Protecting Your Research Productivity with an ORCID iD

 

By Lilian H. Hill

 

An ORCID iD (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) is a unique, persistent 16-digit identifier that provides a single, permanent record of your scholarly work. It distinguishes you from researchers with the same or similar names and stays with you throughout your career, even if you change your name, institution, or academic discipline. Managed by the nonprofit ORCID organization, the iD links to a personal profile where you can list your publications, grants, datasets, conference presentations, peer-review activities, and other contributions. The system integrates with publisher platforms, university repositories, funding agencies, and major scholarly databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, allowing your work to be accurately attributed and easily connected across the research ecosystem.

 

Origin of ORCID iD

ORCID emerged from a collaborative effort to address the persistent problem of researcher name ambiguity in scholarly communication. For example, name confusion can arise when authors publish under the same name with the same middle initials. It can also occur when a name includes diacritical marks, multiple initials, or cultural variations in name order, which are often confused or omitted.

 

Beginning in 2009, publishers, universities, and funding agencies worked together to design a universal, nonproprietary identifier for researchers (ORCID, 2022). ORCID was formally incorporated as a nonprofit organization in August 2010, establishing an international governance structure to support its mission (ORCID, 2010). After a period of testing, the ORCID registry officially launched on October 16, 2012, offering unique 16-digit identifiers to researchers worldwide (ORCID, 2012). Since then, ORCID has expanded its integrations across publishers, funders, repositories, and research information systems, becoming a standard infrastructure component in global scholarship (UNESCO, 2023).

 

Why Authors Should Have an ORCID iD

There are many reasons that scholars should obtain an ORCID iD (Table 1). An ORCID iD unambiguously links you to your scholarly work by distinguishing you from others with similar names and prevents misattribution. It also simplifies the publication process, as many journals now require ORCID iDs.

 

Your publications can automatically populate in your profile with new publications through connections with Crossref or institutional repositories, reducing repetitive data entry for manuscript submissions and grant applications. Additionally, an ORCID iD enhances your visibility by providing a single, publicly accessible profile that increases discoverability among search engines, databases, and potential collaborators, and offers a stable link you can include in email signatures, CVs, bios, and conference materials. It supports compliance with funder and institutional requirements, including those of NIH and NSF, which encourage or mandate its use, helping institutions accurately track faculty output. Finally, an ORCID iD ensures long-term preservation of your scholarly record by remaining with you throughout your career and prevents your academic identity from becoming fragmented across platforms.

 

 

Concerns About ORCID iDs

While ORCID iDs offer many benefits, there are a few potential drawbacks to consider. Academics may hesitate to be tracked through an ORCID iD because of concerns that it could enable excessive institutional monitoring of their productivity, limit their autonomy, or create pressure to continually document and justify their scholarly output. Maintaining an accurate and complete ORCID profile requires ongoing effort, and some researchers may find the initial setup or regular updates time-consuming. Because ORCID integrates with many publishers and institutional systems, users must also navigate privacy settings carefully to ensure they are sharing only what they intend to make public. Additionally, not all platforms synchronize perfectly, which can lead to inconsistencies or gaps in a record unless manually corrected. Finally, while ORCID is widely adopted, it is not yet universally used across all fields or regions, meaning its advantages may vary depending on disciplinary norms and institutional expectations.

 

Conclusion

An ORCID iD ensures you get proper credit for your work, makes scholarly communication more efficient, and boosts your visibility as a researcher. It’s free, easy to register, and increasingly expected in academic publishing, making it one of the simplest ways to strengthen your professional identity.

