To assist New Zealand occupational therapists to develop skills in writing for publication, a focused search of the literature was conducted to identify key information. The literature search process is outlined and the advice gleaned is collated with the authors' personal experience. Writing for publication is presented as an occupation that is achievable through planned marshalling of resources, setting short-term goals, and envisaging oneself as a writer while having realistic expectations of skill development and the time that must be committed. The process of manuscript review and strategies to support skill development are also outlined.
Writing skills, publishing, professional practice, novice author
Hocking, C. & Wright-St. Clair, V. (2007). Writing for publication: Tips and reflections for busy therapists. New Zealand Journal of Occupational Therapy, 54(1), 26-32
In September 2004 and again in August 2005 we ran workshops designed to help occupational therapists write 'something' to submit for publication. That something might range from a letter to the editor or an item for Insight, to a fully-fledged article reporting knowledge gained from practice, research or reading the professional literature. Most participants reported leaving the workshops feeling their ideas warranted publication. They felt inspired to write and had crystallised what they wanted to say. Many had identified the journal, newsletter or magazine they hoped to publish in and a timeframe. However, feedback from participants, colleagues and the referees of an earlier article reporting workshop findings (Wright-St. Clair & Hocking, 2005) indicated that occupational therapists in New Zealand also feel the need for guidance about how to prepare their work for submission and what publishing involves. This article is a response to that feedback. Its purpose is to provide practical guidance for prospective authors by outlining what professional writing skills are, ways to acquire those skills and what happens after manuscript submission.
The article begins by describing how we approached the task of distilling sensible advice, including the assumptions we made, the basis for those assumptions and what we did. The literature search process is recounted in some detail. One reason for doing so is that it is good practice for authors to inform readers about where they looked for literature to inform their discussion, and how it was selected for inclusion (Siwek, Gourlay, Slawson, & Shaughnessy, 2002). The goal is to enable readers to judge the trustworthiness of the information given and conclusions drawn, based on their evaluation of the adequacy of the search. Our second rationale for providing information about our search process is that we wanted it to serve as an example of tailoring search strategies to the topic and the intended outcome.
The article goes on to address the occupation of writing for publication. It emphasises that conveying information in writing is part of occupational therapists' professional role, and describes ways of preparing oneself and developing the skills to take writing to the next level; writing for publication. Finally, the process of manuscript review is outlined and suggestions are given for collaborative action to establish collegial support in the endeavour to write for publication.
Searching for literature
Volumes have been written on professional writing and publishing. People intent on sharing knowledge, however, may not welcome the thought of reading swathes of articles or entire volumes before committing their own ideas to paper (or Word file). More specifically, we thought that prospective authors would be concentrating on reading material relevant to their topic or argument, rather than the process of constructing it. With this in mind, we determined that we would approach the task of locating information to guide the process of writing, as far as we could, from the perspective of a busy therapist, manager or educator.
We envisaged sound, practical advice that could be located, retrieved and digested in a limited timeframe, and set out to find it. Perhaps naively, we anticipated that information fitting our criteria would be relatively easy to locate, but were not sure whether books or journals would prove the better source. Guided by expediency, we decided to start with journals because we could access those from our desks.
We allocated two hours to searching the electronic databases for material, because that seemed an achievable timeframe for most prospective authors. This timeframe also reflected our knowledge that there is ample literature on the topic and the fact that we were seeking general understandings rather than specialist knowledge. We were not undertaking a sophisticated analysis, such as uncovering variations in the advice given to the different health professions, and did not require a historical perspective such as how and why such understandings have changed overtime. Rather, we preferred up-to-date perspectives because we are aware that word processors and email have influenced both how people write and the process of submitting manuscripts and communicating with editors.
Applying a similar rationale, we focused on databases likely to be accessible to therapists or managers employed within a health service or enrolled in a relevant higher qualification. Accordingly, we selected CINAHL, Proquest 5000, and Ovid. We also specifically included EBSCO and Gale because they are accessible through public libraries in New Zealand. In addition, we confined our search to articles published from 1999 onwards, reasoning that recently published articles are more likely to be available as portable document format (*.pdf) files that can be printed direct from the database. We did not limit the search to health journals, since other professionals also write for publication and might conceivably have written a guide that would be eminently suitable to occupational therapists. In the event most of the literature we downloaded was from health, with the exception of one article from the Journal of Business Communications and one from Accounting Education: An International Journal.
