name, title, and institution. If sending the letter offline, also include the traditional elements found on a letter, such as the addressee name and mailing address.

3. The cover letter isn’t written in the style of a letter. Imagine you’re writing a letter to your spouse’s grandmother to thank her for buying you a ticket to a broadway musical. Would you start off with “The most thankful of wishes must be imparted upon you, dear reader, for the gift of tickets which were joyfully received by the authors of this communiqué”? Or would you be more casual, in the style of “Dear Lizzie, thank you so much for buying me that ticket, I was extremely happy to receive it!”. The cover letter is a letter. It is a personal correspondence between two people, not an impersonal document. It should therefore be written in a more conversational style (but not too informally either! Spouse’s grandmother, not college friend!). This means that personal pronouns must be present: “we”, “our”, or if you are the sole author, yes even “I” or “my”! It also means that sentences should be written in the active voice — “I am writing to submit my manuscript”, not “this letter is for the submission of the attached manuscript”.

4. The cover letter is too long. Unless absolutely necessary, the cover letter should fit within one page. You must be selective in your wording and succinctly encapsulate the context for the work, what is new and different, and the significance of your work for the field.

5. The cover letter is tiring to read. When was the last time you used acronyms in a personal letter? Neither they nor jargon should belong in the cover letter unless well-defined and absolutely necessary. Only provide necessary technical details if they are essential to telling the story of the research. Remember that the purpose of the cover letter is not to convince the editor of the quality of your science or the breadth of your knowledge — it is simply to help them see the manuscript’s value and decide whether or not it is appropriate for acceptance and review.