The relevance of title, abstract, and keywords for scientific paper quality and potential impact
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemEditorial
Springer Nature
Materia
Peer-review process Informed authors Authors skills Quasi-species Systematic review Recommendation system
Fecha
2023-02-27Referencia bibliográfica
Chamorro-Padial, J., Rodríguez-Sánchez, R. The relevance of title, abstract, and keywords for scientific paper quality and potential impact. Multimed Tools Appl 82, 23075–23090 (2023). [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-023-14451-9]
Patrocinador
Universidad de Granada/CBUAResumen
Authors, editors, and reviewers need to have a good perception regarding the quality of a
manuscript in order to improve their skills, save effort, and prevent errors that can affect
the submission procedure. In this paper, we compared the author’s perception of a
manuscript’s quality with the manuscript’s actual impact. In addition, we analyzed the
uncertainty of the author’s perception of the manuscript’s quality. From there,we defined
‘partition’ as the author’s ability to perceive the actual quality. We did this by launching a
website for the use of the scientific community. This webpage provided a tool to help
improve an investigator’s skill in understanding and recognizing the quality of a manuscript
so as to help researchers improve and maximize their works’ potential impact. We
carried out the experiment with 106 experienced users who tested our webpage. We
found that the Abstract, the Title, and the Keywords were enough to perform a substantially
decent evaluation of a manuscript. Most of the researchers were able to determine
the quality of a paper in less than a minute from this small amount of information.