 

References

ORCID. (2010). ORCID incorporated: Annual report. https://info.orcid.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/ORCID_2010_AnnualReport.pdf

ORCID. (2012). ORCID launches registry to support unique researcher identifiers. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/elsevier-joins-orcid-in-announcing-launch-of-orcid-registry-174382831.html PR Newswire

ORCID. (2022). ORCID: 10th anniversary booklet. https://info.orcid.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/R2_Orcid-10th-Ann-Booklet-FOR_WEB.pdf ORCID

UNESCO. (2023). ORCID: Identifying researchers and tracing authorship with unique IDs. UNESCO. https://www.unesco.org/en/open-science/inclusive-science/orcid-identifying-researchers-and-tracing-authorship-unique-ids

 

Growth Mindset and the Dissertation Journey

 

By Lilian H. Hill

The concept of a growth mindset refers to how individuals interpret challenges and barriers in the pursuit of achievement. For doctoral students, these challenges are magnified during the dissertation process, where persistence, adaptability, and resilience are critical. A growth mindset, as described by Carol Dweck in Mindset: The New Psychology of Success (2016), emphasizes that abilities can be developed through effort, feedback, and strategy. In contrast, a fixed mindset assumes that intelligence or talent is innate and unchangeable, limiting motivation and perseverance, two qualities essential for doctoral success.

A growth mindset is particularly relevant to dissertation research because progress rarely follows a linear path. Proposals are critiqued, and writing must be revised multiple times. Students who view these experiences as signals of inadequacy may stall or disengage. By contrast, those with a growth mindset reframe these moments as opportunities for refinement and deeper learning, recognizing that scholarly growth occurs through iteration.

 

Applying Growth Mindset to Writing and Proposal Development

• Proposal Development. A growth mindset encourages students to accept critical feedback on research questions and design as part of scholarly dialogue, rather than a rejection of ability. Revisions are a normal step toward clarity and rigor.
• Writing and Revision. The dissertation demands sustained effort across multiple drafts. A growth mindset helps students recognize revision as essential to strong scholarship, reducing the frustration that perfectionism or fixed beliefs often produce.

 

Strategies for Doctoral Researchers

1. Monitor internal dialogue. Replace self-defeating thoughts (“I can’t do this”) with growth-oriented statements (“This draft moves me closer to clarity”).
2. Recognize agency. Choosing to revise and resubmit, rather than avoiding critique, sustains momentum.
3. Reframe fixed beliefs. View methodological or writing challenges as opportunities to strengthen the study, not evidence of incompetence.
4. Engage in deliberate practice. Commit to regular writing sessions, even when progress feels slow.
5. Seek mentorship. Faculty advisors and peers provide essential feedback that guides growth; accept critique as a contribution to your development.
6. Avoid comparisons. Focus on your unique timeline and contribution rather than measuring progress against peers.
7. Take action. For success, a growth mindset must translate into sustained engagement with research and writing tasks.

 

Why Growth Mindset Matters for Doctoral Students

Doctoral study is a long-term developmental process, not a single demonstration of brilliance. Cultivating a growth mindset helps students manage the emotional demands of extended, independent scholarship, persist in the face of repeated critique and revision, recognize that learning occurs through the process of doing research, and build scholarly identity through resilience, adaptability, and inquiry.

As Lovett et al. (2023) argue in How Learning Works, learning is a process that unfolds over time, shapes identity, and depends on active engagement. For doctoral researchers, adopting this process-oriented perspective is essential to moving through the challenges of the dissertation toward eventual contribution to knowledge.

 

Five Key Takeaways for Dissertation Success

1. Resilience matters as much as ability. Growth mindset sustains progress when obstacles arise.
2. Feedback is a resource, not a judgment. Critique is central to scholarly development.
3. Progress is iterative. Revisions and refinements strengthen the dissertation.
4. Persistence over perfection. Consistent effort produces stronger outcomes than waiting for flawless drafts.
5. Doctoral work builds identity. A growth mindset supports the transformation from student to independent scholar.

 

References

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., Dipietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching. Jossey-Bass.

Dweck, C. (2016). Growth mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.

 

 

The Importance of Self-Care for Doctoral Student Success

 

By Lilian H. Hill

Doctoral education is a rigorous process that demands sustained intellectual engagement, independence, and resilience over a period of several years. While academic ability is a prerequisite, evidence increasingly demonstrates that self-care practices are critical to persistence, productivity, and well-being during this journey.

