Excellence Everywhere - National University of Ireland, Galway

submitting image filesToday, most images are obtained digitally and programs such as Adobe Photoshop make it very simpleto modify them. But sometimes by adjusting an image you can make inappropriate changes to yourdata, which could be classified as scientific misconduct. Since 2002, The Journal of Cell Biology hasbeen doing simple, routine checks of every image of all accepted manuscripts to look for signs ofmanipulation. In some cases, this step has caused editors to withdraw the acceptance of a paper, andin a few cases, to notify relevant institutions. Other prominent journals, including Science and Nature,may take similar steps.Here is what The Journal of Cell Biology says constitutes inappropriate manipulation of images:“No specific feature within an image may be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or introduced.The grouping of images from different parts of the same gel, or from different gels, fields, or exposuresmust be made explicit by the arrangement of the figure (e.g., using dividing lines) and in the text of thefigure legend. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if they are applied tothe whole image and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original.Nonlinear adjustments (e.g., changes to gamma settings) must be disclosed in the figure legend.”For more information, see Rossner, M., and Yamada K. M. “What is in a Picture? The Temptation ofImage Manipulation.” J. Cell Biol. 166(1):11–15, 2004.Many times you will be clearly and absolutelyturned down. In other cases, the editors will saythat the work is potentially interesting but toopreliminary, or that it has significant flaws thatpreclude its publication. But other times—quiteoften—you will see that the editor is giving youa short to-do list of experiments based on thereviewers’ comments, and that the journal will beglad to consider the revised paper. And still othertimes—not frequently, but also not rarely—youwill see that the editor will accept the paper if youonly respond to a few quibbles over language.Sometimes the editors will indicate that they wouldlike to publish your work, provided you make a fewminor revisions or do a few additional experiments.Another possibility is that the reviewers will advisethe editors not to publish the work even if it isrevised, because it is either not sufficiently novelor it does not fit the scope of the journal. Mosteditors are happy to talk to you by telephone tohelp you assess whether you should revise andresubmit your paper or try another journal. Inany event, it is important to remain unemotionalduring such conversations.Responding to Reviews. Do not react defensively.Focus instead on the substance of eacheditorial comment. Value good advice whereveryou find it. Read the reviews carefully, and communicateyour responses in writing to the editor. Itis a good idea not to respond as soon as you hearfrom the editor. Let a couple of days go by. A hastilywritten and emotional response will hurt yourchances for resubmission. Do not be sarcastic anddo not speculate on who the reviewer might be orwhy he or she might be trying to thwart your work.If the reviews include a request for additionalinformation that will require a few more experiments,carry them out and send your responseto the editor. You can make the process easier byrepeating each comment, stating your response,and indicating explicitly where in your paper youare making a recommended change.130 excellence everywhere