Strategies for publishing in English journals: A study of the perceptions of Iranian scholars

Abstract

One of the difficulties in scholarly publishing in English scientific journals is the complex process of revision, which often involves reconstruction of the content and the language of the manuscript and becomes particularly difficult when it comes to non-native writers of English. Focusing mainly on the role of English and language editing in revision, the present study investigated this process in terms of the Iranian scholars' perceptions, problems, and strategies. To this end, 15 Iranian scholars from different disciplines were selected and interviewed, and different themes were derived and analysed. According to the premise of Academic Literacies and the idea that we acquire the skills and practices of our professions mainly by participating in them, our results introduced revision as a set of social practices located within a specific academic structure reflecting particular beliefs and values. Our results also showed that the very specific situation in Iran caused the participants to be, at a great extent, overwhelmed by the process, often leading them to adopt strategies that might not be conducive to their academic advancement. PerceptionsHere, we will focus on how the Iranian scholars perceive the revision process. We found four themes for this very category.

Self-Efficacy (SE) and Motivation of the Indonesian Teacher Educator Authors (TEAs) in Writing Articles for Publication: The Bloom Digital Taxonomy (BDT) Perspective

“…The trend of previous research shows that writing for publication is widely seen as an academic responsibility and commitment to all countries and higher education institutions. The countries mentioned are China, Taiwan, Iran, Egypt, Korea, USA, Hong Kong, and Poland (Turmudi et al, 2020b;Zheng & Guo, 2019;Chien, 2019;Maniati & Jalilifar, 2018;Shehata & Eldakar, 2018;Kim, 2018). Producing articles for publication fulfils a dual purpose by functioning as students evaluation as well as a duty and means of career progression for Teacher Educator Authors (TEAs).…”

Perceptions of Indonesian multilingual scholars about preparing and publishing research manuscripts in international journals

“…John (1987), Uzuner's (2008) review alone cites 39 research articles (henceforth: RAs) which met her criteria, which include that it must be an empirical study, meaning some other related studies are not included. After the publication of this review (2008), there have been many more studies reported focusing on different countries, for example, Mainland China (Mu, 2019), Taiwan (Chien, 2019), India (Lahiri, 2011), Iran (Maniati & Jalilifar, 2018), Poland (Lopaciuk-Gonczaryk, 2016) and Sudan (Elmalik & Nesi, 2008). Due to limited space, it is impossible to review them all.…”

Using online machine translation in international scholarly writing and publishing: A longitudinal case of a Chinese engineering scholar

“…To improve the language of their manuscripts, many EAL scholars have turned to fee‐paying ‘literacy brokers’ (Bowker & Ciro, 2019)—a term first coined by Lillis and Curry (2010) to refer to such helpers as translators, proofreaders or editors in the process of publication—or ‘text mediators’ (Luo & Hyland, 2016, 2019), which is similar to ‘literacy brokers’ in denotation but can be either fee‐paying or free. Some have sought convenience editing services from supervisors and colleagues (Luo & Hyland, 2021; Maniati & Jalilifar, 2018; Zeinolabedini & Gholami, 2016) or cooperated extensively with supervisors, colleagues or even students able to improve the language as coauthors (Mu, 2020). Imitation, especially language‐reuse or the use of formulaic sequences has also been a common technique used by EAL scholars in the process of writing or revising manuscripts (Abbas et al, 2020; Flowerdew & Li, 2007; Li, 2005; Mu, 2020).…”