Common Errors in Scientific Paper Submissions: A Reviewer’s Report

Abstract

While research paper writing is turning into a prolific enterprise even in our country, there has never been any stock taking on the nature or number of errors committed by prospective authors. This paper uses a retrospective analysis of available reviewer reports to catalogue common errors identified during refereeing of 50 pre-publication manuscripts in the form of original research papers submitted to 7 indexed journals. With the available reviewers' reports, a comprehensive listing of the common errors was carried under each section of a typical research paper. Results indicate 167 types of errors (Mean: 3.34) equaling 1476 number of errors (Mean: 29.5). The greatest types of errors in the reviewed manuscripts were under the section on method (21/167: 12.6 %), followed by those under data analysis (17/167: 10.2%), improper use of grammar-semantics-syntax (15/167: 9.0 %), and so on. Contrast this with most number of errors under data analysis (184/1476: 12.5 %), method (179/ 1476: 12.1 %), references (156/1476: 10.6 %) and others. In relation to the disciplines reviewed, highest types and number of errors were found in journals of special education, followed by those in speech-hearing and least in journals of psychology. A content wise comprehensive catalogue of common errors is presented with illustrative examples before the implication of these findings and they are discussed in the context and need for carrying out periodic academic authorship training and continuing research education programs for reviewers as well as research writers in the field of humanities-social sciences.