 

Common Mistakes

Because of the multiple demands of doctoral study, students tend to neglect their health, try to do everything themselves, procrastinate, and many experience financial stresses:

 

·      Neglecting Health. Doctoral education demands extended focus, long working hours, and persistence over multiple years. Many students underestimate the degree to which their physical well-being directly impacts academic performance. Poor sleep habits, inadequate nutrition, and lack of physical activity reduce concentration, impair memory consolidation, and heighten susceptibility to stress-related illnesses (Myers et al., 2012). Although caffeine and stimulants may provide short-term energy, they disrupt sleep cycles and contribute to fatigue over time. Without attention to health, doctoral students risk burnout, which can compromise their ability to complete the degree.

 

·      Trying to Do Everything Alone. Doctoral programs often emphasize independent scholarship, which may foster a belief that asking for help signals weakness. However, successful students recognize the importance of social and academic support systems. Collegial relationships with advisors, peer networks, and academic communities offer feedback, encouragement, and accountability (Jairam & Kahl, 2012). Isolation, by contrast, increases vulnerability to imposter syndrome and mental health struggles. Building collaborative networks not only enhances research quality but also sustains motivation during inevitable setbacks.

 

·      Procrastination and Poor Time Management. Long-term research projects, such as dissertations, require sustained effort across months or years. Students who postpone work until deadlines approach often experience intense stress and negative effects on mental health while producing poor products (Van Eerde, 2003). Procrastination also erodes confidence, as unfinished tasks accumulate and appear overwhelming. Developing project management skills—such as breaking large goals into manageable milestones, using calendars or task-tracking tools, and scheduling accountability meetings—helps maintain steady progress and reduces pressure.

 

·      Financial Strain. Doctoral study frequently coincides with financial constraints, as stipends or part-time employment rarely cover full living expenses. Financial stress has been linked to increased anxiety, decreased concentration, and higher attrition rates among doctoral students (Levecque et al., 2017). Careful financial planning, awareness of hidden costs (e.g., conference travel, software, textbooks), and proactive pursuit of fellowships or assistantships are critical to sustaining academic momentum. Financial stress should not be overlooked, as it is a silent but powerful factor that shapes doctoral persistence.

 

 

Self-Care for Doctoral Students

Doctoral training is intellectually demanding and emotionally taxing. Practicing intentional self-care sustains both productivity and personal well-being (Stubb et al., 2011). Self-care encompasses strategies that foster balance, resilience, and a sustainable relationship with academic work.

 

Self-care is essential for doctoral success because it supports mental and physical health, sustainable work habits, and resilience. Doctoral students face high levels of stress, anxiety, and depression compared with the general population, making intentional self-care critical to preventing burnout and promoting persistence (Levecque et al., 2017; Sverdlik et al., 2018).

 

Physical well-being is also closely linked to cognitive performance. Healthy habits improve concentration, memory consolidation, and overall productivity, while neglecting health increases fatigue and susceptibility to illness, which can disrupt research progress (Peluso & Guerra de Andrade, 2011).

 

Self-care fosters sustainable work habits by helping students manage long-term, complex projects with high uncertainty and frequent revisions. Setting boundaries, preserving leisure time, and practicing mindfulness sustain motivation, prevent overwork, and maintain the quality of scholarship (Sverdlik et al., 2018).

 

Finally, self-care supports identity and resilience. Engaging in activities outside of academia helps students maintain life satisfaction, reduces over-identification with academic performance, and promotes recovery from setbacks such as manuscript rejections or critical feedback (Stubb et al., 2011).

 

Strategies for Self-Care

·       Cultivate a strong support system. Staying connected with friends, family, and academic peers helps counteract isolation and provides perspective (Jairam & Kahl, 2012).

·       Prioritize physical health. Regular exercise, nutritious meals, adequate sleep, and time outdoors enhance energy and mental clarity (Peluso et al., 2011).

·       Set boundaries with technology. Limiting social media and news consumption reduces distraction and harmful comparison, while making room for deep work and recovery.

·       Practice mindfulness and reflection. Techniques such as meditation, breathing exercises, or gratitude journaling support emotional regulation and focus (Sverdlik et al., 2018).

·       Preserve meaningful hobbies. Even limited time spent on enjoyable activities provides renewal and supports creativity in research.

·       Seek help when needed. Using counseling services, wellness programs, or advisor support before reaching a crisis point promotes persistence in the program (Myers et al., 2012).