The search terms we employed were straightforward: writing, publishing, journals, writing articles, professional writing skills, getting published, steps for writing, and tips for writing. Not surprisingly, some searches generated large numbers of hits, for example, 2,683 for 'writing for publication' in CINHAL. Disappointingly, 'steps' and 'tips' yielded only material published in the 1980s. The term 'writing guidelines' brought up guidelines for practice, rather than guidelines for writing. Similarly, combining the terms 'writing' and 'journals' yielded mostly discussions of reflective journaling and using journals as a learning strategy in a secondary school context, which we discarded as not relevant to our topic.
Insights and results
In the process of searching, we learned a few things that helped us to select the kind of material we were looking for and avoid that falling outside our criteria. For example, after downloading a few we learned that items of only one or two pages were typically editorials that lacked the detail or scope we sought. That said, items with more specific titles such as 'Letter to the Editor', or 'Figures and Tables' did appear informative. We also noted that search terms that were fruitful in one database might yield nothing in another. Finally, and disappointingly, neither Ebsco nor Gale proved productive places to search.
After two hours, we had 12 articles and four editorials. On closer inspection, four publications were excluded; one article was an update of another, the two being virtually identical, one was focused on publishing the same material multiple times was not relevant to our topic, and one because it was about running workshops to teach people to write, rather than writing per se. Over the next few months, we added a further six articles and a book to our collection. These were identified as relevant as we scanned the literature for other purposes, and considered the various articles cited in the material we had initially located. None proved to be exactly what we were looking for. Most addressed only a single aspect of writing for publication, such as the editing and review process. Articles that were more comprehensive seemed to assume knowledge novice authors might not have. For instance, one advised authors to 'construct and link your paragraphs to provide coherence' (Parsell & Bligh, 1999, p. 463). While we agreed with this assertion, we thought simply telling authors to write coherently would not enlighten them about how this is achieved. Another criticism we had of some of the literature we had found was that it emphasised barriers and blocks to writing or how hard it is to write for publication (Alspach, 2004), which seemed less than encouraging. In addition, some authors addressed assumptions occupational therapists probably do not make, such as receiving financial reward for writing (McConnell, 2004).
Reading across the articles, it was apparent that we had located a range of sensible advice to inform most aspects of writing and publishing, which we could supplement from our own experiences of writing, editorial work and leading workshops for therapists contemplating this occupation. Six key areas are discussed, informed by the literature and our own experiences: the doing of writing, the planning and preparation that precedes writing, being and becoming a writer, implementing a writing plan, the review process and finally, ways and means of supporting occupational therapists' development as writers.
The doing of writing
Writing is something practitioners do. Everyday writing in the practice context might include writing up client notes, preparing reports, completing application forms and writing letters to people or organisations. Doing the writing simply means taking responsibility for creating the written work. In most cases, the purpose of writing in the professional context is to communicate a message to others; the client, the inter-professional team, or the representative of another organisation. So producing information and opinions in writing for others to read is something all practitioners do. Writing for publication is just another way of formatting a written message, following the conventions for published literature. To begin, let us briefly look at some logical steps to follow in writing for a professional journal. We deliberately chose the occupational therapy process as a model to follow as this is something all occupational therapy practitioners are familiar with.
Firstly, conduct your initial evaluation. Consider what you want to write about and the best place to submit your work for publication (Heyman & Cronin, 2005). This initial evaluation will also reveal the material you already have at hand and what else is needed. For example, you may have conducted a literature review on a particular practice approach and uncovered some interesting findings. Alternatively, you may have completed an undergraduate or postgraduate assignment and think it could be shaped up for publication. Once you know what you wish to publish, think about who would benefit from hearing what you have to say. Deciding on your target audience will lead you to your next consideration; which journal will provide the best means of reaching them? (Oermann, 1999). For instance, you may decide the appropriate forum for your work, to ensure it is read by occupational therapists, is the New Zealand Journal of Occupational Therapy (NZJOT). Check your decision about where to submit your work by obtaining information about the journal, such as its publication goals, and by reading a few recent issues. Think critically about the type of work being published. Would your intended article fit in? (Alspach, 2004; 0ermann). If the answer is yes, you are ready to move on.
