What is the Method Section of a Research Paper?

The method section represents the various procedures used to prove the research question or hypothesis.  It represents the experimental procedure conducted during the course of study in a detailed manner so that the reader can understand and if needed can reproduce. The method section is a specific and integral part of a research paper.

  • Importance of method in a research paper?

It provides the opportunity to judge the authenticity and reproducibility of the experimental procedures.

  • The framework of Method Section

The integral components that make a method section are participants, apparatus, and procedure.

Participant: It represents the animal, human being, or every specific substance on which experiments were conducted. It also represents the structural, functional, or any specific attribute of any entity that is examined.

Apparatus: It is the instrument used to conduct the study.

Procedure: It’s the step-by-step process of doing some activity to obtain results. The outcome whether positive or negative is reported. Generally, the procedure is repeated multiple times to ascertain the reproducibility of the results.

  • An important point to be mentioned while writing the methods?

Experiments conducted on human subjects should have clearance from the ethical committee. Some journals ask for ethical approval numbers as a mandate criterion for the submission of the article. Also, informed consent from the patient is a mandate in the case reports and other types of manuscripts as it may contain pictures from recognizable parts of the body.

Also, the Manuscript should comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and IRB guidelines. The former is a set of ethical guidelines from the world medical association while the latter protects the rights of human subjects participating in any research venture.

  • Extensive Literature searches

Databases such as Medline, PubMed, Google Scholar are pioneer repositories to get explore relevant Methods as per the research question of your article. The collection of context-specific and precise keywords is the important component that ascertains successful outcomes without being carried away from the topic.

  • What should be incorporated in a Method Section

Provide in-text citation

The past work that has been referred to for using a particular method should be cited in the method section to give due acknowledgment to the concerned author.

Source of participants

The details from where the non-human subjects came from should be mentioned. Details such as the total number of animals, Number of male/ female counterparts, sex, age, mating history, medical history are few attributes that should be mentioned. In the case of human subjects, the place of study such as hospital, medical college details should be mentioned. If any database or repository was used to procure medical records of participants then the details should be provided.

Inclusion / Exclusion

The basis for the elimination or incorporation of any parameter should be mentioned.

Grouping of participants or subgroup formation

Any subgroups that were formed for specific testing or any modification of protocol to emphasize some facts are also mentioned in the method section.

Study Design

An author should in detail, describes the step-by-step preparation conducted during the course of the study. The particular chemicals, Drugs, instruments, kits, dyes used along with their brand details should be mentioned. It should give a detailed overview of each and every step such as the number of washings, incubation time, amount of solvent, etc. The aim is to provide necessary details so that the study can be reproducible.

Statistical analyses

Details of statistical tests used in the study should be mentioned.

  • Pits fall in writing Methods

Unnecessary information should be avoided. The background of the study should be in the introduction and not in the methods.

An author should emphasize how the methods helped them to address the research question.

Any hindrances that were faced while performing the experiments and how modification helped to overcome the same should be mentioned.

  • Conclusion

During the course of experimentation, an author should not overemphasize the instruments and should write the methods as and when the experiments were performed to avoid missing any details.

Publishing your article after Acceptance

What is an Accepted Manuscript?

The version of the manuscript that has been peer-reviewed is the accepted version. The simplest permitted versions are files that are effectively just plain text with no layout characteristic. This is how the vast majority of accepted papers appear. The Accepted Manuscript should be identical to the final published edition, but there should be no logo, citation details, copyediting, formatting, or copyright marking from the publisher. The document might be in PDF or Word format. Keep a copy of your Accepted Manuscript for any future postings after you receive the acceptance email from the Editorial Office.

What documents do you receive after acceptance?

When your paper is accepted for publication, the proofs are sent to the corresponding author. A paper is subedited (copyedited) after it is accepted to achieve optimum clarity and reach. Ensuring the accuracy of references is vital as published papers should not contain errors. Your paper is combined into an issue of the journal and published in its final form once the associated author approves them.

  • An acceptance letter from your journal’s editorial system.
  • When the object is passed to production, the Production Tracking System (PTS) sends an acknowledgment letter with the following information:
  • The reference code for the utility to track your accepted article.
  • Offprint Order form link to order Proofs and reprint of your article.
  • Copyright, sponsorship and funding, and open access are all covered in the Rights and Access form.
  • A link to a colour figure reproduction form, if applicable.