·       Create a non-negotiable self-care plan. Examples include committing to sleep hygiene, writing daily reflections, or engaging in weekly physical activity. Flexibility and self-compassion ensure that self-care is sustainable over time.

 

In summary, self-care is not peripheral to doctoral success but foundational. It ensures mental and physical stability, sustains intellectual productivity, and supports resilience in the face of academic challenges. As the literature affirms, cultivating deliberate self-care practices significantly increases the likelihood of timely degree completion and overall well-being during the doctoral journey.

 

References

Jairam, D., & Kahl, D. H. (2012). Navigating the doctoral experience: The role of social support in successful degree completion. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7(1), 311–329. https://doi.org/10.28945/1700

Levecque, K., Anseel, F., De Beuckelaer, A., Van der Heyden, J., & Gisle, L. (2017). Work organization and mental health problems in PhD students. Research Policy, 46(4), 868–879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.02.008

Myers, S. B., Sweeney, A. C., Popick, V., Wesley, K., Bordfeld, A., & Fingerhut, R. (2012). Self-care practices and perceived stress levels among psychology graduate students. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 6(1), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026534

Peluso, M. A. M., & Guerra de Andrade, L. H. S. (2011). Physical activity and mental health: The association between exercise and mood. Clinics, 60(1), 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1807-59322005000100012

Stubb, J., Pyhältö, K., & Lonka, K. (2011). Balancing between inspiration and exhaustion: PhD students’ experienced socio-psychological well-being. Studies in Continuing Education, 33(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2010.515572

Sverdlik, A., Hall, N. C., McAlpine, L., & Hubbard, K. (2018). The PhD experience: A review of the factors influencing doctoral students’ completion, achievement, and well-being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 361–388. https://doi.org/10.28945/4113

Van Eerde, W. (2003). Procrastination at work and time management training. The Journal of Psychology, 137(5), 421–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980309600625

 

Understanding Imposter Syndrome in Doctoral Education

 

By Lilian H. Hill

Imposter syndrome (often termed the imposter phenomenon in research literature) refers to a pervasive sense of self-doubt in which individuals question their competence, despite evidence of their accomplishments (Clance & Imes, 1978; Gómez-Morales, 2021). This experience often involves attributing success to external factors—such as luck or circumstance—rather than one’s own capabilities. A common feature is the persistent fear of being exposed as a fraud.

 

Imposter syndrome is particularly salient in doctoral education because of the unique pressures associated with advanced scholarship. For many doctoral students, these feelings surface in moments of professional transition, such as dissertation writing, conference presentations, or publishing. The phenomenon involves persistent self-doubt, fear of intellectual inadequacy, and difficulty internalizing success, even when achievements are evident (Clance & Imes, 1978). For doctoral students, this can manifest in specific ways that are tied to academic culture and the demands of graduate study. These demands include a high-performance environment, pressure to contribute to knowledge in the discipline, the advisor-student relationship, perfectionism, and membership in a minority group.

·      The High-Performance Environment
Doctoral programs often admit high-achieving individuals who are accustomed to excelling. Once among equally talented peers, many students experience a sudden shift in self-perception, believing their acceptance was a mistake or that they do not truly belong (Wang & Li, 2023). This environment heightens comparison, which amplifies feelings of fraudulence.

 

·      Pressure to Contribute Original Knowledge
Unlike earlier stages of education that emphasize mastering existing knowledge, doctoral study requires students to generate new contributions through research. The challenge of producing original scholarship can intensify self-doubt: students may fear that their ideas are not innovative or rigorous enough. This anxiety can be magnified during dissertation proposal defenses, conference presentations, or journal submissions, where peers and experts evaluate work.

 

·      The Advisor–Student Relationship
The supervisory relationship plays a crucial role in how doctoral students experience imposter feelings. Supportive mentorship can validate students’ abilities, while a lack of empathy or encouragement may exacerbate self-doubt. The hierarchical nature of this relationship often reinforces feelings of inadequacy, particularly if feedback is primarily critical.

