Category / BU research

Rejection is the norm

In academic life rejection is the norm, for both journal articles and grant applications, the average academic is more likely to fail than to succeed at any time.  This can also be true, although to a lesser extent, for applications to present at academic conferences.  At the time of writing this blog (12 February 2022), I have 299 published papers listed on the databases SCOPUS.  Of these nearly 300 papers only two papers ever were accepted on first submission as submitted.  Most papers went through one or two rounds revision in the light of comments and critique offered by reviewers, and sometimes also additional feedback from the journal’s editor.

After rejection by the first journal, your paper needs to be rewritten before submitting it to another journal.  Obviously, this process of rewriting and resubmitting takes time as different journals have different styles, lay-outs, sub-headings, audiences, and often peculiar ways of referencing.  I would guess more than half of my papers have been through the review process of at least two journals.  Quite a few of my published papers were accepted by the third or even fourth journal to which we had submitted them.  Persistence is the name of the game.   Some paper fell by the wayside often after second submission, if especially if review process had been time-consuming and the reviewers very critical and demanding too many changes.

Peer review can be very good and constructive but also brutal and destructive.  Blind peer-review is a fair process as it means the quality of the paper is all that counts in getting accepted.  I have had the pleasure of being co-author on papers rejected by journals for which I was: the book review editor at the time (Sociological Research Online), on the journal’s editorial board at the time of submission (e.g. Midwifery, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology), one of journal’s Associate Editors (BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth) and, to top it all, on which I was one of the two editors (Asian Journal of Midwives).   

Grant applications in the UK have a one in eight to one in ten chance of success.  Most of our successful grant applications have been resubmissions, with attempts to improve the application each time in the light of reviewers’ comments.  For example, our successful application to THET (Tropical Health & Education Trust) resulted in the funded project ‘Mental Health Training for Rural Community-based Maternity Care Workers in Nepal‘ [1], led by Bournemouth University (see picture).  This THET project was organised by Tribhuvan University in collaboration with Bournemouth University and Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU).  However, I was only successful during our second submission.  Our first submission was rejected the year before with feedback that our partner organisation in Nepal was deemed to be too small.  In the resubmission we changed to work with colleagues at Tribhuvan University, the oldest and largest university in Nepal. Apart from some further, but minor changes, this was really the main change between the rejected and the successful application.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The situation for conferences is slightly better, the success rate for an application to present a paper or poster are higher. This is partly because conference organisers realise that most academics are unlikely to get funding from their institution unless they present something.  Conferences are often themed and submitted abstracts are peer-reviewed.  This makes in important to write a clear abstract, focusing in on the conference theme.[1]  In the past I have had the honour of being rejected to present a paper at a BSA Medical Sociology Conference, whist I was on the organising committee.

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

References

  1. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, BD. (2013) Writing an Abstract for a Scientific Conference, Kathmandu University Medical Journal 11(3): 262-65. http://www.kumj.com.np/issue/43/262-265.pdf

 

 

 

Apply now for a cluster of postgraduate researchers and postdoctoral research fellows

RESEARCH CAPACITY TRANSFORMATION SCHEME – Call for expressions of interest

Apply now for a cluster of postgraduate researchers and postdoctoral research fellows – closing date for EoIs on 7th March

Bournemouth University’s (BU) recognises that postgraduate researchers (PGRs) and postdoctoral research fellows (PDRFs) are critical to a high performing research environment. Working under the direction of academic research leadership, they provide academic staff with research capacity, which enables the production of research outputs, strengthens research impact, and increases grant bidding.

 

Key information

The Research Capacity Transformation Investment Scheme is focused on building capacity to undertake cutting-edge research securing external research funding. A cluster hiring approach will be used to appoint inter- and/or multi-disciplinary teams of PDRFs and PGRs that focus on a common theme to create “clusters” undertaking strategically important and targeted research. The scheme will invest in:

  • 10 PDRFs and 10 PGRs in September 2022, across 2-5 clusters
  • 5 PDRFs and 5 PGRs in September 2023, across 1-2 clusters.

The clusters need to build critical mass in areas of research strength and provide a team-based, fused experience for PDRFs and PGRs that is anchored in one or more existing high performing entities, such as Research Centres or Institutes. Applications must include external match-fund partners for the PGR studentships.

Full details of the scheme, including the policy document, can be found on BU’s staff intranet.

Application Process

The application process will be in two stages:

To ensure there is timely progress, Research Development & Support and the Doctoral College will manage the funding application process 2022, with oversight of the recruitment process.

