Transferable Skills Course: Getting Published & Mastering Peer Review

Start: Dec 4, 2023
End: Dec 5, 2023
Speaker: Science Craft
Dr. Brian Cusack
Location: Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics
Room: Seminar room 4
Host: Anne-Dominique Gindrat

Learning to write and respond to reviewers' comments are vital skills for early-career researchers to master if they wish to become established scientists. However, these skills are often neglected, forcing researchers to learn them by trial and error. By learning to address reviewers' comments, young researchers not only increase their chances of getting their work published but also learn to think critically about their own research. Equally, by becoming better reviewers, researchers can raise their profiles with journal editors. Becoming an invited reviewer for a prestigious journal is an opportunity for researchers to enhance their academic reputation and improve their career prospects.

Description

This two-day workshop guides young researchers through the peer review process using a practical approach that explores the roles of the author, the reviewer and the editor. As future authors, participants first learn how to engage the interest of the journal editor with a cover letter. They next learn to respond comprehensively and courteously to reviewers' comments. As future reviewers, participants learn how to critically evaluate a research article and to phrase their criticism in a constructive review that facilitates the scientific process.

By considering the differing perspectives of reviewers and authors, participants will learn about the responsibilities and opportunities associated with each of these roles.

Preparation

Before the workshop, participants will receive a manuscript of a short research article (approx. 1000 words). The manuscript describes a fictional research project of general scientific interest and exemplifies many of the common and more subtle errors found in first manuscript submissions.

Before the workshop, participants are asked to write a short review of the manuscript (approx. preparation time 90 minutes). Participants adopt the role of reviewer to:

• assess the work's distinctive contribution to advancing the field and its relevance for the wider scientific community.

• evaluate whether the conclusions and claims of the authors are justified by the evidence presented

• determine if the work is technically rigorous and suggest improvements

Workshop exercises allow participants to understand the subtleties of language use that distinguish courteous, informative and valuable feedback from superficial, unhelpful and small-minded criticism.

Schedule

Monday 4^th December

09:30 – 11:30 – Introduction to the workshop, participant introductions

Purpose of Peer Review and roles of the key players
Personal Perspectives on Peer Review
Authors & Reviewers: Differing Philosophies and Behavioural Types
The Art of Collegial and Constructive Communication: The Importance of Tone

11:30 – 11:45 – Break

11:45 – 13:00 – In the Author’s Shoes: Journal Choice & Crafting the Cover Letter

Choosing Your Target Journals: what criteria should you consider?
Peer Reviewing the “Journal Impact Factor”: does it stand up to scrutiny?
The Cover Letter: selling your science to your first choice journal

13:00- 14:00 – Lunch

14:00 – 15:30 – In the Reviewer’s Shoes: Evaluating a Research Manuscript

Manuscript evaluation: what criteria should you consider?
Tailoring your reviews to match journals’ differing selection priorities

15:30 – 15:45 – Break

15:45 – 17:30 – In the Reviewer’s Shoes: Evaluating a Research Manuscript

The universality of cognitive biases: how does this affect you as a reviewer?
Description of homework (duration: approx. 30-40 mins)

17:30 – End of day 1

Tuesday 5^th December

09:30 – 11:30 – In the Reviewer’s Shoes: Writing a Constructively Critical Review

Purpose of peer review and roles of the key players
Alternative peer review models and impact of status bias
Group discussion on anonymity in peer review: sunlight or shadows?
Reviewing the reviewers: how well does the reviewer perform?
Evaluating Reviews in a real example (based on overnight homework)

11:30 – 11:45 – Break

11:45 – 13:00 – In the Author’s Shoes: Strategies for resubmission

The Editor’s Decision: where do we go from here?
Planning the next steps before resubmission

13:00- 14:00 – Lunch

14:00 – 15:30 – In the Author’s Shoes: Responding to the Editor

Writing the rebuttal letter: standing up for your science
Evaluating the author response in a real example (based on overnight

homework)

15:30 – 15:45 – Break

15:45 – 17:30 – In the Author’s Shoes: Responding to the Editor

The art of diplomacy when appealing the editor’s decision
Workshop conclusion

17:30 – End of day 2

Contact

For further details, the workshop instructor can be contacted directly: Dr. Brian Cusack, brian.cusack@science-craft.com

Registration

Please email imprs-bac@molgen.mpg.de to register for this course.

Before signing up for this workshop, please make sure that you can attend all the dates and write them in your calendar. If you do not show up or cancel at very short notice, other interested students will not be able to participate.