Advice on Choosing Research Topics and Writing Technical ... research... · 10/7/2017 · Advice on...
Transcript of Advice on Choosing Research Topics and Writing Technical ... research... · 10/7/2017 · Advice on...
Advice on Choosing Research Topics and Writing Technical Papers
(Advice for students and new faculty)
Bruce E. LoganPenn State University
Engineering Energy & Environmental Institute
3
The better the topic of your research, the easier it is to publish
• When planning an avenue of research, realize that some topics are “hotter” (more important?) than others.
• “Hot” topics sell better (hopefully because they are needed)– Nano/bio/info topics– New materials, energy sources, etc.
• If you work on traditional areas, such as wastewater treatment, it will be very difficult to get good citation numbers – (There are just not that many people in the field, and it is not well
funded).
4
Important vs Incremental? Both!
• Mapping expeditions– When you map/survey an area, you always come back with data.– Such studies are useful!... But they rarely are big discoveries or have a
big impact.– MS projects good for new researchers, and a PhD student might have
some of this especially when starting out.
• Hunting expeditions– Sometimes you should go after the bear and ignore the squirrels – When you land the “big game”, you get a big reward– New discoveries are more important than building on existing
information, but it is much riskier (you may go hungry)– PhD students must have some (not all!) of these types of hunting
investigations
The “skill” set• As you plan your topics, think about your “expertise” area.• Distinguish yourself from others in the field you are in; • In the USA, we stress “science” topics within engineering
fields– Find a unique niche even at your own lab (if possible)– Examples
• Electrochemistry• Catalysis• Molecular biology/tools
• Know what your goal is after your PhD… Industry? Academia? Consulting? This will affect how you develop your skill set.
7
Good topics and titles
• Avoid descriptive “look‐see” research where you just vary a bunch of variables.
• Conduct hypothesis‐driven research• Bad title example and reasons
– “Effects of materials on solar panel efficiency”– The “Effects of…”, “Analysis of…”, “Comparison of…” papers are usually
low impact
• Better title example– “Solar panels that achieve 50% conversion efficiency using low cost,
non‐precious metal materials”– Make the title reflect the topic
8
Choosing the Journal:Consider the magazine readership
• Science vs Engineering– Science topics get more readers than engineering topics– Science societies are larger than engineering societies
• Magazine type– Sciencemagazine: mostly “big” science topics, such as medicine, geology, astronomy, physics, materials, etc.
– Engineering magazines: just not as highly cited, so if you are an engineer, that is something you have to get used to (or you have to do more science)
9
Environmental Science & Technologyjournal
• Science papers >> technology papers in number
• Very few “engineering” papers in ES&T• Very difficult to get water treatment or wastewater oriented publications in ES&T
• Novelty / impact of the work is very important
10
Science
Nature
PNAS
ES&T
App. Environ. Micro.
App. Micro. Biotechnol.
J. Env. Eng., JPS
IJHE, Biores Technol
Fundamental breakthrough or discovery
New finding that is important, clear high impact
Work that improves our understanding of a process
What you need for different journals
Environmental Science & Technology (ES&T)• Many journals now reject papers without review
– Examples: Science, PNAS, Water Research, ES&T… others…– ES&T rejects 25‐50% of papers without external review
• Significance and relevance are key factors at ES&T• “ES&T editors are asked to consider for publication only papers
of unusual significance to the discipline. Submissions that do not appear sufficiently novel are usually declined without review because our experience is that they do not fare well in the peer review process.”
• Example – Rise and fall(?) of a “hot topic” Microbial Fuel Cells (MFCs) in
ES&T– 2004: First MFC paper nearly rejected– 2004‐2008: Lots of MFC papers.. A “hot topic”– 2013: Many MFC papers are rejected without review. More
difficult to be novel in this field now (and relevant)
12
Planning the paper… do this even before you do the experiments
• You didn’t do it until you publish it…– Work towards a product that can be published (no gaps in your data
and arguments)– Target a journal even before you start!
• Don’t waste your time on unimportant work–– Ask an important question!– Establish the “NEED” for the study!
• Pose a specific and testable hypothesis• Know your audience
– Know (and choose) a journal (and have a back up)
• Work out a plan for first and last authors, and inclusion of co‐authors
Plan the paper at the start
• Construct a “Mock Paper” rather than an outline– Mock paper: Draft of the findings, in the form of a few items, and several figures
• Titles: – The title gives the first clue on whether it is hypothesis‐driven research
– Avoid descriptive “look‐see” research where you just vary a bunch of variables.
– Bad titles = Descriptive work• “Effects of materials on …”• The “Effects of…”, “Analysis of…”, “Comparison of…” papers are
usually low impact– Better titles = Evolutionary work
• “XXX that achieve improved energy efficiency using low cost, non‐precious metals”
• Make the title reflect the innovation of the topic
Mock paper title:States a hypothesis
What we think we know, and what the “controversy” is that motivated our research(3-4 points)
Examples of figures that we expect to produce… and what they should show
15
The mock paper is a dynamic document…
Modify it as the research progresses.
Put in actual figures as you get the data
Graphite Fiber Brush Anodes for Increased Power Production in Air-Cathode Microbial Fuel Cells
Add a new title
17
Once the paper is written• Do YOU think you produced “quality” piece of work? • Is the hypothesis clear?• Decisive finding? (and not negative finding)• Title informative?• Abstract clear?• Introduction short and relevant to Discussion?• Figures well done (symbol sizes, not too cluttered, etc.)? Good and clear figures convey good work!
18
Major revisions needed…• Sometimes a reviewer makes a comment because they
were confused by the way you presented it… change it to make it clearer.