What to do after Research Paper acceptance?

There are still things that you must-do if you truly want to benefit from your publication.

  • Get an ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) as it assigns a unique identification to each research output, ensuring that your work is not mistaken with that of others.
  • Making the accepted work online provides some advantages, including:
  • Earlier access to research that can be read and cited
  • Authors can promote their work as soon as it is acknowledged by their peers, keeping the publication process moving forward.
  • Share it with people as possible to recognize and respond to your work. Breaking down technical and language barriers is another powerful and effective strategy to increase public interest in your work. The way different publishers and periodicals address the problem of sharing differs.
  • Researchers will have more prospects for grant acceptance because they would be able to list their work early.
  • After all of your time and work has gone into publishing and promoting your paper, it only makes sense to keep an eye on it and assess the feedback.

Conclusion

The length of time it takes to prove an article varies by journal. Most journals will send you proofs within two weeks of receiving your acknowledgment letter. Many papers are published online one week before they are printed, and the corresponding authors of these papers will be notified via e-mail when the online publishing date is confirmed. It takes roughly 4-6 weeks for an article to be published after it has been accepted. After that, you can unwind, relax, and reward yourself for your work until the next piece.

How Open Access Publication is sustainable?

The desire of scientists and academics to report the results of their study in academic journals is an ancient practice. For the sake of investigation and education, articles are published without charge. The internet is the latest technology. Reporting practice and publishing technology is useful for future purposes.

 What is Open Access?

Open Access is the free availability of Research Articles on the public internet, allowing anyone to read, download, print, scan, and use without any difficulties. OA journals are expected to become more prevalent in the academic market in terms of both articles published and journal titles, as the scholarly community around the world accepts OA publication formats.

What are the benefits of open access with Global Sustainability?

  • Articles are immediately available online after they are published, offering them the opportunity for increased exposure and dissemination. Gold open access permits anyone with an internet connection anywhere in the globe to view published research without having to pay a subscription fee.
  • A high-quality scholarly journal can be published at a low cost to the scientific community. Not only is all of the material on the website open to view, but the broad range of media, multilingual content, and unlimited existence of the journal’s copyright license allows for the free flow of scientific communication, which is ultimately beneficial.
  • All contributions will be peer-reviewed by Editorial Board before acceptance. Scientific journal publishers, especially medical publishers, have a duty to ensure that the material they publish is as rigorously peer-reviewed as possible and as easily shareable as possible for scientists and society as a whole.

 

Seeking Sustainability in OA

  • Varied firms have different aspects, but the majority agree that you must pay for validation, suitable copyediting, presentation, sustainability, and functionality. Publishers are dedicated to ensuring that their material is widely distributed and accessible. Any long-term access options that protect the scholarly record’s integrity and permanence should be supported. They collaborate closely with funders, universities, and governments to make this possible. A subscription-based journal, hybrid publishing choices are examples of such choices.
  • Payment for open access publishing is made upfront via article processing charges (APCs). APCs might be considered as a more equitable payment mechanism if the charges are based on costs that reflect the services delivered.
  • Gold open access is one strategy for achieving our common aim of increasing access to peer-reviewed scientific works and maximizing the value and reuse of scientific research findings. Institutions and donors play an important role in ensuring that public access regulations enable the funding of peer-reviewed publications and service offerings in any journal that an author chooses. Publishers are eager to collaborate with organizations to achieve this goal and enhance scholarly communication.

 

Conclusion

The researchers, the users, and the funders are all involved in the publication of research. Publishing is a competitive industry. Authors fight for journal space, publishers compete for articles, and library budgets compete with one another. For authors who want to bring the decisions about where to publish and how to pay closer together, Open Access and APCs are a viable option.

How To Write A Highly Citable Journal Article?

Publishing Research Work is essential for a Researcher. How many times the paper is cited after it is published is also very critical. The worthiness of the Research Paper is determined by the Citations.

What is a Citation?

A Citation can be stated as a Reference to the Source of Information used in your Research Paper. Write the Papers and publish them with proper Citation. During the Publication, you cite different references which you have followed.

Why Citation matter?

  • Quality of your Research
  • H-Index – If the Article Citation is increased, H-Index also increases. It is a number that gives the Researcher Efficiency and Impact. The number depends on the papers a researcher publishes, and the citation it gets. It measures the Efficiency and Reference of the Publication of a Researcher.

