View More View Less
  • 1 Division of Atmospheric Sciences, Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
  • 2 Finnish Meteorological Institute, P.O. Box 503, Erik Palménin Aukio 1, 00101, Helsinki, Finland
  • 3 Centre for Atmospheric Science, School of Earth, Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
Restricted access

Abstract

Multiple-part manuscripts are those submitted to a journal and intended for publication as a series, usually having “Part 1,” “Part I,” … “Part N” in the title. Although some journals prohibit such submissions, other journals (including Monthly Weather Review) have no such restrictions. To examine how reviewers and editors view multiple-part manuscripts, 308 multiple-part manuscripts submitted to Monthly Weather Review from May 2001 through February 2010 were examined. For multiple-part manuscripts having reached a final decision, 67% were accepted, which was also the average acceptance rate of all manuscripts (67%). Part I manuscripts submitted alone had a lower acceptance rate (61%) than the average, whereas Part II manuscripts submitted alone had a higher acceptance rate (77%) than the average. Two-part manuscripts submitted together had an acceptance rate (67%) comparable to the average. Typical reviewer comments for Part I manuscripts submitted alone included the manuscript being too long for the available results and the author making claims in Part I that would be supported in the unseen Part II. Typical comments for Part II manuscripts submitted alone included the somewhat contradictory statements that material was unnecessarily duplicated in the two manuscripts and more repetition was needed between the two parts. For two-part manuscripts submitted together, reviewers often recommended condensing the two manuscripts and merging them into one. In some cases, editors rejected manuscripts even though no reviewer recommended rejection because the sum of all reviewers’ comments would require substantial reorganization of the manuscripts. The results of this study suggest the following recommendations for authors considering writing multiple-part manuscripts: Write manuscripts that are sensibly independent of each other, make minimal reference to unsubmitted manuscripts, and have sufficient and substantiated scientific content within each manuscript.

  • Davies-Jones, R 1991 The frontogenetical forcing of secondary circulations. Part I: The duality and generalization of the Q vector. Journal of Atmospheric Sciences 48:497509 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Davies-Jones, R 2009 The frontogenetical forcing of secondary circulations. Part II: Properties of Q vectors in exact linear solutions. Journal of Atmospheric Sciences 66:244260 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Droegemeier, KK, Wilhelmson, RB 1985 Three-dimensional numerical modeling of convection produced by interacting thunderstorm outflows. Part II: Variations in vertical wind shear. Journal of Atmospheric Sciences 42:24042414 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ellingson, RG, Gille, JC 1978 An infrared radiative transfer model. Part 1: Model description and comparison of observations with calculations. Journal of Atmospheric Sciences 35:523545 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schultz, D. M. (2009a). Eloquent science: A practical guide to becoming a better writer, speaker, and atmospheric scientist (412 pp.). American Meteorological Society.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schultz, D. M. (2009b). Are three heads better than two? How the number of reviewers and editor behavior affect the rejection rate. Scientometrics. doi: .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schultz, DM 2010 Rejection rates for journals publishing atmospheric science. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 91:231243 .

  • Schultz, D. M. (2010b). A university laboratory course to improve scientific communication skills. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 91. doi: .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Semtner, AJ, Holland, WR 1980 Numerical simulation of equatorial ocean circulation. Part I: A basic case in turbulent equilibrium. Journal of Physical Oceanography 10:667693 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Starr Malkus, J, Stern, ME 1953 The flow of a stable atmosphere over a heated island, part I. Journal of Meteorology 10:3041.

  • Stern, ME, Starr Malkus, J 1953 The flow of a stable atmosphere over a heated island, part II. Journal of Meteorology 10:105120.