790405 Review, Revision & Resubmission for Doctoral Candidates (in Eng.)

Type
Lecture and exercise
Semester hours
2
Lecturer (assistant)
Buyel, Johannes , Pröbstl-Haider, Ulrike
Organisation
Offered in
Wintersemester 2024/25
Languages of instruction
Englisch
Content

Doctoral studies course on manuscript review processes
-actors: authors, editor in chief, edtior, reviewer, editorial manager, publisher
-editorial board persons
-journal scope -> topical collection vs journal, selection of suitable journal -> open access vs fee-for-service -> costs
-use of pre-print servers -> conflict with plagiarims check
-submission requitements, formats
-check for completness -> cover letter, main text, author approvals
-plagiarism check -> flagging, software tools -> impact of large language models
-initiale quality control -> scope, novelty
-reviewer recruiting -> declines, non-responder, using editorial board member and peers
-reviewer communication -> delays, non-responder
-review process: [our paper -> authentic reviewer comments but -> no major mistakes]; better: example manuscripts with broader spectrum of mistakes -> use evaluation sheet -> use input from bioarchive or publications from "poor" journals
-evaluation criteria -> figure quality, statistical analysis, controls, plausibility, references, quantitative results
-evaluation -> accept, minor revision, major revision, reject but re-submit, reject
-revision -> how to handle reviewer comments (read, rest, respond), revision formats (table, list), rebuttle, personal biases, track-changes, reviewer re-invitation (or only editorial decision)
-final decision -> reject (plan B for authors), reject but resubmit, accept, language editing
-acceptance -> integration of reviewer feedback and handling editor comments
-proofs -> online, pdf, typical corrections -> incomplete references, coherence of reference list and in-text citations, figure formatting, copyright of content -> recycling of material from previous publications, especially doctoral thesis, reviews etc.
-publication type -> open access vs fee for service -> copyright, payment
-reviewer credit -> crediting platforms, name disclosure, reviewer comment disclosure -> benefits and drawbacks
Objective (expected results of study and acquired competences)

The students are able to understand the relevance of the review process. They have insights into the structures within a journal and the decision making process behind. They are able to respond to a scientific review and to write a review in their respective research field.
You can find more details like the schedule or information about exams on the course-page in BOKUonline.