·      Perfectionism and Productivity Pressures
Doctoral students often set unrealistically high standards for themselves, believing they must publish extensively, secure funding, or produce flawless work to prove their worth. This perfectionism can lead to procrastination, overworking, or burnout. Instead of celebrating milestones, students may dismiss achievements as luck or downplay them compared to peers (Gómez-Morales, 2021)

 

·      Intersection with Diversity and Inclusion
Imposter syndrome can be intensified for students from underrepresented groups in academia. Students of color, first-generation scholars, or women in male-dominated fields often experience additional pressures related to bias, stereotype threat, or a lack of role models (Handforth, 2022; Wang & Li, 2023). Women are more likely to report heightened negative emotions associated with imposter syndrome, and doctoral students who are married, divorced, or parenting also demonstrate higher levels of imposter experiences compared to their single peers (Slimi et al., 2024). In such contexts, feelings of “not belonging” are not solely internal but reflect structural inequities in academic culture.

 

Why This Matters

Imposter syndrome is not just a psychological burden; it has practical implications. It can hinder academic risk-taking, delay dissertation progress, and undermine networking or career advancement. Left unchecked, chronic imposter feelings contribute to mental health concerns such as anxiety, depression, and exhaustion (Gómez-Morales, 2021; Wang & Li, 2023). Individuals experiencing imposter feelings may avoid new opportunities, overwork to prove themselves, or adopt perfectionistic tendencies that erode their well-being.

 

Critiques of the Concept

While widely used, the concept of imposter syndrome has been critiqued for several reasons. First, the foundational study by Clance and Imes (1978) focused on high-achieving women, without addressing the experiences of individuals from diverse racial, socioeconomic, or occupational backgrounds. Second, scholars argue that the concept can pathologize normal anxiety responses and shift responsibility from systemic inequities to individuals (Gómez-Morales, 2021). More recent work emphasizes the importance of considering the role of racism, sexism, and classism in shaping imposter experience (Handforth, 2022).

 

Coping Strategies

Research highlights the difference between maladaptive and constructive strategies. Acknowledging feelings of imposter syndrome should be recognized as common and contextualized, which can be empowering. Rather than viewing imposter feelings as evidence of inadequacy, doctoral students can see them as part of navigating the challenges of scholarly growth. Maladaptive strategies include procrastination, avoidance, and overworking, all of which tend to reinforce self-doubt and contribute to burnout.

 

Constructive strategies include:

• Recognizing the signs of imposter thoughts, such as attributing success to luck.
• Acknowledging and naming feelings rather than ignoring them.
• Normalizing the experience by remembering that imposter feelings are common across students and faculty.
• Celebrating achievements by documenting milestones and successes.
• Building a support network of peers, mentors, and trusted colleagues.
• Defining success internally through realistic goals and gradual skill development.
• Taking on opportunities incrementally, using each as a chance to grow in confidence (Slimi et al., 2024).

 

Moving Forward

For doctoral students, reframing imposter feelings as a normal part of growth rather than as proof of inadequacy is critical. Constructive coping strategies—such as practicing self-compassion, building supportive networks, and setting incremental goals—can buffer against the negative effects. At the same time, institutions must recognize and address systemic barriers to belonging in academia. Imposter syndrome is not only about the individual; it is also about the academic culture in which they are embedded (Mutlak & Moustafa, 2023).

 

References

Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and therapeutic intervention. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 15(3), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0086006

Gómez-Morales, A. (2021). Impostor phenomenon: A concept analysis. Nursing Science Quarterly, 34(3), 309–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/08943184211010462

Handforth, R. (2022). Feeling “stupid”: Considering the affective in women doctoral students’ experiences of imposter ‘syndrome’. In M. Addison, M. Breeze, M., & Y. Taylor, (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Imposter Syndrome in Higher Education, Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86570-2_18

Slimi, O., Muscella, A., Marsigliante, S., & Bahloul, M. (2024) Correlation between impostor syndrome among doctoral students and supervisor empathy in Tunisia. Frontiers in Psychology, l5, 1382969. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1382969

Wang Y and Li W (2023) The impostor phenomenon among doctoral students: A scoping review. Frontiers in Psychology. 14:1233434. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1233434

 

 

From Conference Paper to Journal Article: A Step-by-Step Guide

 

By Lilian H. Hill

 

Your conference proposal was accepted, and even better, your presentation was well received. Presenting at a conference is a significant milestone in your scholarly journey. While it certainly deserves a place on your CV, it can also serve as the springboard for a more lasting and impactful contribution to your field. One of the most effective ways to amplify your research is to revise and publish your conference paper as a journal article.

