Tagged / social sciences

Peer review picking up weaknesses in a scientific paper

international, Publishing, writing

Peer review is the the key pillar of academic publishing.  Peer reviewers will read the submitted paper and assess its knowledge contribution, the appropriateness of the research question, the ethical considerations, the quality of the research methods used and the appropriateness of the discussion, conclusion, and recommendations in the manuscript. [1]  It is worth bearing in mind that most peer reviewers are unpaid volunteers, academics like us who review for journals over and above the day job.[2]  For the authors peer reviewers can give excellent feedback.  Harvey and colleagues remind their readers that peer reviewers reading your manuscript with a fresh pair of eyes, can lead to them raising great questions and offering useful comments.  In short, reviewers’ reservations and misunderstandings can help you to rephrase and better focus your paper. [3]

However, what the review process does not do is picking up every possible minor mistake and typo in a paper.  I was reminded of this last week when I read a peer-reviewed paper in which the basic demographics table (the characteristics of the study participants) did not add up to 100%.  Luckily, the same authors (who shall remain nameless) published a different paper from the same study in another quality journal, which allowed me to check the numbers.  Interestingly, the second paper in another peer-reviewed journal had the same mistake.   In the end I ended up writing to two different editors pointing out this anomaly.   The editors contacted the authors who have since promised to rectify the mistake.

Something similar has also happened to us.  Occasionally I reread one of our articles in a good journal and wonder about some of the unclear sentences or poorly expressed grammar or style.  Neither the editor nor the peer-reviewers spotted it nor did my co-authors and I noticed these mistakes in the paper proofs.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH (Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health)

 

 

References:

  1. van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Shanker, S. (2022) Selecting an Appropriate Journal and Submitting your Paper, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 20-31.
  2. van Teijlingen, E., Thapa, D., Marahatta, S.B., Sapkota, J.L., Regmi, P. Sathian, B. (2022) Editors and Reviewers: Roles and Responsibilities, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 32-37.
  3. Harvey, O., Taylor, A., Regmi, P.R., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Struggling to reply to reviewers: Some advice for novice researchers. Health Prospect, 21(2):19-22.

 

British Academy Writing Workshop in Nepal in 2022

conferences, international, Publishing, writing

Two days ago one of the participants of our British Academy funded Academic Writing Workshops announced on Facebook that the paper, we had helped her put together, had been published in a peer-reviewed journal.  It is satisfying to see the fruits of our labours in print following two sets of three-day workshops in Kathmandu and Pokhara.  The team running the 2022 workshop comprised three Faculty of Health & Social Sciences’ (FHSS) staff: Dr. Shovita Dhakal Adhikari, Dr. Pramod Regmi, and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen, and our colleague Dr. Rashmee Rajkarnikar at Nepal’s oldest and largest university (Tribhuvan University) and BU’s Visiting Faculty Dr. Emma Pitchforth, who is Senior Lecturer and Senior Research Fellow in Primary Care at the University of Exeter.  Dr. Shovita Adhikari has since left Bournemouth University to become Senior Lecturer in Criminology & Sociology at London Metropolitan University.

Over the years our team has published a wide range of papers on many aspects of academic writing [1-38].  The authors include: Prof. Vanora Hundley [3-5,8-9,14,16-19,21,23,28-33,36], Dr. Orlanda Harvey [2,22, ], Dr. Pramod Regmi [2,7,13-14,17,22,24-25 ], Dr. Rachel Arnold [20], Dr. Alison Taylor, Dr. Nirmal Aryal [14,24], Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen, PhD student Mrs. Sulochana Dhakal-Rai [8] all in FHSS, Prof. Ann Luce in the Media School [5] and Dr. Shanti Shanker in the Department of Psychology [6] as well as several BU Visiting Faculty: Dr. Brijesh Sathian [1,7-8,21,31,34], Dr. Shovita Dhakal Adhiikari [24-25 ], Dr. Preeti Mahato [11,20, ], Prof. Padam Simkhada [3-4,6,8-9,13,16-19,21,23,25-31,34 ], Dr. Emma Pitchforth [11-12,37], Prof. Bhimsen Devkota [12,16 ], Prof. Sujan Marahatta [7], Dr. Bibha Simkhada [9,14,25,27,29] and Ms. Jillian Ireland [8,20,22,27,31].
has build up capacity in academic writing and publishing in Nepal on many occasions and at many different institutions.  This grant allow us to offer a more systematic approach to capacity building in academic writing, and it build a growing number of paper published by FHSS staff on various aspects of academic writing and publishing.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health