Planning and preparation
The next step is to design your writing plan. Your plan will have one overall writing goal; the publication of your article in the NZJOT. This is your long-term goal. Now plan the steps, your short-term goals, to get you to your overall goal. These steps are designed to gather the resources you need and develop your support systems for writing. Most newsletters and journals publish instructions about how manuscripts should be formatted and the required word limits, so getting a copy of the guidelines might be your first step (Jerosch-Herold, 1997). The NZJOT guidelines for authors (NZAOT, n.d.) are published in each issue and on the New Zealand Association of Occupational Therapists website (http://www.nzaot.com). Supplementing the formal guidelines with a selection of articles published in your target journal that you found easy to read is also a useful strategy, because they are likely to be well written and clearly structured, and will serve as 'recipes' to guide the way you structure your discussion and the style in which you should write (Doyle, Coggin & Lanning, 2004; Lemery, 2001; Oermann, 1999;Thomson, 2005).
Preparation for writing includes gathering all the resources you have and need. That may include locating any initial writing you have done on the topic and conducting a literature search to select articles and books that help inform your topic (Jerosch-Herold, 1997). In this regard, Dixon (2001) made an important distinction between 'gathering behaviour', meaning fairly indiscriminate collection of material around a vaguely defined topic, and a 'hunter' style, which involves a literature search informed by clear understandings of the target audience and purpose of the writing. Your plan should also include making sure you have the other resources you will require, such as a computer, and setting up the space for writing. For example, do you prefer to sit at a desk or in comfortable surroundings, to begin making notes on paper, a computer or a whiteboard? (Parsell & Bligh, 1999). Also think about when you will write. Is there a time of day that you do your best thinking? (Oermann, 1999; Parsell & Bligh). Do you need to negotiate with anyone else to create the time and place for writing? If you have not organised these things, competing demands from family and other life commitments can easily derail your plan. Think of all the steps that will help make your overall goal a reality.
Having mustered your resources, the conceptual work begins in earnest. An article is constructed of coherent parts, joined together in a logical sequence. If you adopt the classical model of writing (Parsell & Bligh,1999), the next step will be to draft an outline of the content of the article, either by listing the topics to be addressed or developing a concept map depicting the key ideas you wish to convey and their interrelationships (Doyle et al., 2004). Determining the sequence in which you will present your ideas will help you organise your thoughts, thus ensuring important content is included. Identifying the logical progression between ideas may also assist you to identify any gaps. Completing this step will require you to clearly identify the message you intend to convey and, if others have recently addressed a similar topic, how your work will be different (Oermann, 1999; Parsell & Bligh).
It is also useful at this stage to write a one or two sentence statement about the purpose your finished manuscript will serve. Is it to report the nature and outcomes of an intervention programme, help others remain current with the latest theories and research findings, discuss a professional issue or propose directions for policy development? Such statements serve to keep authors on track, and often become the final paragraph of the introduction. In contrast to this orderly approach, the generative model of writing acknowledges that some writers prefer to write creatively, developing their ideas through the process of writing them down (Parsell & Bligh, 1999).Writing without a predetermined structure or purpose requires commitment to later analysing what was written, distilling the key ideas and restructuring as necessary (Doyle et al., 2004). Regardless of whether a structured or creative approach is taken, it pays to remain mindful of your intended audience to ensure the work is tailored to their interests, point of view, knowledge of the topic and familiarity with specialist terminology, research methodology and so on (Dixon, 2001).
The next component of the plan is deciding where to start writing. If one section seems easiest to you, perhaps set out to write that first, to get yourself underway. Planning concludes with setting due dates for each step (Oermann, 1999). We suggest you plan ahead to the closing date for submitting manuscripts for the next issue of the NZJOT, ensuring you allow some months for writing and re-writing (De Lange, 2005). Provided the timeframe looks achievable, set the submission deadline as your date for finishing and work backwards to set the dates for each step. Use a wall planner or note pad to plot out your writing days and times. Create ways of keeping to plan like pinning a copy on your computer monitor, putting a post it note of your task for the day on the fridge, or creating an appointment with yourself in your digital diary.