Conference presentations allow for early sharing of ideas and feedback. In contrast, journal articles require greater rigor, depth, and polish. If you’re wondering how to navigate this transition, the following guide outlines each step of the process.

 

1.    Analyze the Feedback you Received

If your presentation generated questions, suggestions, or critiques, consider it a valuable opportunity for learning and improvement. Attendees might have encouraged you to publish or offered ideas for strengthening your work. Make a habit of recording these insights soon after the presentation, while details are fresh. Later, you can revisit your notes to assess which ideas might help refine your paper. (The word paper is used intentionally; your work only becomes an article once it is published.)

 

2.    Reassess Your Purpose and Audience

Conference papers are often written for immediate presentation, tailored to a specific event and its audience. Journals, by contrast, have broader readerships and higher expectations for clarity, evidence, and theoretical grounding. Begin by asking:

• What is the core argument or insight of my paper?
• How does this contribution speak to current conversations in the field?
• Who is the target audience for this journal article?

 

3. Expand the Literature Review

Conference papers often assume shared knowledge among attendees and therefore summarize only the most essential sources. A journal article, by contrast, must situate your study within a well-developed scholarly context. Deepen your literature review to demonstrate how your work addresses gaps or builds on existing research.

 

4.    Strengthen Your Methodology

If your conference paper describes original research, reviewers will expect more detail about your research design, data collection, and analysis. Be transparent and thorough. Ensure that your methodological choices are justified and that readers can assess the trustworthiness of your findings. Journal editors and peer reviewers will examine your methods to determine if they are robust and if the resulting research paper is worth publishing.

 

5. Refine Your Argument

Journal articles typically demand a clearer line of reasoning than oral presentations. Strengthen your argument by explicitly stating your purpose, theoretical framework, and point of view, and supporting it with organized, well-developed evidence. Look for areas where your ideas could be clarified, expanded, or made more persuasive.

 

6. Revise Structure and Tone

Conference papers are often time-constrained and written in a conversational style. A journal article requires a well-organized structure, featuring clear headings and smooth transitions. Move from spoken-word cues to academic writing conventions. Adopt a tone that is professional, evidence-based, and reflective of scholarly discourse, appropriate to your field. Fortunately, research papers have a somewhat standardized structure, although slight variances may occur due to the type of research and your academic discipline. This outline provides you with clear guidance about how to organize the story of your research:

•       Title

•       Abstract

•       Introduction

•       Literature Review

•       Methodology

•       Findings (qualitative) or Results (quantitative)

•       Discussion

•       Conclusion

•       References

•       Appendices, if needed

 

7. Choose the Right Journal

Select a journal that aligns with your topic, methodology, and audience. You can consult with mentors and colleagues who have experience in publishing. Also, consider the publications you used in your literature review. If many of your sources were published in the same journals, it is worth considering them for publishing your work. You can also locate relevant journals through Journalytics Academic (Cabells), a searchable database with comprehensive information about academic journals.

 

Once you have identified possible journals, you need to investigate them. Almost all academic journals maintain websites that provide information about their publication scope, which outlines the specific topics, disciplines, methodologies, and types of content published. It defines the journal’s academic focus and helps authors determine whether their work is a good fit. The scope also typically identifies the intended audience (e.g., scholars, practitioners, policymakers) and may indicate whether the journal is interdisciplinary, regional, or global in scope.

 

Consider whether your work aligns with the journal’s aims and whether you are comfortable with the journal’s review process and publication model (open access vs. subscription, for example). Be sure that your research paper fits the scope and writing guidelines required by your selected journal. Journal editors will quickly reject manuscripts that are out of scope or fail to meet writing guidelines. Please do not exceed the maximum length the journal stipulates; editors receiving manuscripts that greatly exceed length requirements may reject them without reading.