The indicative timetable for the 2022 allocation and recruitment is as follows:

Date Action
Monday 7th March 2022 Closing date for submission of EoIs (see Appendix 1) at 12 noon
Monday 21st March 2022 Successful applicants invited to provide a full application form (see Appendix 2)

Unsuccessful applicants notified

Monday 25th April 2022 Closing date for submission of full applications at 12 noon
w/c Monday 16th May 2022 Successful outcomes announced and recruitment to commence

Unsuccessful applicants notified

June 2022 Adverts for positions to close
July 2022 Interviews and selection
From 1st September 2022 Successful PDRFs to start (funding available from 1 September 2022)
From  26 September 2022 or 23 January 2022 Successful PGRs to start (funding available from 26 September 2022 with an alternative start date of 23 January 2023)

 

Submission Deadline:

Before completing the EoI or full application form, please ensure that you have read all the relevant guidance (including the policy document) and information available on the Staff Intranet.

Applications should be emailed to researchcapacitytransformation@bournemouth.ac.uk before the following deadlines:

Monday 7th March 2022          Closing date for submission of EoIs at 12 noon

Monday 25th April 2022          Closing date for submission of full applications at 12 noon

 

Supporting Documentation

Recruitment of PGRs will be in line with the BU Match-Funded Studentship Allocative Process .

For additional queries, please email researchcapacitytransformation@bournemouth.ac.uk

 

FAQs

  • What can I request?
    • Each proposal should contain a request for a minimum of 2 PGRs and 2 PDRFs, to a maximum of 5 PGRs and 5 PDRFs, or any combination.
  • Do I have to find a match-funding partner for the PGR element of the scheme?
    • You must be able to produce evidence of external partners providing match-funds at the full application stage.
  • Why can’t I request funding for one PDRF or one PGR?
    • This scheme is intended to provide investment into research teams, rather than discrete pockets of activity.
  • What type of proposal is likely to be supported?
    • It is recommended that you review the criteria against which applications are assessed against to ensure that you demonstrate how your proposal meets the criteria.
    • Colleagues are reminded that reviewers of concepts are likely to be from a wider range of disciplinary areas. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that you write your proposal is a way which is clear for all to understand and avoids highly technical or discipline specific language.
  • I’m still confused. Where do I go for help?

Managing rejection – part two

In yesterday’s post, we looked at the initial moment your application is rejected, and how to digest what’s happened. Today’s post will look at what to do once you’ve reflected on the feedback.

For your own sanity, the first thing to consider is whether it is worth pursuing further, or if time has moved on and it’s time for something new. Whatever, you decide, you know that time and planning is a big factor. Like a research project, you also need to map out your application preparation as a project, to ensure you have sufficient time to craft it into a fundable bid. If you need partners, this needs even more time to find the right ones, develop the relationship, and ensure it’s trusted and beneficial to the research.

Resubmissions

To be blunt, most funders will not accept a resubmission. Funder success rates are low enough without old applications being repeatedly submitted. You also shouldn’t expect a different result from doing the same thing. Funders will expect a substantial change to an application if you’re going to submit the same research as a new bid. If the only changes you make are in response to the reviewer comments then you’re 99% more likely to be rejected again, and possibly before it’s even gone to reviewers. If a funder has a ‘no resubmission’ policy, they will chuck out anything that looks like one (they know the tricks too, and so you can’t fool them by swapping personnel or changing the title).

If a funder does allow resubmissions or has invited one, you’ll need to declare this upfront. If you thoroughly revise the application, take the advice of your peers, and resubmit, you could be successful.

Submit to different funders

You may be tempted to submit to another funder. However, beware! The funder may have a whole different approach, criteria, priorities, and schemes. Remember that you tailored your application originally for a specific funding call or a funders priorities. You will still need to substantially revise your application. If you start moving sections to fit into new ones, you may undermine your message, and your research becomes unclear. We’re back to using the crowbar again.

New idea

If you decide that you want to make a fresh start, do think about the tips given above and in yesterday’s post, and employ these to your next bid.

Alternative funding opportunities can be found on Research Professional. All BU academics have an account.

In RDS, we can help you review your feedback and determine what steps you should take next. We’re building a bank of funder feedback and ensuring that our training and development for research reflects the most common weaknesses identified. More information will be provided in Friday’s post, written by Research Facilitator, Alex Pekalski.