The next step will be to implement your writing plan. This is about putting into action the steps you identified. Having the writing plan means you can now trust the process. Just as you plan achievable short-term goals for clients and design the intervention to have them achieve one step at a time; you can do the same with your writing. The article will happen if you complete each step of the plan. Keep focused on the steps and not the outcome. If something is not working well, re-evaluate your plan and modify it. Your overall goal is worth it.
Being and becoming a writer
If this is your first work to be submitted for publication, there is a reasonable chance you do not think of yourself as a writer of articles for publication. Writers are the other people whose work you read in journals. If being a writer for publication falls outside your image of self then, just like the current stream of reality television shows, you need a makeover. You might have a friend or colleague to help you do this, but we suggest a few creative steps towards becoming a writer. Firstly, create a vision of yourself as a writer of journal articles. Create your vision in any way that works for you. You can visualise a future moment, like seeing yourself holding the issue of the NZJOT with your article in it or giving copies of your article to team members for discussion at an inservice meeting; you can write a poem or song about being and becoming a writer; or paint a picture. It does not matter how you do it; create some way of experiencing yourself as a writer (Parsell & Bligh, 1999).
Within this, carefully avoid envisaging yourself as a quick, spontaneous, independent and brilliant writer, as few people are. Moreover, harbouring such illusions will likely lead to disappointment, and although such writing might be possible "it is, in fact, no better than most deliberate writing" (Boice,1994, p. 51) . Remember, the 'best writers are rewriters' (Heinrich, Neese, Rogers & Facente, 2004, p.144), and picturing yourself as someone learning to carefully craft words or as a storyteller (Suchan, 2004), might be more empowering than imagining acclaim as an accomplished author or researcher.
When starting any new occupation, you need to develop the specific skills, endurance and strengths for doing. Just like building up to other occupational goals, get writing fit. This means starting where you are at, working at a pace you can sustain and being realistic about what can be achieved. If you are not used to writing, do not plan your first session to be a full day. 'Binge' writing, as it has been termed, is likely to leave you exhausted and depressed (Baldwin & Chandler, 2002). Just as importantly, do not expect to complete pages of well-crafted writing. A more realistic goal might be 700 words a day (L. Wilson, personal communication, September 2, 2005). Start small and build up. Begin with whichever section of the article comes most easily to you and complete that first. Remember, trust the process.
With perseverance, writing will become one of your occupations, but it can be challenging to move between modes of being in your world. Experiment and find ways of moving into your writing mode. When you first sit down to engage in writing, do a warm-up activity. Warm-ups work for your clients; they should work for you. One useful technique is 'free-writing.' Write about anything for 5 to 10 minutes. You might write about what you see out your window, about something that stands out in your last week at work or home, or write about what you think the essence of your article is. It does not matter, just write. Another technique is to simply start writing. Do not try and write the finished piece; simply start writing and your thoughts will start to engage as you write. Working on a computer means it is easy to edit out what you have just written or shape it up to become part of the finished manuscript.
Implementing the plan
Part of building writing fitness is learning the conventions for published literature including content, structure and language issues. Although few authors begin their writing at the beginning, for the sake of clarity our discussion aligns with the sequence the writing appears in print.
In contrast to other forms of writing, the title of professional literature needs to identify its exact content. The reason is that, for the most part, readers use the information conveyed in the title to decide whether to read on (Lambert, Lambert & Tsukahara, 2003). Similar to other literary works, however, scholarly writing follows the normal structure of having a beginning, middle and end. Following advice Ann Wilcock has repeatedly given to aspiring authors, the opening paragraphs need to say more about what is identified in the title. That is, explain in more detail what the discussion is about, why it is important, how the author(s) came to know about it (i.e. through research, analysis of the literature, reflection or personal experience), and the sequence in which it will be presented to the reader.
The middle is where ideas are presented and discussed. In articles, it is customary for the first part of the discussion to provide 'a comprehensive, yet concise' (Lambert et al., 2003, p. 1) overview of the relevant literature. Its purpose is to summarise what is known about the topic under discussion, identify gaps in knowledge, and justify why those gaps deserve or require further consideration. A common error is to attempt to convey too many ideas, and to include literature that is not central to the discussion. As Heyman and Cronin (2005) advised, 'a single paper should tell one story to one audience' (p. 402). Critical errors include failing to give credit to work published by others (even if you independently came to the same conclusions), and omitting literature that contradicts the argument you are presenting (Jerosch-Herold, 1997; Siwek et al., 2002).
