For more on why I prefer Scrivener, read my full review of Scrivener 3 for academic writing. This phase lasted almost two years. During the academic year, I was able to draft new material and revise existing chapters, but most of the substantial revisions and drafting came during the summer. My introduction, argument, and fifth chapter were completely new to the book and half of my first and third chapters were new. My second and fourth chapters remained closest to the dissertation of all.
Instead, wait to submit your proposal until your manuscript is ready to go straight to peer review. Instead, you should work ON your book before continuing to work IN it. Note that during this time I did not pitch the book to editors. I still got a request for the manuscript quickly after submitting my proposal. Read my article on what to consider when deciding whether pitching your book to an editor would be a good use of your time.
This phase lasted about three months. This phase went quickly because I had already spent the time to work ON my book before working IN it. Because this stage involves waiting at two points, how long this stage takes is entirely outside of your control. Mine lasted five months total , but this is at least half as long as most other first-time academic book authors. My acquisitions editor chose peer reviewers who could operate on a tight timeline.
I waited three months between submitting the manuscript and receiving peer reviews. My press typically does not send manuscripts to a third reader unless the reviews are split, so I did not have to wait for a second round of peer reviews, which can take up to another year.
I received my contract one month later. How long this stage takes depends on what you must revise. My peer reviews did ask for extensive reviews of two chapters and more superficial reviews to other sections, but not major structural or theoretical changes.
So, I requested four months to revise and deliver the final manuscript and was able to complete the revisions in that time. If your press requires another round of peer reviews, you can expect to wait up to another year. This stage took much, much longer than I expected: nine months. The first five months was mostly spent waiting, and I wish I had spent more of this time to set myself up to publicize the book better. Additionally, my acquisitions editor asked me to submit cover art. We settled on a cover design and layout after about a month.
In total, I went through four proofs , including finding some minor typos after receiving the complete book and index. I received my book in the mail one month later.
One of the particular challenges I was not expecting was how much of a letdown receiving my author copies in the mail would be. Additionally, it seems common for first-time academic book authors go through a period of doubt perhaps exacerbated by burnout?
Results may vary. You receive a developmental edit, covering global issues and requesting revisions. Once you turn the manuscript around to her, she will read it again and offer a second round of content editing. Her turnaround will be faster this time, because the managing editor is breathing down her neck to get the book into production.
As the author, the hard work is now complete. Once you send back the copyedit, you will no longer be allowed to make significant changes. This might mean ordering 1, copies or it might mean ordering 20, copies—it depends on the size of the bookseller and the size of the publisher. Now that any and all substantive edits are complete, your book is ready for typesetting!
Once the interior is designed, the typeset pages—a. As the proofer goes over your words with a fine-toothed comb, correcting any typos and other errors, you will have your final chance to read the book before it goes to press. Authors can request that submissions with reviewer reports, if relevant rejected from one PLOS journal be transferred to another PLOS journal for further consideration there.
In addition, PLOS ONE has partnered with the Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium to help ensure that the time and expertise that reviewers devote to assessing a manuscript is not lost if authors decide to submit to another journal.
We will contact individual reviewers for permission to transmit their names to the recipient journal and will otherwise transmit the reports anonymously. Authors may submit a formal appeal for rejected submissions.
Appeal requests must be made in writing to plosone plos. Decisions on appeals are final without exception. Priority is given to new submissions, so the appeal process may take longer than the original submission process. If you have questions at any stage in the process, please email us.
Browse Subject Areas? Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field. Understanding Manuscript Statuses Manuscript submitted The journal has received the submission and is conducting an initial editorial assessment and screening for technical requirements. Editor invited The journal office is identifying potential editors to handle the submission. With editor The manuscript has been placed with a member of the editorial board for handling.
Under review The handling editor has invited peer reviewers to evaluate the submission. Required reviews complete Some or all assigned reviewers have submitted comments.
Decision in process The handling editor has drafted a decision, but it has not yet been finalized or sent to the authors. Initial Checks. Editorial Review.
0コメント