Managing rejection – part one

This week, we’ll be running a series of blog posts on managing rejection. These will include experience from academics, advice on what to do next, tips of understanding EU evaluation reports, and what support is available for you to take the next steps. Leading on from this, next week, we will run a series of posts on institutional learning from funder feedback, and so make sure you’re glued to the research blog for the next couple of weeks. The first and second posts are about managing rejection.

Unfortunately, rejection is part and parcel of academic life. If you watch the TV series ‘Ozark’, rejection can feel like Darlene Snell offering to get the lemonade. You need to try not to take it personally, no matter how hard that is given the weekends and evenings you may have given up to craft your bid. There may be many factors as to why you didn’t get funded, and hopefully, you’ve been provided with feedback from the funding panel (not all do, sadly). The most frustrating feedback is when you were deemed fundable, but there wasn’t sufficient budget.

When a funder doesn’t provide panel feedback, you should at least receive the reviewers’ comments (note that research councils will send these to you in advance of  the panel so that you have a right to reply). These can be a mixed bag, and so don’t focus on the odd sentence that stands out (there is always one), but look collectively at what the reviewers’ are saying.

All is not lost! A huge amount of work goes into the development of a proposal. It is a great shame to park your idea, when it could be re-worked, and submitted to an alternative funder. Alternatively, it might be time to develop a new project idea. Before you decide, you need to take time to reflect on the failed application.

After you’ve given yourself a couple of days to get over the shock, grab a cuppa and revisit the feedback, together with your application, and the funder guidance. This will give you an opportunity to reflect on what you would do differently. This might involve having the right networks in place; did you really meet the call criteria or did you crowbar your research to fit; did you articulate well enough in the sections of the application; did you use the right research methods, was your research really state of the art? Ultimately, did you leave enough time to plan out the application and submit a high-quality bid?

Once you’ve digested all of this, it’s time to think about what to do next. Tomorrow’s post will explore this in more detail.

Up and coming Research & Knowledge Exchange Development Framework events


Every year, the Research & Knowledge Exchange Office, along with internal and external delivery partners, runs over 150 events to support researcher development through the Research & Knowledge Exchange Development Framework (RKEDF).

Responding to your feedback and by popular request, below are the main events coming up over the next six months – please click on the ‘details and booking information’ link to find out more and reserve your place as soon as possible:

Date Start and End Time Event Title Details and booking information link
28/02/2022 09:30-12:30 Fellowships: Being Strategic Fellowships: Being Strategic – Bournemouth University Intranet.
07/03/2022 9:30-11:30 Unsuccessful Applications Repurposing workshops Repurposing Your Unsuccessful Grant Applications – Bournemouth University Intranet.
24/03/2022 09:30-12:30 Refining your research idea Fellowships: Refining your Research Ideas – Bournemouth University Intranet.
13/04/2022 11:00-13:00 British Academy Mid-career Fellowship and British Academy/Leverhulme Senior Fellowship – (Mid-career Fellowships outline stage will likely open in July 2022; Senior Fellowships in October 2022) British Academy Mid-career Fellowship – Bournemouth University Intranet.
27/04/2022 11:00-13:00 British Academy Postdoctoral Fellowship (BAPDF) and Leverhulme Trust Early Career Fellowship (LECF) (BAPDF will likely open for outline stage in July 2022; LECF in January 2023) British Academy Postdoctoral Fellowship – Bournemouth University Intranet.
05/05/2022 09:30-12:30 Fellowship Interviews Techniques Fellowships: Interviews – Bournemouth University Intranet.
11/05/2022 11:00-13:00 Leverhulme Research Project – Outline – Leverhulme Research Project Outline Stage – Bournemouth University Intranet.
20/05/2022 09:30-11:30 Unsuccessful Applications Repurposing workshops Repurposing Your Unsuccessful Grant Applications – Bournemouth University Intranet.
25/05/2022 11:00-13:00 AHRC Research Development and Engagement fellowships workshop (ECR and Standard) – AHRC Leadership Fellowship – Bournemouth University Intranet.
08/06/2022 11:00-13:00 ESRC New investigator ESRC New investigator – Bournemouth University Intranet.
04/07/2022 09:30-11:30 Unsuccessful Applications Repurposing workshops Repurposing Your Unsuccessful Grant Applications – Bournemouth University Intranet.

IMIV MRI Pump-Priming Research Scheme Round 2 – Call Re-opens

Following the launch of Round 2 of the IMIV MRI Pump-Priming Research Scheme, the window for applications for innovative MRI research projects has re-opened.

 

The aim of the scheme is to support projects that will lead to competitive external funding applications for MR imaging studies.  Applications are therefore required to demonstrate a clear plan for progressing preliminary studies to grant applications and larger studies.

