Abstract
The first three chapters focused on how to prepare human subject research, how to design experiments and quasi-experiments with human participants, and how to do statistical analyses. This fourth and last chapter explains how to report research in the form of a publication. We discuss why publishing is important, how to structure a research paper, how to agree on authorship, how to cite, how to format tables and figures, what is plagiarism and how it can be prevented, what is data fabrication, and what is copyright and fair use. We also explain the process from submission to publishing, and discuss open access publications and scientometrics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Aad, G., Abbott, B., Abdallah, J., Abdinov, O., Aben, R., Abolins, M., et al. (2015). Combined measurement of the Higgs boson mass in pp collisions at √s = 7 and 8 TeV with the ATLAS and CMS experiments. Physical Review Letters, 114, 191803. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803
Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Abernathy, M. R., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., et al. (2016). Observation of gravitational waves from a binary black hole merger. Physical Review Letters, 116, 061102. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102
Alberani, V., Pietrangeli, P. D. C., & Mazza, A. M. (1990). The use of grey literature in health sciences: a preliminary survey. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 78, 358–363.
American Psychological Association. (2007). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Asendorpf, J. B., Conner, M., De Fruyt, F., De Houwer, J., Denissen, J. J., Fiedler, K., et al. (2013). Recommendations for increasing replicability in psychology. European Journal of Personality, 27, 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1919
Baethge, C., Franklin, J., & Mertens, S. (2013). Substantial agreement of referee recommendations at a general medical journal—A peer review evaluation at Deutsches Ärzteblatt International. PLOS ONE, 8, e61401. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0061401
Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index? A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74, 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-0216-y
Bekelman, J. E., Li, Y., & Gross, C. P. (2003). Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: A systematic review. JAMA, 289, 454–465. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.4.454
Bergstrom, T. C., Courant, P. N., McAfee, R. P., & Williams, M. A. (2014). Evaluating big deal journal bundles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 9425–9430. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1403006111
Berkhout, K., & Rosenberg, E. (2012, October 2). Psycholoog Diederik Stapel nu ook verdacht van subsidiefraude [Psychologist Diederik Stapel now also suspected of grant fraud]. NRC. http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2012/10/02/psycholoog-stapel-nu-ook-verdacht-van-subsidiefraude
Björk, B. C., & Solomon, D. (2013). The publishing delay in scholarly peer-reviewed journals. Journal of Informetrics, 7, 914–923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.09.001
Bohannon, J. (2013). Who’s afraid of peer review. Science, 342, 60–65. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.342.6154.60
Bolton, D. (2016, March 3). Scientific paper which says the human hand was designed by a ‘Creator’ sparks controversy. Independent. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientific-study-paper-creator-intelligent-design-plos-one-creatorgate-a6910171.html
Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Daniel, H. D. (2010). A reliability-generalization study of journal peer reviews: A multilevel meta-analysis of inter-rater reliability and its determinants. PloS One, 5, e14331. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014331
Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Neuhaus, C., & Daniel, H. D. (2008). Citation counts for research evaluation: Standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting results. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 8, 93–102. https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00084
Bouter, L. M., Tijdink, J., Axelsen, N., Martinson, B. C., & Ter Riet, G. (2016). Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: Results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5
Breedveld, P. (2015, March 11). Integriteitsorgaan: VU onzorgvuldig gehandeld in zaak Nijkamp’ [Integrity Board: ‘VU negligent in case Nijkamp’]. Advalvas. http://www.advalvas.vu.nl/nieuws/integriteitsorgaan-vu-onzorgvuldig-gehandeld-zaak-nijkamp
Broad, W. J. (1981). The publishing game: Getting more for less. Science, 211, 1137–1139. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7008199
Callaham, M. L., Wears, R. L., Weber, E. J., Barton, C., & Young, G. (1998). Positive-outcome bias and other limitations in the outcome of research abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting. JAMA, 280, 254–257. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.3.254
Campbell, P. (2005). Not-so-deep impact. Nature, 435, 1003–1004. https://doi.org/10.1038/4351003b
Chawla, D. S. (2017, January 17). Mystery as controversial list of predatory publishers disappears. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal0625
Chemistry World. (2011, March 23). H-index ranking of living chemists. http://www.rsc.org/images/H-index%20ranking%20of%20living%20chemists(March%202011)_tcm18-85867.pdf
Clay Mathematics Institute. (2012). Rules for the millennium prizes. http://www.claymath.org/millennium-problems/rules-millennium-prizes
Clay Mathematics Institute. (2016). Millennium problems. http://www.claymath.org/millennium-problems
Copyrights Act. (1976). 17 U.S.C. § 107.