Once this conceptual groundwork is complete, authors proceed with presenting their own work. For research projects, this means outlining what was done, why it was done that way, who was involved and who gave permission, perhaps how long it took and where it happened, and how the data was analysed. Ethical considerations are described. Findings are given and compared with what was known previously, after which an explanation is given about how the work extends previous knowledge (Pat-sell & Bligh, 1999). The implications of the findings are presented and limitations declared. The ending is generally a summary, which reiterates the main points of the discussion, or a conclusion, which emphasises what needs to happen as a consequence of the argument that has been presented (Dixon, 2001; Jerosh-Herold, 1997).
As well as these conventions about how content is sequenced, there are standards about how professional literature is written. These concerns will likely be addressed in the second draft of your paper, since 'few authors are gifted enough to both think on screen and write well at the same time' (Heyman & Cronin, 2005, p. 402). A common error, born of trying to appear scholarly, is employing complex sentences and 'pretentious phrasing' (Lambert et al., 2003, p. 2). As a rule, it is better to keep sentences simple and use as few words as possible, because that is easier to read. That is, write in plain English, choosing language 'not to impress readers, but to inform them' (Hegyvary, 2005, p. 193).
Authors are also consistently advised to 'use both long and short sentences' to vary the pace of the writing, and to put their first draft aside for a few days before revising it again (Parsell & Bligh, 1999, p. 463). To assist readers to follow the argument, the revision process includes checking that ideas are presented in a logical sequence, and that it is clear how each new idea or paragraph builds on the one before (Lambert et al., 2003). Starting sentences with the idea under discussion rather than the name of the author who proposed it is one strategy to achieve this, because when ideas are emphasised, rather than the people who proposed them, it is easier to follow the progression in the argument. Careful use of linking phrases is also important, because they indicate the relationship between the previous idea and the one that follows. See Table 1.
The review process
When an editor receives a submission, he or she is concerned that it is relevant to the scope of the journal, original and of high quality. To check originality and enhance quality, peer reviewed journals send each manuscript to two or three referees for their advice about whether it should be accepted with minor amendments, revised or rejected. This process may take some time, so be prepared to wait. Two points appear repeatedly in the literature in relation to peer review (Baldwin & Chandler, 2002; Doyle et al., 2004; Happell, 2005; Henson, 2001; Jerosch-Herold, 1997; Parsell & Bligh, 1999; Thomson, 2005). The first is that receiving feedback is unpleasant. In this regard, the generally proffered advice is to set the manuscript aside for a day or a week before deciding what to do, because responding to feedback may not be as difficult as it first appeared.
The second point is that the refereeing process will strengthen the final paper. Accordingly, the process of providing and responding to critical feedback is best viewed as a collaboration between authors, editors and referees (De Lange, 2005), whereby the extent of the comments reflects the time and effort others have given to assist you to publish (McConnell, 2004). In addition, manuscripts returned for rework are highly likely to achieve publication if the feedback is incorporated or a careful rationale offered about why it would be inappropriate to action it. In our experience as authors, referees and editors, both points hold true. It is also important to recognise that even well written, professionally important manuscripts are at times rejected, perhaps because they are not suitable for the journal to which they were submitted or because a similar discussion has recently been accepted for publication (McConnell).
Supporting personal development
Being able to write to a professional standard is not an innate skill. Neither is it generally developed in undergraduate programmes. Moreover, writing for publication can be emotionally complex, because published work 'reveals its author's level of thinking, ... skill sophistication, and knowledge of the topic' (Baldwin & Chandler, 2002, p. 8). As with any emotionally demanding occupation, novice writers may benefit from the support of others. Baldwin and Chandler identified four kinds of writing support. Emotional support comes from people who listen and understand, providing encouragement and reassurance while respecting your concerns. Instrumental support refers to practical help, assisting with the task at hand or perhaps relieving you of other responsibilities. Informational support refers to providing information that will help you help yourself, such as having someone help you with referencing requirements, setting up headings on your computer or interpreting the guidelines for authors. Finally, appraisal support is about giving feedback on drafts, to assist writers to objectively evaluate and improve their work. Novice and experienced authors alike are advised to solicit feedback, perhaps on a draft and certainly before submission. One suggestion is to have someone read your work, then list the four or five most important points. If these are 'not the same as yours, or ... not in the order you intended, review the organisation of the paper' (Dixon, 2001, p. 418).
