How To Write & Publish a Scientific Paper: 5th Edition

Rating:
Summary: Teaches how to write, not how to do science
Review: Dr. Day was editting scientific manuscripts for longer than twenty years. His text is eminently readable, even enjoyable, and, yes, he does have some anachronisms - like the suggestion to submit a typed manuscript. But it's been through five editions, spanning major changes in publishing.
The text describes how to organize an original scientific publication, as well as posters, reviews, theses, and some other forms of scientific communication. It even presents information about the editorial and review processes. Not how to do the research, but rather what belongs in the introduction, how to organize the experimental, etc. The price of the book is worth it just for his insights on how to organize tables effectively, and he does similar treatment for figures.
I've written some twenty papers using Day's text, and I recommend it everyone who is involved with research publications. The style of writing is light and humorous, which contributes to the effectiveness - it's enjoyable to read.
I don't understand Dr. Moore's so apparent dissatisfaction with Day's text. True, it does not attempt to present a recipe to slavishly follow; Day assumes he's writing for a scientist who understands the area in which he's working and recognizes that there will be differences for each publication. It does, however, do as promised, assuming you think about what you read: Dr. Day's text teaches you how to write and publish a scientific paper.

Rating:
Summary: Teaches how to write, not how to do science
Review: Dr. Day was editting scientific manuscripts for longer than twenty years. His text is eminently readable, even enjoyable, and, yes, he does have some anachronisms - like the suggestion to submit a typed manuscript. But it's been through five editions, spanning major changes in publishing.
The text describes how to organize an original scientific publication, as well as posters, reviews, theses, and some other forms of scientific communication. It even presents information about the editorial and review processes. Not how to do the research, but rather what belongs in the introduction, how to organize the experimental, etc. The price of the book is worth it just for his insights on how to organize tables effectively, and he does similar treatment for figures.
I've written some twenty papers using Day's text, and I recommend it everyone who is involved with research publications. The style of writing is light and humorous, which contributes to the effectiveness - it's enjoyable to read.
I don't understand Dr. Moore's so apparent dissatisfaction with Day's text. True, it does not attempt to present a recipe to slavishly follow; Day assumes he's writing for a scientist who understands the area in which he's working and recognizes that there will be differences for each publication. It does, however, do as promised, assuming you think about what you read: Dr. Day's text teaches you how to write and publish a scientific paper.

Rating:
Summary: Warning to Engineering professionals
Review: I purchased this book to help improve my techincal writing skills. Something that engineering professionals should be aware of before purchasing this book is that it is quite geared towards scientific journals and NOT engineering journals. The formats presented within do not match the standards of the journals and conferences that we submit to in my research group. However, the general advice that is given about writing is extremely useful and the scientific world would be a better place if every single professional spent a few days studying it.

I believe there is a separate edition available for Engineering disciplines.

Rating:
Summary: High readability, invaluable information
Review: I read this book in one morning, and I instantly felt less apprehensive about writing my manuscript. Day writes in a reassuring, humorous tone, and the information is concise and easily applied. This book will help anyone write a manuscript, develop a poster, compose a literature review, and be an effective communicator. The appendices are a brilliant resource on abbreviations, common errors, and other useful information.
And to the individual who stated that those with a background in English shouldn't advise for science: I have a B.A. in English literature, and am currently doing graduate work in the field of science. Hate to break it to you, buddy, but there isn't a formidable barrier between the two schools of science and arts. This pompous, condescending attitude will prove to be a disadvantage for you.
My B.A. has been an invaluable resource for writing in the scientific field. I agree with Day's perspective on communication skills being the downfall of many scientists. Many of my science professors desperately need an editor for the pitiful examples they force us to try learning from. All too often I've encountered my peers in scientific fields turning their noses up at those with an arts background. It is a beautiful example of poetic justice when I read their writing.

Rating:
Summary: Great for all levels
Review: I was first introduced to this book while in college and continue to draw from it as a resource. I encourage my students to purchase it for themselves and I give examples from the book when lecturing on "good" writing techniques. This book is good for all levels from the freshman science student to the accomplished research scientist. Day's use of textual humor and Peanuts cartoons is a welcome break from the typical boring style of "how to write" books. I would recommend this book for anyone involved in scientific writing no matter what their background OR what field they are writing for.

Rating:
Summary: too basic to be helpful
Review: It's good to know how an editor think about the scientific writing, but practically the book is not helpful if you want to learn writing rather than editing. The author has never written scientific papers by himself. He has no idea how to orgnize the data and make a convincing story.

I have read many beautiful scientific papers in prestigeous journals. How come those authors have not written a book??

Also Day's book is too old. Now day nobody would like to draw graphs if there is software available.

Rating:
Summary: One of my secret to be able to publish many papers by myself
Review: Many professors (in Taiwan) are surprised that I can publish many scientific paper by myself starting from my Ph.D days.
Of course, my deligence over the years are undeniable.
However,there are two other secrets: Firstly, I got the help from a Canadian, John Ogilvie, who is also my senior from one of the university I studied. He helped me to correct my English. He said, he will let my English "as beautiful as the Queen".
The other secret is that I read this book.
It is written by a retired editor after serving most of his life in a scientific journal and saw many papers and noticed their problems.
If you want to play this "adult game" in the scientific world, you must read this book. During the years, I saw many people, even after they became professors for many years, still don't understand the art. I am lucy to encountered this book at the beginning of my career. I recommended it to everyone who wants to become a scientist.

Rating:
Summary: Teacher & Engineer
Review: The explaination of each individual element of the scientific paper is very well presented. I would give 5 starts if it include some examples.

Rating:
Summary: Occasionally Amusing but Essentially Unhelpful
Review: This book is a prime example of the old adage: "Those who can't do, teach." The author of this book has never been the primary author of a major scientific paper (he is a professor of English), but he tries to give advice on how to write an effective scientific article. Because he has little to say on the subject, much of the text is made up of amusing anecdotes and quips rather than substantive guidelines. An example of the unhelpful advice he doles out is on page ninety-two, where he advises the reader to submit a typed, rather than handwritten, manuscript to the publisher. He litters his chapters with cute Peanuts cartoons depicting Snoopy getting rejection letters from publishers: a great way to take up space, but not useful to someone seeking practical advice on how to prepare a scientific article. He also gives advice on good grammar, which is more within his area of expertise. But there are better books on the subject of good writing, the classic example of which is Strunk and White's Elements of Style. I would advise the fledgling scientific writer to read many scientific articles in order to learn how to construct them effectively. On the other hand, if you want to learn how to write a whole book about something of which you know almost nothing, Dr. Day's "How to Write & Publish a Scientific Paper" would be a great place to start.

Rating:
Summary: Consise, to the point, and not boring - how papers should be
Review: This book is a treasure for all scientists, particularly graduate students. The author covers each detail of writing a paper in its own chapter in a consise, clear and sometimes funny way. I recommend this book as a basic reference, if you need more help in one area, then consult other books.