 

Importance of Citation

When you are a Researcher who has published a Paper recently and thinking about how to increase your citation, these are the steps to increase the visibility of the Published Paper among the Research Community.

  • The best way is to upload your Scientific Journal Article on Social Platforms such as Twitter, Linkedin, Facebook, Youtube where you can attract an audience from different backgrounds. Let people know what your Research is about.
  • Publishing Lots of Papers, if you have good data and planning to publish your data then make a Schedule, Plan your writing and Publish your Research Articles regularly. Cite your previous works and also your Colleague’s Work. Share part of your data with the Public.
  • Update your Profile on different Platforms like Google Scholar, Academia, Scopus. Use a Consistent form of your paper on all of your forms.
  • Publish more Review Articles. Review Papers get more citations than Research Articles.
  • Use Short Attractive Titles to get more Citation.
  • Use unique, Trending Keywords in the Abstract.
  • Collaborate with different Scientific Communities. Make Collabs to become Co-Authors of the Research Paper.
  • Work as a Volunteer in Journals where you can Review Papers and also upgrade your Scientific Knowledge in a particular field.
  • Target your Journals. Focus on New Journals, Open Access Journals, and Journals that offer Free Publication have greater impact.
  • Publish in Special Issues – You get wide publicity which attracts more Audiences.
  • Socialize and try to attend more Conferences where you can meet the scientific community who are working on different aspects of Science and participate by publishing your Research Paper.
  • Expert Advice is highly valuable to get Citation. Cross Check your data before you publish.
  • Target High Impact Factor for Paper Publication. Impact Factor decides the Quality of the Research Journal.
  • Use the Image Search Option. Make attractive Graphical Abstracts which is engaging and informative.
  • Try to cite Recent and Relevant Papers alone.
  • Cite a Renowned Person in your field of research that will make your paper a reputed one.

 

Conclusion

A High Citation Score is one of the Parameters to get a Postdoc Position. By following the above ways, your work will be visible and your citation score will increase. The most important way of getting citations lies in the contribution of the Research Excellence.

How to Overcome Journal Rejection?

Publishing Papers after rejection could be a long time-taking process that holds the ability to share our work with the Public. If you don’t succeed at first, revise and resubmit.

A Paper rejected doesn’t mean the research is always bad.

 Reasons for Rejection of Academic Papers from Journals

These mistakes are consistently made by different people. These mistakes are non-fatal which creates a bad impression about the paper Many non-fatal mistakes can lead to rejection of the Paper.

The submission of Paper takes almost 1 to 1.5 years, so avoid making these deadly mistakes.

  • Formatting Issues
  • Choosing the wrong Journal
  • Grammatical Errors
  • References (Many or Few)
  • Revealing the Author’s Identity
  • Missing Tables & Figures
  • Missing Abstract
  • Writing Style

In some cases, the Paper may be rejected even after major revisions. Most researchers believe that the data and assumptions will be accepted with minor revisions, but when they get a negative response, they become low.

What are the things that you should not do after Paper Rejection?

  • Complaining to the Editor
  • Posting the Reviews Online
  • Writing a letter with Anger
  • Discarding the Reviews
  • Giving up

 

Researchers Perspective after Rejection

  • Upset about the outcome – Give yourself time and go back to the feedback. Read the letter when the anger stage is off.
  • Look for Valuable Feedback – Review the Feedback in detail. The feedback can be helpful with a lot of clues as to how to improve the paper. Some feedback seems to be unhelpful but when looking it deeper, there will be a different perspective which turns out to be good.
  • Resubmit the same Journal – Some Journals reject the Paper but invite you to resubmit it later. If you do decide to submit on that Journal, you can choose this option.
  • Make Changes & Submit to a New Journal – The most common Chosen option is considering the comments, improving the manuscript, and submitting it to a New Journal. Must ensure the details of the Cover Letter, Reference Format. Deciding what to Change – Address all the comments. Minor comments are also needed to be addressed.
  • Make No Changes & Submit to Another Journal – This is an easy option but is not at all effective. Reviewers may identify the same feedback that you received earlier.
  • File the Manuscript & Never resubmit – Choosing a new paper for Advanced research so deciding not to submit the paper in any journal. Instead of posting it in a scientific community where your Research data might be useful to others. Making it as a Blog or Workshop for Practitioners. The outcomes might be surprisingly good. Have multiple projects, when something is messing up, you have another in hand which can lift you.

 

Conclusion

Rejection is a natural part of Academic life. Persistence and Willingness are the keys to Success in Paper Publication. Rejection as Redirection by looking at it as an opportunity redirected to something more suitable. Rejection makes us improve and strengthen our work before submitting it to another set of Audiences.

What are the barriers to post-publication peer review?

Post-publication peer review – doing peer review after the publication of the manuscript. When a paper is published. Everyone in the community starts to read it and comment on it either in conferences or Journal Clubs. It is an informal way of doing Peer Review.

F1000, OpenReview, PubMed Commons, TrueReview, Pubpeer are some of the Post-publication Peer Review Platforms.

 Challenges of Post-publication peer review

Lack of Motivation towards Scientific Researches

Editorial control will always be a vital feature of every open peer review method, including PPPR, as we’ve previously reported. Editors are expected to seek peer feedback promptly (and often submit several reminder emails), as well as provide a sense of “prestige” for being asked to review an article, as a clear acknowledgment of your expertise in that area.

Too many choices – Many platforms and alternative methods of use in communicating reviews. It’s likely that various comments appear on different pages but not on others when multiple copies of a paper exist across multiple platforms. It’s also likely that researchers would experience plagiarism. This mode of communication is possibly more suitable when significant theoretical or methodological shortcomings in published studies have been discovered.

Plagiarism

Allows unqualified referees to smear the Researcher’s original work with unfounded accusations, claims, and lies in the name of free speech.

Risk of non-constructive criticism

Some people may use PPPR to be intentionally confrontational in public, talking down to or intimidating their junior peers. As a result, any alternative or complementary system must mitigate or minimize this negative dynamic, ensure that an accountability process is built into and maintained, and ensure that marginalized groups are encouraged to participate.

 Solutions to Post-publication peer review

  • Offers Opportunities for Corrections Authors receive more Feedback from peers by posting papers online. This should lessen the agony of revise and re-submit.
  • Increases engagement of the Scientific Community for more recognition & career development.
  • Ensures openness by making the analysis publicly accessible to those involved in the study.
  • The technology has made it possible for Scientific Research Papers to be accessible always.
  • After reading the Research Paper, review comments can be posted immediately and shared on social media platforms.
  • Strength & Weakness of Scientific Papers is done real-time globally.

 

Conclusion

Peer review was established to ensure that research papers are well-documented and meet the scientific community’s general standards. However, another aim of peer review has always been to stimulate scientific debate. Post-Publication Peer review allows the broader community to discuss the article in greater depth, providing the open forum that peer review is designed to provide. Using this method would undoubtedly result in a conflict of interest. Peer review often prohibits discussion of a mainstream theory against a competing mainstream theory, and theoretical scientists are often denied the opportunity to do so. PPPR aims to make aspects of the daily research process more accessible to the public. It’s about bringing meaning to published research papers by using the evaluations and criticisms that researchers and others conduct.

The Benefits Of Peer-Reviewing A Manuscript

What Is The Peer-Review Of A Manuscript?

  • Peer-Review is a process in which the Manuscript proposed for the Publication of the Journal is assessed by a group of experts in the appropriate field.
  • It can be said as a sign of recognition in one’s field.

 

Who is involved in the Process of Peer-Review?

  • Experts in the appropriate field.
  • Editorial Board Members.

 

Evaluation Stages

Initial Evaluation

  • Read the Abstract & Conclusion.
  • Skip the Figures, Data, Tables.

 

In-Depth Evaluation

  • Read the entire script
  • Note the details
  • Getting Answer to these Questions
  • Is the quality of the manuscript good for a conclusion?
  • Is the experimental design appropriate?
  • Is there any non-relevant data?

 

How does Peer-Review Work?

  • The Research Scholars writes a Paper & Submits the Manuscript to the Academic Journal that publishes similar or related types of works.
  • The Journal Editor reads the Manuscript and decides whether it meets the criteria for Publication or not. If it is rejected, the manuscript goes back to the Researcher with a polite rejection letter. If it meets the criteria, then the Manuscript is accepted and is sent to the scientific community who will read it as well.
  • The reviewers read the manuscript to evaluate in terms of its purpose, scope, thesis, outcome and ask questions such as
  • Is the topic worth investigating?
  • Are relevant sources being used?
  • Does the evidence support the thesis?
  • Is the thesis clearly and convincingly argued?
  • Is the work original?
  • Once the reviewers have finished reading the manuscript, they send their comments to the editor, who in turn, sends it to the writer another letter that will either accept the paper without revisions or will provide comments and ask for revisions based on the peer reviewers’ evaluation of the work.
  • Once the paper is revised to the satisfaction of the editor and the reviewers take several revisions, the article is published.
  • When using Peer-reviewed articles for research papers and assignments, can use the best data or information available upon which to base your work.

 

Peer Review Methodology

 What are the Questions to be focused on while Peer-Reviewing?

Title

  • Is the title match with the Manuscript?
  • Are the major findings mentioned in the Manuscript?
  • Is the conclusion overstated?

 

Abstract

  • Can the abstract stand alone?

 

Intro

  • Is the Intro brief?
  • Does the intro have the aim or objective of the Research?

 

Methods

  • Are the methods appropriate?
  • Is the statistical analysis provided?

 

Results

  • Is the paper within the scope of the Research?
  • Does the paper address the important & interesting question?
  • Is the Manuscript readable?

 

Over-view of Peer-Review

  • The manuscript should be kept confidential.
  • Feedback should be constructive and must include reasons to support the comments.

 

How is Peer-Review beneficial in Academic Writing?

  • Improves Writing & Critical Thinking Skills
  • Develops Collaborative Learning
  • Encourages the writer to perform better
  • Saves time for Researchers
  • Ensure Quality Research is Published

 

The Peer-Reviewer needs to pay attention to evaluate the Manuscript Readability such as

  • Is the manuscript readable?
  • Are the sentences easy to read?
  • Are the sentences grammatically correct?

 

Conclusion

Peer-Review is a crucial learning process. A Good Peer-Review should be

  • Focused – Main areas should be addressed
  • Constructive – Identification of the Problems clearly
  • Structured – Systematic Approach to the Manuscript
  • Polite & Professional Feedback
  • Listing major strength & weakness
  • Recommend changes to improve

Common Reasons Why a Research Paper Gets Rejected by Journals

The publishing industry is enormous and authors are open to choose the appropriate journal for submission. Though there are thousands of journals to choose from, rejection is common in scholarly publishing. The rejection causes demotivation among researchers, who dedicate months to designing and writing a perfectly molded paper.

Here, we have focused on the common mistakes for which academic papers are rejected by journals.

Technical screening

Manuscripts submitted to a reputed high-impact academic journal undergo severe scrutiny even before they are screened by the editorial board members and reviewers.

The primary causes of their rejection at this stage are:

  • The paper is not relevant to the journal’s readers or are not under the aims and scope of the journal
  • Paper lacks novelty in the relevant field
  • Plagiarized content
  • Ethical concerns
  • Unavailability of Informed consent forms of subjects
  • If similar research papers are already under consideration
  • The paper has not been prepared based on the journal’s guidelines
  • Incomplete materials (If the author hasn’t provided the mandatory documents)

Peer review process

After the initial screening, the editors assign the reviewers to initiate the peer-review process. In the peer-review a comprehensive critical analysis of the high-quality papers takes place.

The primary causes of their rejection at this stage are:

  • The aim is unclear and the introduction part lacks clarity
  • Use of insignificant or outdated procedures or methodology
  • Statistical analysis of the data is inadequate and weak
  • Illogical or unstructured arguments
  • The data does not support the conclusions
  • Insufficient data failing to produce a significant result
  • Poor writing or contains too many jargons
  • Inconsistencies in the writing with grammatical and spelling errors

Quality of figures and other issues

  • If an author has failed to obtain written consent of the participants before/during the research.
  • Conflict of interest declaration, copyright issues, plagiarized data, and other ethical concerns associated with the research paper.
  • The journal may not have the space for the paper
  • The paper is incompetent with the high standards of other papers submitted to the journal
  • Non-archival data and of insignificant value to the journal
  • Poorly designed and irrelevant repetition tables or figures

Whatever the reasons, make sure that you read the feedback in depth and reflect on it. Even if you don’t agree with the feedback, it’s still important to understand why someone else might have thought that. Hence, knowing and accepting the reasons for rejection by the journal can significantly enhance the chance of publication in the next attempt.

Transparency, Openness and Peer Review

Peer review of a journal article is a critical aspect of publication. The academic circle only acknowledges peer-reviewed journal publication as quality publication, mainly because it gives an assurance of quality and pedigree of the article and thereby the author.

However, there are numerous stemming issues with the peer review mechanism, that in turn has led to various forms of peer review practices. The issues of transparency and openness in peer review procedures in the underlying factor for each of these different forms.

Single-blind Review: This is a process where the author does not get to know the identity of the reviewer, while the reviewer knows who the author is. This is often followed to prevent authors from influencing peers who are reviewing their articles.

Double-Blind Review: This is e process where neither the author nor the reviewer knows each other’s identity. This is followed to prevent any form of nexus or collusion between author and reviewer. This mechanism promises maximum quality control with minimal transparency in the process.

Open Peer Review: This is the exact opposite where both author and reviewer know each other’s identity. This model is one of the most transparent processes and it seeks to address the issue of influence or collusion via an open and transparent process.

Transparent Peer Review: This new form emerged with the emergence of open access journals. In this model, both the article and the peer reviews are posted on the site. Often, an open-access journal uploads the entire article as received from the author on the site and invites reviewers to post their reviews as comments. The entire process is often based on a subscription-based model, where both authors and reviewers have subscribed to the open-access journal, as are the readers who want to access both articles and reviews. This is one of the most innovative and transparent review mechanisms gaining popularity.

Collaborative Review: in this case, either one or more reviewers work together to share a common review, or authors work in collaboration with reviewers on the final draft. This process is also popular for the transparency and openness of publication.

Post-publication Review: This is an extension of the earlier discussed transparent peer review mechanism, where the author’s article is posted as received, and solicited and unsolicited reviews are posted along with it. This is often like a blog where everyone is free to comment on the original post. This model is often restricted to subscription-based access to prevent trolling.

Transferable peer Review: This is a new offering from several publishers in which they allow authors, whose article they may have rejected, to transfer their manuscript along with the peer reviews received to another publication. This allows greater transparency where the new journal and reviewers have an open idea about why it was rejected earlier or the developments done on the previous comments.

Different forms of peer review have differing forms of transparency and openness. There is a set formula as each has its own merits and demerits. What matters is the choice of the journal and what process the journal follows.

HOW TO REUSE OLD ACADEMIC PAPERS

While pursuing a career or academic research and publication, it is only natural to expect academicians to develop on their previous works or pursue a set line of investigation. More often than not, research or experimental investigation spans over years and researchers may indulge in multiple publications on the matter which builds on their previous works.

However, reusing one’s own previous publication is a taboo that comes under the ambit of self-plagiarism. This is a great dilemma that is strongly challenged by many academicians who argue using one’s own work is not ethically plagiarism. However, there are certain limitations on how one can use one’s previous works, and therefore one has to be careful about how to use them.

What is the Concern?

To best understand why there are limitations to text recycling, one has to understand the reason why it is restricted. Many unscrupulous authors have been scoring multiple publications by simply rehashing the same content over and over again. This was red-flagged in the academic community, as these publications go against the ethics of academic publication. They do not offer new value or insights on the subject; they are not pushing the boundary of knowledge; they are just done for the base intention of having more publication credits or citation.

How to reuse your own content?

However, there is a genuine case of reusing one’s own content for legitimate reasons and that too is well understood. To avoid the vice of multiple publications, there are some checks and balances suggested.

The context: The context of text recycling is the most defining factor. You may have done a certain publication says while reporting your own findings. Tomorrow, you are looking to develop a review article in which you want to posit your own findings with other publications. In this case, you may definitely refer to your previous content, but it needs to be edited to fit the present context. You cannot simply copy-paste from the previous publication as it does very little value added to the news article. Edit, paraphrase, and contextualize the previous content and you can avoid the pitfall of self-plagiarism.

Citation: Even if you are using your own content, you have to ensure proper referencing and citation as you would for any other literature review. Offer the content as something you have already published before and not as something you are offering now. You also need to develop a logical flow that justifies these citations, or else you may be found guilty of just recycling text to cover up for lack of original content for the new article.

Journal selection: Journal selection is critical for articles recycling text. If you are looking to publish a series of articles in a specific journal, then referring to previous publications via recycling text has a certain context. If you are submitting articles to various journals with recycling text, it may be red-flagged under self-plagiarism.

Remembers, reusing own content is not a crime; the crime lies in the dishonesty involved in the process.