A strategy for systematically developing and refining skill in writing that is highly endorsed in the literature is participating in a group formed explicitly for that purpose. Indeed, Hegyvary (2005) claimed, 'anyone who has never been part of a critique group is developmentally disadvantaged' (p. 193). What Hegyvary has in mind are groups of five or six fellow authors who have no conflicts of interest, such as exist between friends and family. Her norms for critiques, presumably delivered face-to-face, include listening to and considering feedback without defending or arguing about comments made, since failing to understand what the author meant is not the reviewer's fault. Those giving feedback are advised to start with the positive, and be specific about 'what works and what does not' (p.193) . Hegyvary also recommended agreeing on confidentiality of critiques and discussions, and not combining critique groups with social events, since that undermines the legitimacy of giving negative feedback. While acknowledging that the potential for hurt feelings is high, Hegyvary asserted that the usual result is improved writing, gratitude for assistance given, and strengthened relationships.
Other writing groups are less intense, catering for 10 to 12 people at each meeting. Membership is not limited to one profession or even one place, if teleconferencing is a possibility (Cumbie, Weinert, Luparell, Conley, & Smith, 2005). There are no set procedures. Rather, it might be more realistic to expect groups to be free flowing and to change over time, as participants' needs, skills and goals change. The general format, however, seems to be a type of round-robin where participants reflect on their focus, goals and problems, and ask for the input or assistance they require. This might include identifying two or three 'test readers' for a draft or suggestions about how to respond to an editor's requests. Frequency of meetings also needs to be determined (Cumbie et al. met weekly or biweekly). The outcomes of groups such as this include both learning to set realistic goals and increased productivity, brought about by the increased focus on writing activities and feeling accountable to the group for meeting personal goals and external deadlines (Cumbie et al.).
While the quality of articles published in NZJOT over recent years demonstrates that occupational therapists in New Zealand have the capacity to write for publication, many express a need for assistance in developing the requisite skills and knowledge. In this article, we have attempted to support that aspiration by modelling some of the skills required to search for relevant information, and by synthesising advice commonly offered to health professionals and others about this occupation. Building on processes familiar to occupational therapists, we framed writing for publication as an extension of existing professional documentation skills. Further, we suggested that occupational therapists break the task of acquiring skill in preparing a manuscript for publication into achievable steps. To support therapists to set realistic short-term goals, we described a process of conducting an initial evaluation of a writing project, designing a writing plan, and preparing to write by gathering resources and establishing an environment in which to write. We also addressed issues of incorporating writing for publication into therapists' self-concept, advocated using warm-up activities to get started, and outlined the literary conventions of published work. In particular, the importance of presenting ideas in a logical sequence that conforms to a recognised journal article format, and providing links between the ideas presented were stressed. Finally, aspects of the publication processes enacted at institutional levels were described; namely the review process typical of professional journals and professional structures that might be developed to support individual endeavours to master writing for publication. In conclusion, we are hopeful that this introduction will assist others to participate in an occupation we experience as both challenging and immensely rewarding and creative.
* Occupational therapists can plan short term goals and implement a paced programme of activity to develop the skills required to achieve publication
* Preparation for writing includes organising the place, time and resources, and envisaging yourself as a writer
* Some authors systematically plan what they want to say before they start writing, while others use the process of writing to crystallise what they think
* Writing for publication takes time and perseverance, and almost always involves working through a series of drafts and revisions
* Soliciting feedback on drafts is recommended for novice and experienced writers.
Alspach, G. (2004). Editorial: The number 1 secret to getting published. Critical Care Nurse, 24(6), 8, 10, 11.
Baldwin, C., & Chandler, G. E. (2002). Improving faculty publication output: The role of a writing coach. ,journal of Professional Nursing, 18(1),8-15.