• Make changes!– Don’t just argue with the reviewer. – Try to make a change for each comment (if possible)
• Make it easy for the editor and reviewers to evaluate your changes.
• For each comment:– Restate the comment, – Provide a reply to the reviewer– Show what changes were made as a result of the review
19
Example of a reply to commentsRestate exactly (!) the comment, and put in italics
Indent ½ inch, then put in your reply, normal font (11 or 12 pt)
Put in a copy of your new text, in blue, in a smaller font (say 10 pt)
20
After rejection, don’t be dejected• Just because a paper is rejected, doesn’t mean you
should give up on it. • Not all reviewers are created equal…
– Talk the paper over with a colleague… were the reviewers fair?
• Reviewers often help to improve the process.– They can find flaws in your logic you didn’t notice– They may make helpful suggestions for future work
• Rejected manuscripts can be resubmitted to the same journal, but they are often not successful in changing the reviewer’s minds
• You should consider resubmitting to the same journal if:– The points can be addressed– You can answer the questions raised during the review
21
Rejected manuscripts• Choose another journal. Did you “aim too high”? • Consider your reviewers.
– When suggesting reviewers, suggest people that you know are likely to give good and fair reviews… some people are just never satisfied.
• If you feel you got a bad review and you think you know who the person is, then just request they be excluded from further submissions.
• Always make some changes to a paper before resubmitting elsewhere– Likely there is a slightly different audience– One of the reasons for rejection may be you were not convincing in
your presentation of your hypothesis or findings.
22
The paper is published!• Congratulations!
• Consider whether your work was read by others.• Are you writing enough “breakthrough” papers (based on
“hunting expeditions”)? – Or, are you publishing too many “mapping expedition” type results?
• If nobody reads or cites your papers…– Are you okay with this?– Is your work like a “critically acclaimed film that nobody went to see”?
If so, maybe time to produce the “action film with special effects”? – Do you want to move into new areas of greater interest?
25
How to build in creative work into your life
• Don’t just acquire facts and information… think about new ways to look at a problem.
• Be more creative by taking risks... – Try crazy experiments. – Evolve a new field‐‐ one that you will become known for (vs. your
advisor’s main field).• How to do this?‐‐ Work in 3 areas:
– Continue in the area of funding for your dissertation work (keep steady)
– Find a new area but aligned with your dissertation work (evolution)– Pursue crazy idea(s) (mutation?).. this is the MOST FUN!
26
Dissertation: mass transfer to microbial aggregates and biofilms
Biofilm reactors (trickling filters)
Bacterial respiration with chlorate
Pollutant degradation in fungal bioreactors
Particle transport in the subsurface
Aggregation rates in sheared reactors
Hydrogen generation via fermentation
Microbial fuel cellsUsing atomic force microscopy to understand bioadhesion
Bacterial respiration with perchlorate
Effect of fluid environment on mass transfer to bacteria
Fractal coagulation (of aggregates)
Aggregate formation in the ocean
Research Topics… the evolution of the Logan Lab
27
Hydrogen generation via fermentation
Microbial fuel cellsUsing atomic force microscopy to understand bioadhesion
Bacterial respiration with perchlorate
H2 in microbial electrolysis cells
28
Microbial fuel cells
Biofuel production (H2, CH4) in microbial
electrolysis cellsA new method for water desalination
?what is next?
Biotechnology based on “electromicrobiology”
H2 in microbial electrolysis cells
Reverse electrodialysis & MFC technologies
Salinity Gradient Energy (SGE)
RED, CapMix, BatMix, HEx
Thermal Regenerative Batteries (TRBs)
(Heat Energy Electricity)
DesalinationConc flow cells, RO biofouling
29
Assessing Performance• Numbers: Various approaches used but not one methods seems to work… people tend to “know” who the best researchers are without these factors.
• Total number of citations: This can be skewed by one or two papers, but not common
• Total number of papers published: Doesn’t tell us if anyone read them
• H‐index (Hirsch index): – Defined as number of papers cited that many times– Varies by fields (biology and physics > engineering)– Difficult to get data on this if you have a common name
30
Example of citations‐ established field Trickling filter OR Trickling filters
# citations = >5,600 (2000 – 2010)
31
Example of a “hot” fieldMicrobial Fuel Cell OR Microbial Fuel Cells
OR bioelectrochemical systems OR MFC # citations = >36,000 (2000 – 2011; 11/7/2011)
32
Long term considerations
• Your papers should be a way to teach people new things.
• Take steps to continue to write better papers.
• You can always write a better paper– so continue to improve your writing style.– Look at how others write and examine their style
– Form a journal club/ literature review class
Literature review class
• Choose a new topic each semester (students should suggest these)
• Professor chooses the first paper, and leads only the first discussion– and then attends but is as quiet as possible!
• Students choose papers in following weeks, and they lead discussion (not instruction).
• Focus your discussion on:– Identify the main hypothesis– Do the data support the statements?– Look at each figure and discuss what is says and if it is needed or
helpful.– Are there errors in tables, figures, calculations?
• Learn to be critical of what you read, and don’t assume it is correct because it is published!
34
Enjoy writing
• Engineers often hate to write, but this will change with more experience and confidence.
• Learn to write well, and enjoy the fun that comes from people having read your papers.
• Good papers lead to:– Rapidly advancing the field– Interest in the field– And if you’re lucky… speaking invitations and opportunities to discuss your work…
In Summary…• Choose important topics.. You only get 4 or so
during your PhD.• Have a blend of hunting and mapping expedition
type projects• Identify a “skill set”• Don’t be swayed by journal impact factors… they
often represent topics more than quality
• The quality of your work, as judged by your peers, is most important.
35