Skip to main content

Peer Review Week 2019: Digest for PhD students and early career researchers

Image
By

This week has been the 5th annual Peer Review Week. The subject of peer review is discussed all year round, but it's been fascinating to observe the focussed discussion this week on the theme that gets to the heart of the issue: Quality. Peer Review has long been a cornerstone of academic publishing and a signifier of quality, but evidence of bias towards positive findings and spotlights on flaws, in general, have come to light over the years.

The increased workload on academics, pressures on early career researchers to publish or perish and a lack of recognition for reviewers has also resulted in questions about the sustainability of peer review. Technology inevitably is involved in generating possible solutions to these challenges, but at what cost to quality?

This post will summarise some of the contributions to these topics that have been made this week.

Types of Peer Review. http://reviewers.plos.org/open-peer-review/
It's a common misconception that there is one way to peer review. Blind, where the author is known to the reviewer but not vice versa, or double-blind where neither the reviewer or author is known to one another. In fact, many different forms of peer review have emerged over the years that aim to open up the peer review process, sometimes to discourage bad behaviour and bias or simply to allow more contributors to take part in moulding a better piece of research. The infographic above summarises the different types of review, which would you prefer to see or do in your research? Read more about Open Peer Review on the PLOS reviewers website.


Declaring conflict of interest in peer review. @Editage https://twitter.com/Editage
An invitation from a journal to become a reviewer can be a flattering experience and provide an opportunity to boost your academic career. It can be tempting to just say yes and worry about the consequences later. If one of those consequences is a conflict of interest, which can sometimes take place with no bad feeling intended and especially if a field has a very small number of specialists in it, remember to stay objective. When a potential conflict of interest arises it's important to declare it and await the next suitable paper. The infographic above shows how to spot when a conflict may arise.


Words to the wise! 

Lots of researchers have been sharing their experiences of peer-reviewing and why they do it. Often the message has been to be constructive and supportive in equal measure. Dr. Manu Saunders from the University of New England wrote a particularly poignant post, "Why I don't want to be paid for peer review".

Dr. Heather Staines from MIT Knowledge Futures Group builds upon the subject of Open Peer Review and offers a great insight into emerging experiments and approaches. Read her post, "Making Open Peer Review More Open and Transparent".

Twitter poll on Open Peer Review 

Major survey on quality and trust in peer review

Sense About Science worked with Elsevier on a survey 10 years on from their first major survey of researchers. Their report, "Quality, trust and peer review: researchers' perspectives 10 years on" offers an interesting overview of how scholarly communications has changed dramatically in 10 years, the rise of predatory publishers and variety of research outputs being available (preprints, data, code, etc) are making a significant impact. Despite these changes they found that researchers confidence in peer review has increased. Challenges posed to the industry by researchers in the survey include: 
  1. Ensuring researchers receive clear guidance on how to conduct peer review 
  2. Ensuring researchers get meaningful recognition for reviewing, which relates to the pressing need to overhaul research assessment and evaluation.
  3. A need to leverage technologies to manage the ever-increasing volume of research articles and improve the speed of review. 
  4. Should peer review be extended beyond the research article, which would pose a significant resource challenge?
Sense About Science and Elsevier report published during Peer Review Week 2019

Finally, courses on peer review!

It seems the first point mentioned in the survey challenges above has been addressed by publishers already. Many of whom took Peer Review Week as an opportunity to promote their free courses on conducting peer review. Some highlights of courses include:


Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

You can now export multiple citations from Google Scholar

By
You can now export multiple citations from Google Scholar if you have a Google Account. Go to Google Scholar and sign into your Google Account. Conduct your search. Click on the Star icon (Save) under each reference you want to export. Then click on My Library in the top, right of the screen. Select all the references and click on the Export option: Click the Star/Save Icon Choose Export Option To Export into EndNote Choose the EndNote option. Open the EndNote file that is created. The references should automatically import into EndNote. To Export into RefWorks Choose the RefMan option. Save the RIS file that is created. Login to your RefWorks account. Click on the plus (+) button. Choose Import References. Add the RIS file you just saved. Set the file import option to RIS - Reference Manager. Click import and your references will be imported. --- Good Practice Tip: Always check that all the reference information you need has been
Read more

Searching ABS Journals in Business Source Premier

By
In Business and Management Studies, researchers undertaking a literature review sometimes search across a defined group of journals. This is a way of focusing the literature search to make the results more relevant to the questions in hand. Groups are often chosen from the Association of Business Schools (ABS)'s  Academic Journal Guide . Read more how about how they put together the guide here . There are several ways to search across ABS journals. Here is how to do it in Business Source Premier, a leading literature database for this subject area.  1.     Login into the ABS journal guide. If you have never used it before you will need to create an account. 2.     You can use the guide to draw up a group of journals either by using the Rankings information or the Fields. Fields divides up the journals into categories of research focus e.g. Accounting, Finance etc. In this example we will use the Fields. The field we are interested is ‘Operations Research and Marketin
Read more

Advanced Search Tip: Proximity (Adjacency) Searching

By
Proximity (Adjacency) Searching vs Phrase Searching When you're searching literature databases you might want to find a phrase. The easiest way to do this is to put the phrase in "speech marks". E.g. "heart disease" This will find that exact phrase - with the words next to each other in that order. BUT... You may be interested in variations on that phrase e.g. heart disease, disease of the heart, diseases of the heart, diseases of the human heart. In that case it might be better to use a proximity/adjacency search - this allows you to find one keyword next to another. Or one keyword within a specified number of words of the other keyword. When using a proximity search the keywords can be in any order. Different Databases Use Different Proximity Operators In Ovid Medline : heart adj disease finds the word heart next to the word disease, in that order.    (This is the same as searching for the phrase, of course) heart adj2 disease fin
Read more