Boice, R. (1994). How writers journey to comfort and fluency: A psychological adventure. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Cumbie, S., Weinert, C., Luparell, S., Conley, V, & Smith, J. (2005). Developing a scholarship community. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 37(3),280-293.
De Lange, P. A. (2005). The long road to publishing: A user-friendly expose. Accounting Education. An International Journal, 14(2),133-168.
Dixon, N. (2001). Writing for publication: A guide for new authors. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 13(5),417-421.
Doyle, E. I., Coggin, C., & Lanning, B. (2004). Writing for publication in health education. American Journal of Health Studies, 19(2), 100-109.
Happell, B. (2005). Disseminating nursing knowledge: A guide to writing for publication. The International Journal of Psychiatric Nursing Research, 10(3),1147-1155.
Hegyvary, S. T. (2005). Editorial: Writing that matters. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 37(3),193-194.
Heinrich, K. T., Neese, R., Rogers, D., & Facente, A. C. (2004). Turn accusations into affirmations: Transform nurses into published authors. Nursing Education Perspectives, 25(3),139-145.
Henson, K. T (2001). Writing for professional journals: Paradoxes and promises. Phi Delta Kappan, June, 765-768.
Heyman, B., & Cronin, P. (2005). Writing for publication: Adapting academic work into articles. British Journal of Nursing, 14(7),400-404.
Jerosch-Herold, C. (1997). Writing for publication: A guide for health-care professionals. British Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, 4(5), 264-265.
Lambert, V. A., Lambert, C. E., & Tsukahara, M. (2003). Editorial: Basic tips about writing a scholarly manuscript. Nursing and Health Sciences, 5,1-2.
Lemery, L. D. (2001). On writing for publication. Clinical Leadership & Management Review, 15(5), 319-330.
McConnell, C. R. (2004). Getting your ideas into print: Writing for a professional journal. The Health Care Manager, 23(4), 355-367.
New Zealand Association of Occupational Therapists. (n.d.). New Zealand Journal of Occupational Therapists guidelines for authors. Wellington: Author. Retrieved October 3, 2006 from http://www.nzaot.comlpublications/documents/Authorsguidelinesjune2006.pdf
Oermann, M. H. (1999). Writing for publication as an advanced practice nurse. Nursing Connections, 12(3), 5-13.
Parsell, G., & Bligh, J. (1999). AMEE Guide No. 17: Writing for journal publication. Medical Teacher, 21(5),457-468.
Siwek, J., Gourlay, M. L., Slawson, D. C., & Shaughnessy, A. F. (2002). How to write an evidence-based clinical review article. American Family Physician, 65(2),251-258.
Suchan, J. (2004). Writing, authenticity, and knowledge creation. Journal of Business Communications, 41(3), 302-315.
Thomson, A. M. (2005). Writing for publication in this refereed journal. Midwifery, 21,190-194.
Wright-St. C1air, V., & Hocking, C. (2005). Communicating through publishing: A professional mandate. New Zealand Journal of Occupational Therapy, 52(2), 4-8.
Clare Hocking, PhD, MHSc(OT), AdvDip(OT), Dip(OT) Associate Professor, School of Occupational Therapy AUT University Private Bag 92 006, Auckland New Zealand
Valerie Wright-St. Clair, MPH, DipProfEthics, DipBusStudies, Dip(OT) Senior Lecturer, School of Occupational Therapy AUT University Private Bag 92 006, Auckland New Zealand
Address for correspondence: Phone: ++64 9 921 9999 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Table 1: Examples of linking phrases used in published literature Relationship between ideas Examples of linking phrases The same or similar concepts In addition, additionally, as well as, another, also, similarly, likewise, one more, other ... An idea that builds on or More specifically, moderates the previous one moreover, furthermore, as a consequence, consequently, within this, in relation to this, given that ... A general or more specific Generally, in general, as example a rule, normally, typically, usually, for example, for instance, one illustration of ... Next step in a sequence When, once, as soon as, whilst, after, the next ... A logical outcome of the Therefore, thus, accordingly, previous statement hence, as a consequence, for that reason, because of this, since ... Emphasising the most Indeed, certainly, in fact, in important idea reality, undeniably ... Opposite or divergent ideas In contrast, however, while, rather, alternatively, earlier, later, conversely, on the other hand, nonetheless, compared to ...…