 

  • All projects must have a Bournemouth University researcher as lead or co-lead applicant (see application form).

 

  • The IMIV MRI Pump-Priming Scheme Round 2 has a rolling 3-month window for applications, rather than a single deadline, and up to 200 hours of scanning time to be awarded in total in 2021/22.

 

  • There is no limit on the number of scanning hours that can be applied for, but projects applying for an award of more than 20 hours may be subject to external peer review. Awards will not cover any additional expenses related to scanning, or other aspects of the project.

 

  • Projects must be deliverable within 12 months, including ethical approvals. Projects with ethical approvals already in place will be prioritised.

 

The second window for applications is now open, and closes on Friday 22nd April 2022.  Subject to availability, there will be further application windows during the year.

To receive the application form, please email imiv@bournemouth.ac.uk.

New Intention to Bid and Bid Enquiry Process

Following the announcement of the new electronic ITB form on 24 January 2022, these are some updates since the launch.

The new ITB form and Enquiry service will provide a better user experience and create a more efficient administrative control process for Research Development and Support (RDS).

 

New ITB form: The new Intention to Bid (ITB) form and the updated Research Costings Request Sheet are both available now in the Policies & Procedures/Research/Pre-award section of the intranet under Research > Pre-award. Please complete the Research Costings Request Sheet and attach it to the e-ITB form for completion. PDF copies of all submissions can be printed or saved but there are limitations to editing a form once it has been submitted.

 

Bid Enquiry Process: If you have more than 4 weeks to the submission deadline and need advice or support regarding a bid, please access the same form link and select ‘Enquiry/Advice on Bidding’. This ensures that the pre-award team will see your Enquiry, rather than emailing a sole officer who may not be available at the time.

 

As a service, RDS is committed to delivering service excellence to enable BU’s academic community to deliver and grow world-leading research for societal benefit. The program of work continues to look at processes to enhance the user experience.

 

Changes include improvements to the pre- and post-award support being offered. Building on the delivery of a new Principal Investigator report which is currently in the final stages of being rolled out, and continuing our collaboration with the Transformation Team.

 

For any queries about the transformation of pre-award services at BU, please contact Jo Garrad or Brian Kaliczynskyj to discuss further.

For any technical issues in relation to the form, please contact Roy Harvey directly.

Upcoming Research Impact Workshops – book now!

We have five RKEDF Impact-related workshops coming up over the next month; please use the links below to book onto them via OD:

Impact and Funding Applications: 16th February at 15:00 

Influencing Policy – with Professor Mark Reed: 1st March at 13:00

Getting started with research Impact: what is it?: 8th March at 14:00

Inspirational Impact – a lunchtime seminar with Professor Zulfiqar Khan: 24th March at 13:00

Evidencing Impact – with Saskia Gent: 29th March at 9:30

We’d be delighted to see you there!

If you have any questions, please contact the Impact Advisors – Amanda Lazar or Beth Steiner

 

Research process seminar, Tuesday 15th Feb at 2pm on Zoom. Intersectional Methods of Visual Media Analysis

You are warmly welcomed to this week’s research process seminar. Hosted in FMC but welcome to all staff and research students. This week’s talk is truly interdisciplinary, and delivered by a former BU staff member, now at Loughborough University (Emma Pullen).

 

Intersectional Methods of Visual Media Analysis by Dr. Emma Pullen & Dr. Laura Mora  

 

Is intersectionality a method? How can we implement intersectionality in our research? In this talk, Laura Mora and Emma Pullen cover the history and definition of (the nowadays buzzword) intersectionality, followed by a discussion of how its theory can be interpreted on a methodological level. As a tool for analysis, intersectionality makes visible how several systems of oppression (based on people’s identity markers) intersect and should be seen as mutually constitutive in creating power relations. This ensures that we move away from single-issue approaches (race-only or gender-only etc.) in our research, and instead reflect people’s complex realities. We discuss how to embed intersectionality into your sampling and in conducting a visual media analysis, discourse analysis and audience study. We also learn about the importance of intersectionality in positioning oneself as a researcher. Throughout the talk, we refer to our own visual media analysis of Paralympians’ Instagram posts, but there is plenty of room as well to walk through the possibilities of making research within your fields or case studies more intersectional.

 

Tuesday 15th Feb at 2pm on Zoom

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/9292103478?pwd=UzJnNTNQWDdTNldXdjNWUnlTR1cxUT09

Meeting ID: 929 210 3478

Passcode: rps!4fmc

Hard to reach or hard to engage?