References:

  1. Sathian B, van Teijlingen E, Banerjee I, Kabir R. (2022) Guidance to applying for health research grants in the UK. Nepal J Epidemiol 12(4):1231-1234.
  2. Harvey, O., Taylor, A., Regmi, P.R., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Struggling to reply to reviewers: Some advice for novice researchers. Health Prospect, 21(2):19-22.
  3. van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P.P., Wasti, S.P. (2022) Introduction, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 1-4.
  4. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Swoveet, P. (2022) Writing an Academic Paper, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 6-14.
  5. Hundley, V., Luce, A., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Collaborative Writing for Publication, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 15-19.
  6. van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Shanker, S. (2022) Selecting an Appropriate Journal and Submitting your Paper, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 20-31.
  7. van Teijlingen, E., Thapa, D., Marahatta, S.B., Sapkota, J.L., Regmi, P. Sathian, B. (2022) Editors and Reviewers: Roles and Responsibilities, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 32-37.
  8. van Teijlingen, E., Ireland, J., Hundley, V, Dhakal Rai, S., Simkhada, P., Sathian, B. (2022) Identifying an appropriate Title, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 39-47.
  9. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, B, Acharya D.R. (2022) Writing an Abstract for a Scientific Conference, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 48-56.
  10. Subedi, M., van Teijlingen, E., Baniya J., Sijapati, B. (2022) Writing the Introduction and Background, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 57-67.
  11. van Teijlingen, E., Pitchforth, E., Keenan Forrest, K., Mahato, P. (2022) Writing a Qualitative Paper, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 88-97.
  12. Wasti, S.P, Devkota, B., Bhatta, D.N., Pitchforth, E., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Writing the Introduction and Background, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 112-120.
  13. Regmi, P., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P. (2022) Writing up the Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 121-129
  14. Aryal, N., Regmi, P.R., Simkhada, B., Subedi, M., van Teijlingen, E., Wasti, S.P., Hundley, V, Khatri, R. (2022) Being Ethical in Writing and Publishing, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 153-161.
  15. van Teijlingen, E., Venter, K. (2022) Writing a Book Review, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 162-167.
  16. Devkota, B., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V, Wasti, S.P. (2022) Writing a Research Proposal, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 168-175.
  17. Wasti, S.P. Regmi, P.R., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V. (2022) Writing a PhD Proposal, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 176-183.
  18. Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Converting your Master’s or Doctoral Thesis into an Academic Paper for Publication, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 184-189.
  19. van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., Acharya, J., Silwal, R.C., Wasti, S.P. (2022) Academic Writing: Final Thoughts, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 201-20
  20. Arnold, R., Ireland, J., Mahato, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Writing and publishing a reflective paper: Three case studies, Welhams Acad J 1(1): 4-11.
  21. van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V, Sathian, B., Simkhada, P., Robinson, J., Banerjee, I. (2022) The Art of the Editorial Nepal J Epidemiol, 12(1): 1135–38.
  22. Harvey, O., van Teijlingen, A., Regmi, P.R., Ireland, J., Rijal, A., van Teijlingen, E.R. (2022) Co-authors, colleagues, and contributors: Complexities in collaboration and sharing lessons on academic writing Health Prospect 21(1):1-3.
  23. Wasti, S.P., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Hundley, V. with Shreesh, K. (2022) Writing and Publishing Academic Work, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books
  24. van Teijlingen, E.R., Dhakal Adhikari, S., Regmi, P.R., van Teijlingen, A., Aryal, N., Panday, S. (2021). Publishing, identifiers & metrics: Playing the numbers game. Health Prospect, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.3126/hprospect.v20i1.37391
  25. Adhikari, S. D., van Teijlingen, E. R., Regmi, P. R., Mahato, P., Simkhada, B., & Simkhada, P. P. (2020). The Presentation of Academic Self in The Digital Age: The Role of Electronic Databases. Int J Soc Sci Management, 7(1), 38-41. https://doi.org/10.3126/ijssm.v7i1.27405
  26. van Teijlingen, E, Simkhada, PP, Rizyal A (2012) Submitting a paper to an academic peer-reviewed journal, where to start? (Guest Editorial) Health Renaissance 10(1): 1-4.
  27. van Teijlingen, E, Simkhada. PP, Simkhada, B, Ireland J. (2012) The long & winding road to publication, Nepal J Epidemiol 2(4): 213-215 http://nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/7093/6388
  28. Hundley, V, van Teijlingen, E, Simkhada, P (2013) Academic authorship: who, why and in what order? Health Renaissance 11(2):98-101 www.healthrenaissance.org.np/uploads/Download/vol-11-2/Page_99_101_Editorial.pdf
  29. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, BD. (2013) Writing an Abstract for a Scientific Conference, Kathmandu Univ Med J 11(3): 262-65. http://www.kumj.com.np/issue/43/262-265.pdf
  30. Simkhada P, van Teijlingen E, Hundley V. (2013) Writing an academic paper for publication, Health Renaissance 11(1):1-5. www.healthrenaissance.org.np/uploads/Pp_1_5_Guest_Editorial.pdf
  31. van Teijlingen, E., Ireland, J., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., Sathian, B. (2014) Finding the right title for your article: Advice for academic authors, Nepal J Epidemiol 4(1): 344-347.
  32. van Teijlingen E., Hundley, V., Bick, D. (2014) Who should be an author on your academic paper? Midwifery 30: 385-386.
  33. Hall, J., Hundley, V., van Teijlingen, E. (2015) The journal editor: friend or foe? Women & Birth 28(2): e26-e29.
  34. Sathian, B., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Roy, B, Banerjee, I. (2016) Grant writing for innovative medical research: Time to rethink. Med Sci 4(3):332-33.
  35. Pradhan, AK, van Teijlingen, ER. (2017) Predatory publishing: a great concern for authors, Med Sci 5(4): 43.
  36. van Teijlingen, E, Hundley, V. (2002) Getting your paper to the right journal: a case study of an academic paper, J Advanced Nurs 37(6): 506-11.
  37. Pitchforth, E, Porter M, Teijlingen van E, Keenan Forrest, K. (2005) Writing up & presenting qualitative research in family planning & reproductive health care, J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 31(2): 132-135.
  38. van Teijlingen, E (2004), Why I can’t get any academic writing done, Medical Sociol News 30(3): 62-63. britsoc.co.uk/media/26334/MSN_Nov_2004.pdf

