I am writing a review paper in the field of engineering.
At the moment the paper is 20 pages and I am afraid that this goes up to 80 pages when it is finished.
I was thinking about making it open access. However, I am afraid to break the paper into several parts and pay the open access fee multiple times which I definitely could not afford.
Could anyone please advise how much is the page limit for an open access review paper in IEEE and Elsevier. If my paper is not publishable there, where else could be a valid and feasible journal for me?
In order to download a full document I had to install the Scopus Document Download Manager for Firefox. Before I used the Institutional Login via Shibboleth with success so I can get the full content.
When I try to download a document, I get error messages:
Some documents may not download in full text due to restrictions on
the publisher’s side.
well, then I clicked on “Download”. But then:
This document could not be downloaded. Check with publisher(s) or try
your link resolver.
I submitted a paper recently to an elsevier journal. It has been about 19 days and the paper status is still “With journal”. Is it appropriate to email the journal, or shall I wait for a few more days?.
Thanks in advance for your help …
I submitted a paper recently to an elsevier journal. During the submission, I forgot to add the taxonomy topics related to my manuscript. After I completed the submission, I received an email that the manuscript was received successfully. However, it has been 2 days and the manuscript status is still “With Journal”. Is this because I forgot to add the taxonomy topics. If yes, what should I do to fix this.
Thanks in advance for your help …
I see many papers on ResearchGate that are recent downloaded papers from Elsevier’s website and not an author’s copy. Is there a mechanism to report such copyright issues to Elsevier?
This question already has an answer here:
I have submitted a paper in an Elsevier journal. The paper has gone through the “Under Review” stage and was subsequently given the status “Under Editor Evaluation”.
The paper is now back to “Under Review”. What does this mean in practice?
This is not a duplicate question. I am aware of the journal workflow. This is a specific question about a particular scenario.
Since recently I have adopted the practice of depositing and publishing raw data and background information (e.g. original images, chromatograms, R scripts, etc) regarding my published papers. I am still learning the best ways of doing this.
I am wondering what was the experience of colleagues with using the new options offered by Elsevier journals towards sharing raw data and supplementary information below:
I have just tried my first attempt with submitting a paper linking to parallel supplementary data submission to Data in Brief, and received somewhat negative reactions from my Reviewers.
(In short they did not understand how it works, and why would anyone do it.)
Has anyone here tried such new data-sharing options yet? Opinions, please?
A scientific institute wants me to write a LaTeX template just like the articles which are published on the ScienceDirect website, in other words, the institute wants a template like the following:
Is it OK to do so with regard to copyright issues?
I need help on how to get a laboratory in a developed country with a grant to finish my research on my Ph.D thesis. Am studying in a federal university in Nigeria and my research is on microbial fuel cell to produce electric current.
I submitted a paper to a high impact elsevier journal. However, the problem is things going very slowly. In fact the first reviewer submit his comments after 30 days exactly wich is today but the other one didnt bother at all to accept or decline the invitation. Im reviewer myself and i know sometimes you get busy but this behavior of not declining piss me off so much. If you are busy, just decline and not leave the invitation without respond for over 30 days. Anyways what do suggest? should i contact the editor and encourage him to take the process himself since it require 2 reviewers to take decision, or should i suggest other reviewers which may/may not respond to the invitation & take another 30 days or more to respond.
Either cases are crap as you see its been more than 8 weeks since the initial submission and going this way the research lose its novelty since others will implement what i found. So any suggestions?