Congratulations to FHSS PhD students Aniebiet Ekong and Nurudeen Adesina on the acceptance of their paper by MIDIRS Midwifery Digest [1]. This methodological paper reflects on their data collection approaches as part of their PhD involving African pregnant women in the UK.

This paper provides a snapshot of some of the challenges encountered during the recruitment of pregnant Black African women living in the UK for their research. Though there are several strategies documented to access/invite/recruit these ‘hard-to-reach population’ these recruitment strategies however were found to be unsuitable to properly engage members of this community. Furthermore, ethical guidelines around informed consent and gatekeeping seem to impede the successful engagement of the members of this community. It is believed that an insight into the experience and perceptions of ethnic minorities researchers will enhance pragmatic strategies that will increase future participation and retention of Black African women across different areas of health and social care research. This paper is co-authored with their BU PhD supervisors: Dr Jaqui-Hewitt Taylor, Dr Juliet Wood, Dr Pramod Regmi and Dr Fotini Tsofliou.

Well done !

Pramod Regmi

  1. Ekong, A., Adesina, N., Regmi, P., Tsofliou, F., Wood, J. and Taylor, J., 2022. Barriers and Facilitators to the recruitment of Black African women for research in the UK: Hard to engage and not hard to reach. MIDIRS Midwifery Digest (accepted).

FHSS Women in Science

 

Tomorrow Friday 11th February is the UN’s International Day of Women and Girls in Science.  To celebrate this event we would like to highlight the contributions of three BU female academics in the sciences in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences: Jane Murphy, Rebecca Neal and Amanda Wilding.

Jane Murphy

Prof Jane Murphy – Professor in Nutrition, Co-lead for the Aging and Dementia Research Centre

Jane is a role model as a female research leader committed to solving key nutrition problems in older adults. She has won funding from prestigious organisations like the Burdett Trust for Nursing and NIHR. Jane’s research has direct impact in practice through her clinical lead role in the Wessex Academic Health Science Network. She influences high standards in education and practice in her role as an elected council member for the Association for Nutrition.

Dr. Rebecca Neal– Senior Lecturer in Exercise Physiology.

Rebecca is an Early Career Research excelling in traditionally male-dominated field of Sport and Exercise Science. Her work in the field of Extreme Environmental Physiology is published in prestigious physiology journals and she has been the recipient of external and internal grants to advance her work. Rebecca contributes greatly to transferring her research finding to the end user, through public engagement events, magazine articles and podcasts aimed at raising the awareness of the issues and needs of individuals exercising in extreme environments.

Dr. Amanda Wilding– Senior Lecturer in Sport Psychology

In addition to teaching Sport and Exercise Psychology, Amanda works as a Sports Psychologist in professional male football and Army rugby. Her involvement working in male dominated sports lead to her being invited to lead a workshop on Women in Sport  to women at the Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University in Saudi Arabia.

Talks on Science, Health, and Data Communications Winter/Spring 2022

logo - science, health, and data communications research groupThe Science, Health, and Data Communications Research Centre invites you to our Winter-Spring 2022 research series. These talks are open to the public, and encompass topics on representations of bodies in the media, managing your health data, immersive media, and community responses to suicide.

Register for events on EventBrite.

SHDC-RC is an emerging interdisciplinary, cross-faculty centre seeking to explore the ways in which specialised knowledge and information is communicated to the public, including policy-makers and front-line workers, and how mass communication (such as journalism and entertainment media) conveys and represents these areas to audiences.

 

Carina Westling: Audience Experience in Immersive Media Contexts

Date: Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 14:00 GMT
Further details and registration.

Juhan Sonin – Own Your Healthcare Experience: an Open Source Path

Date: Thursday, 3 March 2022 at 14:00 GMT
Further details and registration.

Alex Ketchum – Toolkits for Engaging in Public Scholarship

Date: Thursday, 10 March 2022 at 14:00 GMT
Further details and registration.

Ann Luce – Supporting communities to respond to suspected suicide clusters

Date: Thursday, 17 March 2022 at 14:00 GMT
Further details and registration.

Susan Oman – ‘Following the Data’ to understand well-being data

Date: Thursday, 31 March 2022 at 14:00 BST
Further details and registration.

Catalin Brylla – Destigmatising ‘non-normative’ Bodies through Media Rep

Date: Thursday, 5 May 2022 at 14:00 BST
Further details and registration.

Jennifer Rudd – From Climate Change Ignorant to Climate Change Educator

Date: Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 14:00 BST
Further details and registration.