Your Article is Accepted. Academic Writing for Publication: A Deep Dive into International Research on Challenges and Strategies
Abstract
Background. Academic writing for publication (AWforP) has recently come to the fore because of the critical importance of scholarly publication to academia. A review of the scientific literature on AWforP found that it is underdeveloped and lacks comprehensive frameworks and models for AWforP challenges, AWforP strategies, or both.
Purpose. To contribute to bridging these gaps, this article aims to summarize and map the AWforP challenges and AWforP strategies identified in the scholarly empirical literature.
Method. A systematic Scopus/WoS literature review was used for data collection, identifying 15 relevant sources (n, sample size). Data were analyzed and summarized by deduction and meta-analysis based on chi-square heterogeneity test and meta-regression, then mapped by induction and K-means clustering.
Results. First, 31 challenges to AWforP and 36 strategies for AWforP were detected. Second, an original classification of AWforP challenges was introduced. The taxonomy of academic writing strategies was expanded with AWforP strategies. Third, AWforP challenges/strategies were ranked based on their frequency of mention in the sample. Semantic difficulties were the most prevalent challenge, and attending academic writing courses was the most advised strategy. Fourth, through meta-analysis, the sample was found to be moderately statistically heterogeneous (I2=60.97%), and the summary effect size was positive and statistically significant. Fifth, the sampled sources were mapped into five clusters based on the country of researchers studied (SSE=10.511).
Conclusion. This article conceptualizes empirical research on AWforP challenges and AWforP strategies by identifying, comprehensively systematizing, summarizing, and mapping them. Implementing the proposed taxonomy of AWforP challenges/strategies under the identified cluster specifics in strategic research planning and control practices would improve researchers’ publication activity and research management effectiveness at the university and national levels.
Downloads
References
Agathokleous, E. (2022). Mastering the scientific peer review process: tips for young authors from a young senior editor. Journal of Forestry Research, 33(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-021-01388-8
Andrade, C. (2020). Understanding the basics of meta-analysis and how to read a Forest plot: As simple as it gets. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 81(5), Article 20f13698. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.20F13698
Bakla, A., & Karakaş, A. (2022). Technology and strategy use in academic writing: Native, native-like versus non-native speakers of English. Iberica, 2022(44), 285–314. https://doi.org/10.17398/2340-2784.44.285
Biber, D. (2006). University Language: A Corpus-based Study of Spoken and Written Registers. J. Benjamins. https://books.google.com.fj/books?id=-2zqpWi19h4C
Blömer, J., Lammersen, C., Schmidt, M., & Sohler, C. (2016). Theoretical analysis of the k-means algorithm – A survey. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics): Vol. 9220 LNCS. (pp. 81–116). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49487-6_3
Bui, H. P., Nguyen, L. T., & Nguyen, T. V. (2023). An investigation into EFL pre-service teachers’ academic writing strategies. Heliyon, 9(3), Article e13743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13743
Carlson, R. B., Martin, J. R., & Beckett, R. D. (2023). Ten simple rules for interpreting and evaluating a meta-analysis. PLoS Computational Biology, 19(9), Article e1011461 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011461
Carlsson, V., & Wilén, E. J. (2024). “It is controlling, but you don’t really care.” Researchers’ perceptions of legitimation of research policy. Science and Public Policy, 51(4), 609–617. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae004
Chanamé-Chira, R., Santisteban-Chévez, D., Manayay-Tafur, M., Solano-Cavero, J. K., Villón-Prieto, R. D., Villón-Prieto, C. R., & Quintana-Marreros, C. (2022). Discursive and rhetorical strategies: A problem of academic writing. RISTI - Revista Iberica de Sistemas e Tecnologias de Informacao, 2022(E53), 137–154.
