I neeeeed to publish help

Off-topic conversations and chit-chat.

18 posts Page 1 of 2
:shock: :shock:

Hello ladies and gentlemen, I hold a master degree and I am in an organization that I have to must publish three papers a year at least.

My interest is around pesticides , environment , analytical chemistry.

Which area I can work on to publish a lot. Is there is some way like road mapping that make my direction clear. I really don't know exactly which question I have to answer. In other word I need a project topics that really make me drawn in it.

I can not thank every one in this forum enough .... really really great
Fraish wrote:
I hold a master degree and I am in an organization that I have to must publish three papers a year at least.


Find a job at a company which has bosses that don't make up such strange policies. Should be quality not quantity.
Thanks I might do.

I believe the question is still open. Any tips ohhh sorry any help would be appreciatted
You could look into reducing sample size and extraction volume while doing large volume injections with GC/MS to help reduce the amount of hazardous solvents used.

Something I am working on currently but doubt very much there will be any publishing out of it for me.
The past is there to guide us into the future, not to dwell in.
Thanks James I really appreciate your valuable discussion through the forum I have learned a lot from you since many months a go. It is quite frustrating for me to find out area to work on. Now I am gathering new PhD thesis in GCMS to see what is their future work to share research with them but this required an extensive reading which i feel I am losing lots of time.

I am sure expert like you have some idea in finding area in litreature quite easy and this might come with experience in case of me maybe. Do you think that review papers might give us a way in finding area quickly. In other word how to find gap in research is there is some litreature can tell us about that.

Thanks
Fraish wrote:
Do you think that review papers might give us a way in finding area quickly. In other word how to find gap in research is there is some litreature can tell us about that.
Thanks


Recent review papers are indeed a good source to find gaps, they should highlight this.

A requirement of 3 papers/year does not stimulate good research... :roll:
Original poster, none of this rant is intended to target you! You are blameless, it's just the daft job-requirement that's making me angry:

Candidly, this sort of requirement makes me rather grumpy. I'd guess that in the time that's elapsed since I did my PhD, the number of papers published in that field per year has gone up ten-fold. Back then, nearly every paper was valuable. Now I'd guess 90% aren't worth reading. Nevertheless, institutions have to carry the burden of paying for all this wasted publication-space (either as pay-to-publish fees, or in the form of subscriptions to journals and journal-bundles from big publishers). Individuals have to waste their time reviewing all this stuff. Individuals have to waste even more time trawling through it to find the paper that actually contains useful information. But worst, highly capable scientists have to leave the lab, stop working on something useful, and instead stress themselves concocting half-hearted efforts to inflate their publication lists.
We live in a world where there are now so many unnecessary journals that the minor ones are even publishing stuff where the reviewers have attempted to say "No! Enough! Stop!". Meanwhile the impact-factor-driven pressure to get a publication in the top journals is so high that ethical standards have been known to slip. And here, too, the desire for spots in top journals is being exploited ruthlessly by the publishers, who can spawn side-kicks from their main titles, each requiring yet another subscription (Nature, here's looking at you...), where good dissemination of research would be served better were the side-kick papers published in what used to be the straightforward mainstream journals.
lmh wrote:
Original poster, none of this rant is intended to target you! You are blameless, it's just the daft job-requirement that's making me angry:

Candidly, this sort of requirement makes me rather grumpy. I'd guess that in the time that's elapsed since I did my PhD, the number of papers published in that field per year has gone up ten-fold. Back then, nearly every paper was valuable. Now I'd guess 90% aren't worth reading. Nevertheless, institutions have to carry the burden of paying for all this wasted publication-space (either as pay-to-publish fees, or in the form of subscriptions to journals and journal-bundles from big publishers). Individuals have to waste their time reviewing all this stuff. Individuals have to waste even more time trawling through it to find the paper that actually contains useful information. But worst, highly capable scientists have to leave the lab, stop working on something useful, and instead stress themselves concocting half-hearted efforts to inflate their publication lists.
We live in a world where there are now so many unnecessary journals that the minor ones are even publishing stuff where the reviewers have attempted to say "No! Enough! Stop!". Meanwhile the impact-factor-driven pressure to get a publication in the top journals is so high that ethical standards have been known to slip. And here, too, the desire for spots in top journals is being exploited ruthlessly by the publishers, who can spawn side-kicks from their main titles, each requiring yet another subscription (Nature, here's looking at you...), where good dissemination of research would be served better were the side-kick papers published in what used to be the straightforward mainstream journals.


