February’s Writing Club – Peer review

February’s meeting was an informal peer review session.   Participants were encouraged to bring something they had written, which was then read for comment by another participant.

Keith Nockels from the Clinical Librarian Service facilitated this informal peer review by providing a checklist of things to look for, but participants did all the peer reviewing.   It was good to see writers providing personalised and positive feedback to other writers.

We also talked about the ethics of peer reviewing, if you are reviewing for a journal.   What to do if you suspect fraud or bad practice, and guarding against using information or insights from the paper you are reviewing, were two of the issues.

Some useful resources about peer review:

We also talked about language and style.   Watch for another posting about that.

Watch for the next informal peer review session, something we plan to do again.

 

Advertisements

Top tips #8: Become a peer reviewer

No matter how you might feel about the state of peer review, becoming a peer reviewer could well be a useful way of becoming familiar with the process that papers go through before eventually getting into print. The peer review process can really help to improve an article before publication and therefore make it more relevant and useful to readers.

Elsevier have tips for anyone interested in becoming a reviewer: https://www.elsevier.com/reviewers/becoming-a-reviewer-how-and-why

As you begin to publish in your field, you will become known and as a consequence, invited to complete more peer review work.

Top tips #7: Follow the instructions to authors

Each journal will have a section on its home page for “Instructions to authors”. These are there to help you as a potential author understand what the editor is looking for, and to get your work published.

There should be an indication of the types of research that the journal is aiming to publish, and also expectations of word length. There should also be details on the house style of the journal, for example, whether the active (We did…) or passive (the research done was…) voice is preferred.

Following the instructions to authors with care will lead to a greater chance of getting your work into print, and avoid your work being rejected at the first stage in the process.

Informal peer review

The February meeting of the Writing Club will be an informal peer review session.  Bring something you have written, perhaps something you would like to get published.   Others at the meeting will give you feedback on it.    We will have a peer review checklist to hand, and look at what is involved in peer review.    And you will be able to review others’ work.

The meeting is from 1pm to 2pm on Thursday 23rd February, and will be in the Stanley Tipton Room, Clinical Education Centre, Jarvis Building at the LRI.   Please note venue, which is not our usual one.