Costas, R., Zahedi, Z., & Wouters, P. (2015). Do “altmetrics” correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66, 2003–2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23309
Cumming, G., Fidler, F., & Vaux, D. L. (2007). Error bars in experimental biology. The Journal of Cell Biology, 177, 7–11. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200611141
Dal-Ré, R., Ioannidis, J. P., Bracken, M. B., Buffler, P. A., Chan, A. W., Franco, E. L., et al. (2014). Making prospective registration of observational research a reality. Science Translational Medicine, 6, 224. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3007513
De Winter, J. C. F., Zadpoor, A., & Dodou, D. (2014). The expansion of Google Scholar versus Web of Science: a longitudinal study. Scientometrics, 98, 1547–1565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1089-2
Dekker, S. (2013). Kamerbrief over Open Access van publicaties [Letter to the Parliament about Open Access of publications]. The Hague, the Netherlands: Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/kamerstukken/2013/11/15/kamerbrief-over-open-access-van-publicaties
Delft University of Technology. (2016). Publishers with a questionable reputation. https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20161226051111/http://www.library.tudelft.nl/en/support/researchers/publishing-support/publishers-with-a-questionable-reputation/
Dingemanse, M. (2016, August 4). Why PLOS ONE needs page proofs [blog post]. http://ideophone.org/why-plos-one-needs-page-proofs/
Dirnagl, U., & Lauritzen, M. (2010). Fighting publication bias: introducing the Negative Results section. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism, 30, 1263–1264. https://doi.org/10.1038/jcbfm.2010.51
DOAJ. (2017). Directory of Open Access Journals. https://doaj.org/
Dyer, C. (2008). Pfizer asks journal for comments made by peer reviewers. BMJ, 336, 575. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39518.526389.DB
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ, 315, 629–634. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
Elsevier. (2016). Content policy and selection. https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/content/content-policy-and-selection
Ferguson, C. J., & Heene, M. (2012). A vast graveyard of undead theories publication bias and psychological science’s aversion to the null. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 555–561. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612459059
France, B., Bell, W., Chang, E., & Scholten, T. (2015). Composite sampling approaches for Bacillus anthracis surrogate extracted from soil. PLOS ONE, 10, e0145799. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145799
Friedrich, N., Bowman, T. D., & Haustein, S. (2015). Do tweets to scientific articles contain positive or negative sentiments? http://altmetrics.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/altmetrics15_paper_18.pdf
Funder, D. C., Levine, J. M., Mackie, D. M., Morf, C. C., Vazire, S., & West, S. G. (2013). Improving the dependability of research in personality and social psychology recommendations for research and educational practice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18, 3–512. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868313507536
Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science: a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122, 108–111. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.122.3159.108
Gillan, D. J., Wickens, C. D., Hollands, J. G., & Carswell, C. M. (1998). Guidelines for presenting quantitative data in HFES publications. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 40, 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872098779480640
Gilmour, R., & Cobus-Kuo, L. (2011). Reference management software: A comparative analysis of four products. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 66, 63–75. https://doi.org/10.5062/F4Z60KZF
Google Scholar. (2016). Inclusion guidelines for webmasters. https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/inclusion.html
Gowers, T. (2014, April 24). Elsevier journals—Some facts [blog post]. https://gowers.wordpress.com/2014/04/24/elsevier-journals-some-facts/
Gura, T. (2008). Court deny Pfizer access. Nature Biotechnology, 26, 480. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0508-480
Gura, T. (2014, November 18). Robert Langer: Creating things that could change the world. Science. http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2014/11/robert-langer-creating-things-could-change-world
Gutknecht, C. (2015, August 29). Zahlungen der ETH Zürich an Elsevier, Springer und Wiley nun öffentlich [Payments by ETH Zurich to Elsevier, Springer and Wiley now public.]. https://wisspub.net/2015/08/29/zahlungen-der-eth-zuerich-an-elsevier-springer-und-wiley-nun-oeffentlich/
Hartley, J. (2005). To attract or to inform: What are titles for? Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 35, 203–213. https://doi.org/10.2190/NV6E-FN3N-7NGN-TWQT
Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106, 787–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9
