Abstract vs. Paper

[sunshine02]

What is the difference between publishing an abstract vs. an actual paper besides the fact that one takes more time and probably is better? Is publishing an abstract "easier" than publishing a paper, and how do they differ in requirements for publishing?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[CyberMaxx]

Hey OP, So here is what I know. Publishing an abstract is much easier than publishing a paper. Publishing an abstract generally means that you have gotten a poster accepted to a conference and the conference put all of the abstracts in a journal issue. I would say (though I'm sure others know more than me 😛) that publishing an abstract is viewed on the same level as a poster presentation - because they really go hand in hand.

Publishing a paper on the other hand is a fairly big deal as an undergraduate and represents a significant amount of work. Although publishing an abstract (poster) is peer reviewed, the process is very lenient. When you publish a paper on the other hand, the peer review progress is very rigorous and often includes writing multiple drafts according to your reviewer's criticisms. Of course, being first author on a paper is a bigger deal than being a secondary author, but they are both serious accomplishments for an undergraduate student. For that matter, so is a poster presentation and abstract, just not to the same degree. 🙂

 

[Microglia]

Hey OP, So here is what I know. Publishing an abstract is much easier than publishing a paper. Publishing an abstract generally means that you have gotten a poster accepted to a conference and the conference put all of the abstracts in a journal issue. I would say (though I'm sure others know more than me 😛) that publishing an abstract is viewed on the same level as a poster presentation - because they really go hand in hand.

Publishing a paper on the other hand is a fairly big deal as an undergraduate and represents a significant amount of work. Although publishing an abstract (poster) is peer reviewed, the process is very lenient. When you publish a paper on the other hand, the peer review progress is very rigorous and often includes writing multiple drafts according to your reviewer's criticisms. Of course, being first author on a paper is a bigger deal than being a secondary author, but they are both serious accomplishments for an undergraduate student. For that matter, so is a poster presentation and abstract, just not to the same degree. 🙂

This. Papers usually take at least a year of full time work if you're a higher ranked author, abstracts can (potentially) be accomplished in a summer. Abstracts are almost always accepted at conferences, while papers undergo rigorous peer review, and it's harder to publish in journals with higher impact factors.

Tl;dr: papers carry more weight in admissions because they represent a longer and more serious commitment, but both are good.

Tl;drtl;dr: paper > abstract

 

[Chem4Days]

Not to derail this thread, but along the same vein...

My lab is currently in the process of publishing a paper on which I am the first author. Only problem is it will most likely have not been officially "published" by the time I submit my AMCAS and AACOMAS apps. How should I address this because I feel like it is a pretty important thing to mention?

 

[Law2Doc]

Hey OP, So here is what I know. Publishing an abstract is much easier than publishing a paper. Publishing an abstract generally means that you have gotten a poster accepted to a conference and the conference put all of the abstracts in a journal issue. I would say (though I'm sure others know more than me 😛) that publishing an abstract is viewed on the same level as a poster presentation - because they really go hand in hand.

Publishing a paper on the other hand is a fairly big deal as an undergraduate and represents a significant amount of work. Although publishing an abstract (poster) is peer reviewed, the process is very lenient. When you publish a paper on the other hand, the peer review progress is very rigorous and often includes writing multiple drafts according to your reviewer's criticisms. Of course, being first author on a paper is a bigger deal than being a secondary author, but they are both serious accomplishments for an undergraduate student. For that matter, so is a poster presentation and abstract, just not to the same degree. 🙂

Close. You submit an abstract to try to present something at a meeting. It isn't usually "published" per se, although when it is accepted to a national meeting they usually will put it into a program book of accepted abstracts, so in this sense it is published, but you wouldn't call it that. So in general you might lust an abstract that was accepted on your CV, but you wouldn't call it "published". Once you do the poster or presentation, you generally should drop the abstract off of your CV and just list the poster or presentation. An abstract is generally just a one page discussion of your research and results. The threshold of having an abstract accepted is much lower than a paper.

 

[Microglia]

Not to derail this thread, but along the same vein...

My lab is currently in the process of publishing a paper on which I am the first author. Only problem is it will most likely have not been officially "published" by the time I submit my AMCAS and AACOMAS apps. How should I address this because I feel like it is a pretty important thing to mention?

You can list the manuscript with authors, title, etc. and where the journal name would normally go say one of the following:

Manuscript in preparation (Or Manuscript in Progress): it's being written up
Submitted to X Journal, Manuscript in review: you submitted it and it's in review.

 

[sobored]

You can list the manuscript with authors, title, etc. and where the journal name would normally go say one of the following:

Manuscript in preparation (Or Manuscript in Progress): it's being written up
Submitted to X Journal, Manuscript in review: you submitted it and it's in review.

Don't say that. "Manuscript Submitted" is appropriate. I can submit a piece of trash to Nature, doesn't mean anything. Plus, if your paper is rejected, you would look foolish if you listed the journal in the first place. Only list the journal if it's accepted.