The paper focuses on the key issues Russian scientists face in the process of writing abstracts in English. The undertaken study outlines practical solutions to such challenges. The paper relies on an overview of previously published research literature on the subject, as well as classification, generalisation, descriptive research, quantitative and frequency analysis. In order to verify the obtained data, corpus analysis was used. As a result, the research reveals common difficulties of abstract writing Russian authors experience and identifies discrepancies in the available findings. The paper argues that referring to authentic lexicographic and corpus online resources can become a way to avoid and / or eliminate errors. Removing the major (linguistic) stumbling block can result in overcoming academic writing issues. In addition, the article provides a brief description of the best practices for working with such resources.

A text of a scientific paper, adapted for academic search engine optimization (ASEO) tools, enables it to achieve a high ranking in the context of search queries in databases and other search systems. As a result, the article appears in more search queries, receiving more views, downloads, and citations. ASEO not only promotes the fundamental discoverability of the article but also optimizes its metadata. Carefully formulated titles, keywords, and abstracts increase the interest of all categories of potential readers in the paper content, facilitating a deeper understanding of the essence of the described research and the authors’ motivation for conducting it. The purpose of the presented paper is to describe the ASEO tools, enabling the author to optimize the manuscript text for its post-publication promotion. The paper presents basic information about ranking mechanisms, comments on the advantages and limitations of ASEO optimization. It will be useful not only to authors of scientific publications but also to editors of scientific journals who are interested in increasing their visibility.

The history of creation and the content of the elective lecture course “Basics of scientometrics and preparing scientific publications” created in 2022 at the School of Biology of Lomonosov Moscow State University are considered. The course, consisting of 12 lectures, is intended for Ph.D. students of any schools of Moscow State University, who, unlike undergraduate students, already have some experience in scientific work and publication of its results. The topics covered in the course are listed, a list of questions proposed in the test is given. Among other things, the main scientometric indicators, work on lists of references, search for possible borrowings in the manuscript, requirements for illustrations, compliance with publication ethics, determining whether a scientific publication belongs to “predatory”, reviewing scientific articles, their correct structuring, etc. are considered. Since the majority of course participants are Ph.D. students of the School of Biology of Moscow State University, special attention in the lectures is paid to the ethical issues of publishing the results of research conducted on animals and humans. It is noted that the course of lectures attracted a fairly large number of listeners interested in the correct design of their articles and choosing the best scientific editions for them. It is emphasized that these issues are especially relevant for scientists involved in the preparation of applications for grants, without which it is now almost impossible to imagine serious scientific research. The results of the test carried out after the end of the course are briefly analyzed.

In 2022, the journal of the first quartile, indexed by Web of Science and Scopus, called Thinking Skills and Creativity, retracted 47 articles simultaneously. The author of this article found that 27 of the retracted articles belonged to authors from China, 10 – from Russia and 10 – from Kazakhstan. The article describes how the fact of retraction was perceived by the Kazakhstan authors of the retracted articles, what is the role of intermediaries, the degree of participation of the authors themselves in the work on the articles, what lessons were learned by the authors from this case. The research method used in this work is an interview with the authors responsible for correspondence, according to a questionnaire that included 11 questions. The sample included six authors from various universities of Kazakhstan. When analyzing the data, the content analysis method was used. The respondents’ answers to each question were analyzed by code and category. The answers showed that in order to publish an article in this journal, the authors: a) used the help of intermediaries; b) were not acquainted with the reviews in the process of double-blind peer-review; c) tried not to disclose the fact of retraction at their university; d) after retraction tried to make intangible claims to intermediaries, but were refused; e) in general, consider the fact of retraction an annoying misunderstanding due to the fault of the editorial board of the journal. This case clearly showed that it is necessary to purposefully and constantly improve the skills of authors in communication with foreign and domestic rating publications during the publication of scientific articles, to develop a culture of scientific writing at the institutional and individual level.

In the academic world, despite their corrective nature, there is still a negative stigma attached to retractions, even more so if they are based on ethical infractions. Editors-in-chief and editors are role models in academic and scholarly communities. Thus, if they have multiple retractions or a record of academic misconduct, this viewpoint argues that they should not serve on journals’ editorial boards. The exception is where such individuals have displayed a clear path of scholarly reform. Policy and guidance is needed by organizations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Version 1: June 2022