Haustein, S., Peters, I., Sugimoto, C. R., Thelwall, M., & Larivière, V. (2014). Tweeting biomedicine: An analysis of tweets and citations in the biomedical literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65, 656–669. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23101
Higgins, J. P., & Green, S. (Eds.). (2008). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
Hoffman, R. R., & Hancock, P. A. (2014). Words matter. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Bulletin, 57, 3–7
Huiskamp, F. (2013, June 28). Diederik Stapel treft schikking met justitie om vervolging te voorkomen [Diederik Stapel settles an agreement with the judicial authorities to avoid persecution]. NRC. http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2013/06/28/diederik-stapel-treft-schikking-met-justitie-om-vervolging-te-voorkomen
IEEE. (2016). IEEE Access Frequently Asked Questions. http://ieeeaccess.ieee.org/frequently-asked-questions/
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (2016). Defining the role of authors and contributors. http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
Ioannidis, J. (2012). Reporting and reproducible research: Salvaging the self-correction principle of science. Freiburg, Germany: Annual Lecture given at the EQUATOR Network Scientific Symposium. http://www.equator-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012AnnualLecture_John+Ioannidis+freiburg102012.pdf
Ioannidis, J. P. (2008). Measuring co-authorship and networking-adjusted scientific impact. PLoS One, 3, e2778. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0002778
Jacsó, P. (2005). Google Scholar: The pros and the cons. Online Information Review, 29, 208–214. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520510598066
Jacsó, P. (2008). Google scholar revisited. Online Information Review, 32, 102–114. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520810866010
Journal of Safety Research. (2016). Guide for authors. https://www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-safety-research/0022-4375/guide-for-authors
Jubb, M., Goldstein, S., Amin, M., Plume, A., Aisati, M., Oeben, S., et al. (2015). Monitoring the transition to open access: A report for Universities UK (Report). Research Information Network. http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/90213/
Kaplan, R. M., & Irvin, V. L. (2015). Likelihood of null effects of large NHLBI clinical trials has increased over time. PLOS ONE, 1, e0132382. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132382
Krzywinski, M., & Altman, N. (2013). Points of significance: Error bars. Nature Methods, 10, 921–922. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2659
Lee, C. (2016, January 20). Navigating copyright for reproduced images: Overview [blog post]. http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2016/01/navigating-copyright-overview.html
Levelt, W. J. M. (2012). Falende wetenschap: De frauduleuze onderzoekspraktijken van sociaal-psycholoog Diederik Stapel [Flawed science: The fraudulent research practices of social psychologist Diederik Stapel]. http://www.scienceguide.nl/media/1109077/114736354-eindrapport.pdf
Lexchin, J., Bero, L. A., Djulbegovic, B., & Clark, O. (2003). Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: Systematic review. BMJ, 326, 1167–1170. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1167
Lindsey, D. (1988). Assessing precision in the manuscript review process: A little better than a dice roll. Scientometrics, 14, 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02020243
Mandavilli, A. (2011). Trial by twitter. Nature, 469, 286–287. https://doi.org/10.1038/469286a
National Institutes of Health. (2015). NIH public access policy details. https://publicaccess.nih.gov/policy.htm
National Library Medicine. (2015). Errata, retractions, partial retractions, corrected and republished articles, duplicate publications, comments (including author replies), updates, patient summaries, and republished (reprinted) articles policy for MEDLINE. https://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/factsheets/errata.html
Nature. (2016). How to transfer manuscripts. http://www.nature.com/authors/author_resources/transfer_manuscripts.html
Neff, B. D., & Olden, J. D. (2006). Is peer review a game of chance? BioScience, 56, 333–340. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2006)56%5B333:IPRAGO%5D2.0.CO;2
Nicol, A. A. M., & Pexman, P. M. (2010). Presenting your findings: A practical guide for creating tables (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Norman, I., & Griffiths, P. (2008). Duplicate publication and ‘salami slicing’: Ethical issues and practical solutions. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45, 1257–1260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2008.07.003
Nuijten, M. B., Hartgerink, C. H., Assen, M. A., Epskamp, S., & Wicherts, J. M. (2016). The prevalence of statistical reporting errors in psychology (1985–2013). Behavior Research Methods, 48, 1205–1226. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0664-2
Osborne, J. W., & Holland, A. (2009). What is authorship, and what should it be? A survey of prominent guidelines for determining authorship in scientific publications. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14.
