A bad abstract won’t by itself cause log editors to reject a scholarly article, however it does incline them toward a short negative solution, write Faye Halpern and James Phelan.
Most journals need authors to submit abstracts along with their articles, because do both associated with journals we edit, ARIEL and Narrative. This requirement has two primary rationales: an abstract offers visitors a helpful, succinct summary associated with longer argument developed within the essay, also it identifies key words which will allow it to be easier for the search engines to obtain the essay.
Realize that these rationales presuppose the book of both abstract and essay and, in that way, assume that the key market for the abstract is potential visitors associated with the essay that is published. But, through the viewpoint of a writer publishing strive to a log, there is certainly another essential audience to take into account: the log editor(s) and also the outside reviewers to who the editor(s) send it.
This market talks about your abstract along with their most pushing question in brain: is this informative article publishable in this journal? A great abstract tilts them toward an affirmative solution by making them well-disposed toward the longer argument within the article. A bad abstract won’t it does incline the audience toward an initial negative answer by itself cause this audience to reject an article, but. By doing so, an inadequate abstract becomes an barrier that the article has to over come.
How will you make a good abstract for this audience? In an activity of reverse engineering, we’ve identified a collection of recurring concerns that underlie the strong abstracts that we’ve posted over time.