du Plooy, B., Albertyn, R., Troskie-de Bruin, C., & Belcher, E. (2024). Academic writing for publication: The experience and facilitation of liminality for developing higher levels of scholarliness. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2024.2363899
Dwayi, V. V. M. (2024). Reimagining how the critical realist ways of methodological triangulation might allow for resolving paradigm in/commensurability in research methodologies. European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies, 23(1), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.34190/ecrm.23.1.2464
Frandsen, T. F., Lamptey, R. B., & Borteye, E. M. (2024). Promotion standards to discourage publishing in questionable journals: a follow-up study. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 50(5), Article 102895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102895
Gillett, A., Hammond, A., & Martala, M. (2013). Inside Track to Successful Academic Writing. Pearson Education Limited. Available at: https://books.google.bg/books?id=NcxOAQAAQBAJ
Giraldo, F. (2019). An English for research publication purposes course: Gains, challenges, and perceptions. GiST Education and Learning Research Journal, 18, 198–219. https://doi.org/10.26817/16925777.454
Good, V., & Pullins, E. B. (2024). The nine habits of highly effective researchers: Strategies for strengthening scholarly submissions. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management. 44(2), 101-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/08853134.2024.2324883
Gupta, S., Jaiswal, A., Paramasivam, A., & Kotecha, J. (2022). Academic writing challenges and supports: Perspectives of international doctoral students and their supervisors. Frontiers in Education, 7, Article 891534. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.891534
Habibie, P. (2022). Writing for scholarly publication in an interconnected disjunctured world. Journal of Second Language Writing, 58, Article 100933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2022.100933
Hansen, C., Steinmetz, H., & Block, J. (2022). How to conduct a meta-analysis in eight steps: A practical guide. Management Review Quarterly, 72(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-021-00247-4
Harvey, D., Barker, R., & Tynan, E. (2020). Writing a manuscript for publication: An action research study with allied health practitioners. Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi-Professional Journal, 21(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.11157/fohpe.v21i2.397
Higgins, J. P. T., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (2023). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.4 (updated August 2023). Cochrane, 2023. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook.
Hyland, K. (2021). Academic discourse. In Hyland, K., Paltridge, B. & Wong, L. (eds.) The Bloomsbury Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Second Edition. (pp. 125-138). Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. Available at: https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/bloomsbury-handbook-of-discourse-analysis-9781350156081/
Jalongo, M. R. (2024). Scholarly publication during doctoral candidature: Obstacles, benefits, and strategies for success. Early Childhood Education Journal. 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-024-01724-7
Lambovska, M. (2023). What is behind the shine? The dark side of research evaluation: A conceptual framework. TEM Journal, 12(4), 2552–2563. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM124-67
Lambovska, M., & Raitskaya, L. (2022). Specificity of the motivation for high-quality publications in Russia. TEM Journal, 11(3), 1205–1212. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM113-28
Lambovska, M., & Todorova, D. (2023). Striving for high-quality publications: Motivational profiles of management within a Bulgarian university cluster. TEM Journal, 12(2), 1100–1109. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM122-56
Langum, V., & Sullivan, K. P. H. (2020). Academic writing, scholarly identity, voice and the benefits and challenges of multilingualism: Reflections from Norwegian doctoral researchers in teacher education. Linguistics and Education, 60, Article 100883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2020.100883
Lillis, T., & Curry, M. J. (2022). The dynamics of academic knowledge making in a multilingual world Chronotopes of production. Journal of English for Research Publication Purposes, 3(1), 109–142. https://doi.org/10.1075/jerpp.22002.lil
Lim, W. M., & Koay, K. Y. (2024). So you want to publish in a premier journal? An illustrative guide on how to develop and write a quantitative research paper for premier journals. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 43(3), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.22252
Lin, N. (1976). Foundations of Social Research. McGraw-Hill. https://books.google.bg/books?id=DIowAAAAMAAJ
Martín, E. (2017). Current Sociology and the challenges of inequality in academia: 65 years forging spaces of intelligibility. Current Sociology, 65(3), 327–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392117694516
Meredith, J. (1993). Theory building through conceptual methods. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 13(5), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579310028120
Milani, A., Dessi, F., & Bonaiuto, M. (2024). A meta-analysis on the drivers and barriers to the social acceptance of renewable and sustainable energy technologies. Energy Research and Social Science, 114, Article 103624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2024.103624
Nedyalkova, P. (2020). Quality of internal auditing in the public sector. Perspectives from the Bulgarian and international context. In Contributions to Management Science, Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29329-1