Pautasso, M. (2010). Worsening file-drawer problem in the abstracts of natural, medical and social science databases. Scientometrics, 85, 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0233-5
PeerJ. (2014, October 21). Who’s afraid of open peer review? [blog post]. https://peerj.com/blog/post/100580518238/whos-afraid-of-open-peer-review/
Peng, R. D. (2009). Reproducible research and Biostatistics. Biostatistics, 10, 405–408. https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxp014
Pfeiffer, T., Bertram, L., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2011). Quantifying selective reporting and the Proteus phenomenon for multiple datasets with similar bias. PLoS One, 6, e18362. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018362
Priem, J., Piwowar, H. A., & Hemminger, B. M. (2012). Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.4745.
Reich, E. S. (2009). The rise and fall of a physics fraudster. Physics World, 22, 24–29.
Remie, M. (2014, January 7). Vier voorbeelden van het (zelf)plagiaat van topeconoom Nijkamp [Four examples of (self)plagiarism of top economist Nijkamp]. NRC. http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2014/01/07/vier-voorbeelden-van-het-zelfplagiaat-van-topeconoom-nijkamp
Retraction Watch. (2015, December 8). Diederik Stapel now has 58 retractions. http://retractionwatch.com/category/by-author/diederik-stapel/
Ripple, A. M., Mork, J. G., Knecht, L. S., & Humphreys, B. L. (2011). A retrospective cohort study of structured abstracts in MEDLINE, 1992–2006. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 99, 160–163. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.99.2.009
Ritchie, M. L., & Romanuk, T. N. (2012). A meta-analysis of probiotic efficacy for gastrointestinal diseases. PLOS ONE, 7, e34938. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034938
Roig, M. (2011). Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. http://ori.hhs.gov/images/ddblock/plagiarism.pdf
Ross, J. S., Hill, K. P., Egilman, D. S., & Krumholz, H. M. (2008). Guest authorship and ghostwriting in publications related to Rofecoxib: A case study of industry documents from Rofecoxib litigation. JAMA, 299, 1800–1812. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.299.15.1800
Roth, B., Becker, N., Romeyke, S., Schäfer, S., Domnick, F., & Spinath, F. M. (2015). Intelligence and school grades: A meta-analysis. Intelligence, 53, 118–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.09.002
Rougier, N. P., Droettboom, M., & Bourne, P. E. (2014). Ten simple rules for better figures. PLOS Computational Biology, 10, e1003833. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003833
Rusk, N. (2013, September 27). How to write a rebuttal letter [blog post]. http://blogs.nature.com/methagora/2013/09/how-to-write-a-rebuttal-letter.html
Sahadat, I. (2014, January 7). Rector VU: wat Nijkamp deed, was geen diefstal [Rector VU: what Nijkamp did, was not stealing]. De Volkskrant. http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/5288/Onderwijs/article/detail/3573444/2014/01/07/Rector-VU-wat-Nijkamp-deed-was-geen-diefstal.dhtml
Scanes, C. G. (2007). Ethics of publication: Is publication an obligation for researchers? Poultry Science, 86, 2051–2052. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/86.10.2051
Schilp, M. (2014, January 17). Commissie-Zwemmer gaat oeuvre Peter Nijkamp onderzoeken [Committee Zwemmer will investigate Peter Nijkamp’s work]. Aldalvas. http://www.advalvas.vu.nl/nieuws/commissie-zwemmer-gaat-oeuvre-peter-nijkamp-onderzoeken
Schultz, D. M. (2010). Are three heads better than two? How the number of reviewers and editor behavior affect the rejection rate. Scientometrics, 84, 277–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0084-0
Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., & Moher, D. (2010). CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. PLOS Medicine, 7, e1000251. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000251
Science. (2016). The Science contributors FAQ. http://www.sciencemag.org/site/feature/contribinfo/faq/
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22, 1359–1366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632
Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2014). p-curve and effect size correcting for publication bias using only significant results. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 666–681. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614553988
Sollaci, L. B., & Pereira, M. G. (2004). The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure: A fifty-year survey. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 92, 364–371.