 

8. Avoid Predatory Journals

Predatory journals are publications that exploit the open-access model of academic publishing by charging authors fees without providing legitimate editorial and peer review services. These journals lack transparency, publish low-quality or unvetted research, and exist primarily to generate profit rather than advance scholarship. They may mimic the appearance of reputable journals but fail to meet accepted standards of academic integrity and scholarly publishing. Work published in a predatory journal is not recognized as legitimate by hiring committees, tenure review boards, or funding agencies. This can waste your time, damage your scholarly reputation, and diminish the perceived quality of your research.

 

9. Seek Feedback Before Submission

Before submitting your research paper, ask colleagues or mentors for feedback. A fresh pair of eyes can help identify unclear sections, overlooked sources, or logical inconsistencies. But choose your reviewers carefully. They need to be:

·      familiar with the type of research used in your research paper

·      knowledgeable in your academic field

·      kind, constructive, and honest

·      respectful of your timeline

 

Upon receiving feedback, respond with grace and gratitude, and thoughtfully incorporate the suggested revisions into your manuscript before submission. Keep in mind that this is your paper, so you have the discretion to choose which feedback to incorporate thoughtfully.

 

10. Submit Your Paper

Most journals require electronic submission of manuscripts through their designated online portals. It is essential to follow the submission guidelines carefully, which typically include providing a title, abstract, full manuscript, references, tables, and figures, a funding disclosure, brief author bios, and a conflict of interest statement. Author names, including any co-authors, should appear only on a separate title page and not within the main manuscript. To facilitate anonymous peer review (also called blind peer review), the manuscript must be anonymized. Avoid including self-identifying details such as citations of your publications, institutional affiliations, or program names. When citing your previous work, use the placeholder ‘Author, 2025,’ and do the same in the reference list. Once your manuscript is accepted, these placeholders can be replaced with the appropriate identifying information during the copyediting stage.

 

You should not submit the same paper to multiple journals at the same time because it violates ethical standards in scholarly publishing. Most journals explicitly require that submissions are not under consideration elsewhere, and violating this policy can lead to retraction, reputational damage, or even blacklisting by journals. These events would severely damage your career.

 

11. Wait for a Response

Patience is crucial in the journal submission process. Once editors determine that a paper is suitable for peer review, they must find qualified reviewers with relevant expertise, a task that can take several weeks. Most reviewers are university faculty who are often overextended and may decline invitations. Those who accept typically have a month or more to complete their reviews, but delays are common due to professional and personal responsibilities. As a result, a wait of three to six months for a response is normal. You can generally expect acknowledgment of submission within a few days to two weeks, a desk review in two to four weeks, and peer review to take one to three months. If no decision has been communicated to you after six months, it is appropriate to send a courteous inquiry to the editor. Journals usually welcome respectful follow-up.

 

12. Understand the Editorial Decision

After peer review, journal editors typically respond to submissions with one of the following decisions:

• Accept
• Conditional Accept (requiring minor revisions)
• Revise and Resubmit (requiring substantial revisions)
• Reject
• Reject-out-of-Scope

 

While an "Accept" decision is ideal, more commonly you’ll receive a “Conditional Accept” or a “Revise and Resubmit.” These outcomes may seem discouraging, but they are good news. They indicate that the editors and reviewers value your work and are inviting you to refine it for potential publication. If a journal rejects your paper, respond with professionalism and use the experience as a learning opportunity. Keep in mind that rejection is a standard part of academic publishing, not a reflection of your worth as a scholar. Resilience, revision, and thoughtful resubmission are essential to eventual success.

 

13. Prepare for Peer Review

Manuscripts are rarely accepted without revisions. Take advantage of the editorial reviews you received to revise and resubmit your paper. Use reviewer comments to improve the clarity, rigor, and relevance of your article. Approach feedback with humility and discernment. Engage constructively even if critiques are sharp. If you disagree with the reviewers’ comments, you can contact the journal editor with a well-reasoned explanation. Most journal articles go through multiple rounds of revisions before an “Accept” decision is reached.

 

Final Thoughts

Turning a conference paper into a journal article is both a practical step forward and a mark of scholarly growth. It requires you to move from presentation to publication, from idea-sharing to knowledge-building. With careful revision and thoughtful framing, your conference work can find a lasting place in the scholarly record.