Nedyalkova, P. (2024). Concepts of the nature and development of control. In A. Derbali (Ed.), Recent Developments in Financial Management and Economics (pp. 14-25). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-2683-1.ch002
Neyeloff, J. L., Fuchs, S. C., & Moreira, L. B. (2012). Meta-analyses and Forest plots using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet: Step-by-step guide focusing on descriptive data analysis. BMC Research Notes, 5, Article 52. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-5-52
Niemelä, H., & Naukkarinen, J. (2021). On the rocky road to academia: Stumbling blocks for Finnish engineering students with English as a second language. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy, 10(6), 36–56. https://doi.org/10.3991/IJEP.V10I6.14559
Oancea, A. (2019). Research governance and the future(s) of research assessment. Palgrave Communications, 5(1), Article 27. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0213-6
Owan, V. J., Bassey, B. A., & Ubi, I. O. (2023). Construction and standardisation of an instrument measuring lecturers’ persistence to publish in Scopus-indexed journals. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 158–171. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.2.37
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., … Moher, D. (2022). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica/Pan American Journal of Public Health, 46, Article e112. https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2022.112
Raitskaya, L., & Tikhonova, E. (2022). An in-depth glimpse into research on academic writing. Journal of Language and Education, 8(2), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.14586
Raitskaya, L., & Tikhonova, E. (2020). Seven deadly sins: Culture’s effect on scholarly editing and publishing. Journal of Language and Education, 6(3), 167–172. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2020.11205
Ren, S., & Hu, G. (2023). Two Chinese medical doctors’ English scholarly publishing practices: Challenges, contradictions and coping strategies. Iberica, 2023(45), 289–315. https://doi.org/10.17398/2340-2784.45.289
Rezaei, S., & Seyri, H. (2019). Iranian doctoral students’ perceptions of publication in English: Motives, hurdles, and strategies. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 11(4), 941–954. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-02-2019-0040
Rosdiana, L. A., Damaianti, V. S., Mulyati, Y., & Sastromiharjo, A. (2023). The role of metacognitive strategies in academic writing skills in higher education. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(6), 328–344. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.6.18
Scholz, F. (2022). Writing and publishing a scientific paper. ChemTexts, 8(1). Article 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40828-022-00160-7
Selmi, A. T. E., Zerarka, M. F., & Cheriet, A. (2024). Enhancing K-Means clustering with post-redistribution. Ingenierie Des Systemes d’Information, 29(2), 429–436. https://doi.org/10.18280/isi.290204
Shehata, A. M. K., & Eldakar, M. A. M. (2018). Publishing research in the international context: An analysis of Egyptian social sciences scholars’ academic writing behaviour. Electronic Library, 36(5), 910–924. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-01-2017-0005
Subaveerapandiyan, A., & Sinha, P. (2024). Assessing scholarly communication competence in Zambian library professionals. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication. https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-09-2023-0351
Supeno, Sundari, H., & Yohanna, L. (2024). Willingness to write among EFL university students: A case of a virtual writing course in Indonesia. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 21(1), 37–78. https://doi.org/10.30397/TJTESOL.202404_21(1).0002
Tang, X., Zhou, H., & Li, S. (2023). Predictable by publication: Discovery of early highly cited academic papers based on their own features. Library Hi Tech, 42(4). 1366-1384. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-06-2022-0305
Teng, M. F., & Yue, M. (2023). Metacognitive writing strategies, critical thinking skills, and academic writing performance: A structural equation modelling approach. Metacognition and Learning, 18(1), 237–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-022-09328-5
Tikhonova, E. V., Kosycheva, M. A., & Mezentseva, D. A. (2024). Ineffective strategies in scientific communication: Textual wordiness vs. clarity of thought in thesis conclusion section. Integration of Education, 28(2), 249–265. https://doi.org/10.15507/1991-9468.115.028.202402.249-265
Üstünbaş, Ü. (2023). Machine translation use in language learning: Learner characteristics, beliefs, and ethical concerns. In Transforming the Language Teaching Experience in the Age of AI (pp. 141 - 159). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-9893-4.ch009
Veretennik, E., & Okulova, O. (2023). Of performance and impact: How AACSB Accreditation contributes to research in business schools. Higher Education Policy, 36(4), 758–780. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-022-00284-y
Wischgoll, A. (2016). Combined training of one cognitive and one metacognitive strategy improves academic writing skills. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 187. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00187
Zhelev, Z., & Kostova, S. (2024). Investigating the application of digital tools for information management in financial control: Evidence from Bulgaria. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 17(4), Article 165. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17040165
Zhigalev, B. A., Belorukova, M. V., Ganyushkina, E. V., & Zolotova, M. V. (2022). Effective strategies forming L2 professional communicative competency in postgraduate groups. Yazyk I Kultura-Language and Culture, 59, 202–226. https://doi.org/10.17223/19996195/59/11
Copyright (c) 2024 National Research University Higher School of Economics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the Copyright Notice.