Springer Nature. (2016). Recommended data repositories. http://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories#general
Stroebe, W., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2012). Scientific misconduct and the myth of self-correction in science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 670–688. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460687
Testa, J. (2016, January 14). The Thomson Reuters journal selection process. http://wokinfo.com/essays/journal-selection-process/
Thelwall, M., Haustein, S., Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Do Altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLOS ONE, 8, e64841. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0064841
Thompson, L. A. (2001). Grey literature in engineering. Science & Technology Libraries, 19, 57–73. https://doi.org/10.1300/J122v19n03_05
Thrower, P. (2012, September 12). ‘Eight reasons I rejected your article’. A journal editor reveals the top reasons so many manuscripts don’t make it to the peer review process [blog post]. https://www.elsevier.com/connect/8-reasons-i-rejected-your-article
Turner, E. H., Matthews, A. M., Linardatos, E., Tell, R. A., & Rosenthal, R. (2008). Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. The New England Journal of Medicine, 358, 252–260. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa065779
Valenta, K., Brown, K. A., Melin, A. D., Monckton, S. K., Styler, S. A., Jackson, D. A., et al. (2015). It’s not easy being blue: Are there olfactory and visual trade-offs in plant signalling? PLOS ONE, 10, e0131725. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131725
Verbraak, C. (Director), & NTR (Producer). (2016, September 9). De wetenschapper [The scientist] [Television series episode]. In Kijken in de ziel [Looking in the soul]. Hilversum, The Netherlands: NTR.
Vestergaard, G. L. (2017). The science grapevine: Influence of blog information on the online media coverage of the 2010 arsenic-based life study. Journalism. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884915623171
Von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Vandenbroucke, J. P. (2008). The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology [STROBE] statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61, 344–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.008
VSNU. (2013). Beschuldiging van plagiaat [Charge of plagiarism]. http://www.vsnu.nl/files/documenten/Wetenschapp.integriteit/2013%20Beschuldiging%20van%20plagiaat.pdf
VSNU. (2017). Overview of costs incurred by universities for books and journals by publisher. http://www.vsnu.nl/en_GB/cost-of-publication
Wadman, M. (2008). Crunch time for peer review in lawsuit. Nature, 452, 6–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/452006a
Wainer, H. (1997). Visual revelations: Graphical tales of fate and deception from Napoleon Bonaparte to Ross Perot. New York: Copernicus.
Whitesides, G. M. (2004). Whitesides’ group: Writing a paper. Advanced Materials, 16, 1375–1377. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.200400767
Wolfe-Simon, F., Blum, J. S., Kulp, T. R., Gordon, G. W., Hoeft, S. E., Pett-Ridge, J., et al. (2011). A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus. Science, 332, 1163–1166. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1197258
Yau, N. (2011). Visualize this: The FlowingData guide to design, visualization, and statistics. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley Publishing.
Zerhouni, E. A. (2004). NIH public access policy. Science, 306, 1895. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1106929
Zwemmer, J., Gunning, J. W., & Grobbee, R. (2015). Report concerning references cited in the work of Professor P. Nijkamp. http://retractionwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Report-Zwemmer-Committee-for-publication-without-attachments-English....pdf
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
de Winter, J.C.F., Dodou, D. (2017). Publishing. In: Human Subject Research for Engineers . SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56964-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56964-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56963-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56964-2
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)