I have to agree. Recently I have been getting tons of emails from AAAS wanting me to join so I can get a copy of "Science" which used to be a good journal for science topics. I checked out their website and it seems over half of what they promote are climate change articles.

I don't dismiss climate change off hand, but most of the articles I read on the subject have results that are highly questionable when you apply the laws of chemistry and physics to them. The push to Publish or Perish leads to papers where the quality control of the data being used to back up the results is very lax.

Fraish, As long as the topic is relevant and the data is sound, go for it. We honestly need some good useful papers to make up for the poor ones that flood the journals and only try to appeal to the non-scientific public at large. Publish with purpose, not for prestige.
The past is there to guide us into the future, not to dwell in.
Thanks all for valuable advice. The thing is i am still searching for a gap in research world, I hope I could find guidance on road mapping in where to start research on something what questions i have to answer ? It is like searching for a new PhD topic after long reading . Literatures should put something like ok we didi search on this but we require somebody to search on this topic

Thanks
There are gaps all over the place - some of them are narrow and some of them are wide, and with the explosion in journal publishing you can get almost anything into print somewhere, especially if you are willing to pay to publish. I have just read a paper in what used to be a respectable journal on the effect of cell phone radiation on how fruit fly maggots crawl ! There is an infestation of articles on new SPME fibers - almost without exception tested on hydrophobic analytes in aqueous samples. Pick an obscure compound from an obscure far eastern medicine and publish a method to quantify it. Analyse the essential oil from an aromatic plant of your choice and show that it has it is an antioxidant / antimicrobial / insecticide. Take any method and adapt it to smaller, shorter columns to save time. Micro-scale anything. Analyse anything by GCxGC. The list goes on an on

What are you interested in, what does your company work on, what hardware do you have ?, what methods do you already have in place, what are you good at ?

Peter
Peter Apps
Something I have found missing is a highly solvent efficient GPC method for sample extract cleanup of semivolatile and pesticide samples. Most are still using the wide bore glass columns from twenty years ago, there should be a nice high pressure prep scale column out there and an automated system for doing the cleanup procedure that would use 10-50ml of solvent instead of 200-500ml of solvent. That is definitely a hole in the process that needs to be filled.
The past is there to guide us into the future, not to dwell in.
What are you interested in,
( pesticide , food contaminated , water research, wastewater treatment, degradation study )

what does your company work on,

( it is a university lab i should say uni not company ) they put pressure on us to publish as technician who have master


what hardware do you have ?,

LCMSMS
GCMS
GC-FID
GC-UV
UV vis
Preparative HPLC
MALDI
NMR
AAS
ICPMS

I cannt think more

what methods do you already have in place, what are you good at ?

Not sure but i am good at LC -UV, GC-FID but mass spec i am not good at it but i am reading now on it

Thanks great man
Thanks James thats really helpfull.

You reminded me by my MSc supervisor. The first day I met him he defined the research problem and straight to the gap that he needed me to fill. I really wander with these millions journals why there is no service that tell you the roadmapping in certain area and its gap and its progress.

I really really benefit a lot from each word written here , i can not thank every one enough because you are true professor to us
If you are a technician in a university chemistry lab I am slightly puzzled about why you are asking on the internet what research you should be doing. Have you asked your colleagues, the PhD students, the lecturers and professors what they are doing ? Multi-author works are the norm these days - work with someone else on their problem until you have enough experience to recognise your own gaps.

Peter
Peter Apps
Yes Peter you are right but this is only successful when you find true collaboration but in my case I entered with many research group I really had bad experience as I ended up with people wanted me to do their research. I really do not feel comfortable with this case as I want to work with people who really share effort 50% by 50% not laid back and want us do the work by 100%.

In some society this is helpfull ( group working) but in other you find doing single work is better.

In term of collaboration is their some web who share research together, i mean i was not successful finding this in real life , do you thing is it easy to share research from remote countries. If I send email to professor do you thing he might help or just say ohhh this person is stranger I dont know him I am not going to work with him. I sent to some people in research gate but i got no response to my email!

Not sure if i explained my idea well
18 posts Page 1 of 2

Who is online

In total there are 4 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 4 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 200 on Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:15 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests