To start with, new technical authors must carefully format their technical articles, and then learn the particulars of the target journals they want to publish them in.
These two processes alone take time and energy because each section of an article has its own requirements.
For example, the experimental section requires explicit detail so the work can be duplicated by others.
Also, the summary and discussion sections could appeal both to the executive types and regular scientists.
Also, if the proposed articles are to be peer-reviewed, the authors might find themselves pitted against competitive reviewers.
These situations can lead to more stress and seemingly unnecessary revising.
The authors might also have to incorporate new ideas into their articles along with substantial rebuttals to the editors.
In the end, however, the final decisions belong to the editors, not to the reviewers.
Formatting Generally, the formatting of a proposed article is learned quickly with only minor differences occurring between the target journals in question.
A basic format goes like this: abstract or summary, introduction/background, experimental/methods, results, discussion/conclusion, recommendations, acknowledgments, and references.
Accuracy Scientific accuracy is the most important component of the proposed article, more so than the writing itself.
All too often, the authors could find themselves faced with numerous valid-appearing reasons to pad the article's results for business purposes.
But they are not true.
Such reasons are never valid enough for padding or falsifying scientific data.
People People will be people, even the professional ones.
We can become petty at times, especially when we try to put guarantees on what we perceive to be our future and security.
That could mean putting-handles-on those who could disrupt our sense of security, including those who publish scientific articles.
This kind of human behavior goes with the technical-publishing territory to a degree.
Yet, if it is dealt with in a straight forward manner, it need not get out of hand.
Control The scientific authors themselves must be well-grounded in the knowledge they present as well as in their own abilities.
Sometimes, their own local reviewers and managers will exert unnecessary opinions into the proposed article for their own aggrandizement and control reasons.
The only way these reviewers can obtain that kind of control is to inject something into the article or into the author's mind that is not true, especially if they are trying to overly control both the author and publication.
This fraudulent step separates the author from accurate truth, which makes him or her more susceptible to abusive man-made controls.
These kind of situations occur where basic professionalism is lacking.
Editors The editors of scientific journals have seen it all.
They're smart, capable, and perceptive.
They can instantly recognize interfering game-playing in the proposed articles submitted to them.
Thankfully, because these editors want their journals to be top-notch, they lean toward intense accuracy.
They want their articles to contain accurate science and credits, and to be put together by accurate writer's voices.
Thus, new technical authors might want to take a technical writing course before submitting an article for publication.
For detailed information on this kind of publishing, see the following website.