Funding Development Briefing 08/02/23 Spotlight on: BA/Leverhulme Small Research Grants

Funding opportunities

What are Funding Development Briefings?

Each session will cover the latest major funding opportunities, followed by a brief Q&A session. Sessions will also include a spotlight on a particular funding opportunity of strategic importance to BU. Sessions will be on Wednesdays, from 12 pm for half-an-hour. The same link can be used each week to join here.
Next Weds 08 February 12:00-12:30, we will cover the BA/Leverhulme Small Research Grants

50th PhD viva as external

international, PG research, Publishing, student research, writing

Late last week I had the pleasure of conducting my 50th Ph.D. viva as an external examiner.  The first Ph.D. viva as external examiner was in 2004 at the University of Durham.  Over the years most have been at universities in the UK, but I have also had the pleasure of conducting viva in Ireland, the Netherlands, Nepal, Australia, Belgium, Finland, Denmark and New Zealand.  Technically three of these were not a traditional Ph.D. viva, as it included one Doctorate in Professional Practice (at The Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen), a D. Phil. at the University of Oxford and acting as pre-examiner for a Ph.D. at a university on Finland.  In addition I have also acted six times as an internal examiner at the University of Aberdeen (n=3) and Bournemouth University (n=3).  Over the years some of the experiences related to examining and supervision Ph.D. theses have resulted in papers and book chapters [1-5].

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health

 

References:

  1. van Teijlingen E (2007) PhD theses: the pros and cons (letter), Times Higher Education Suppl. Issue 1808 (August 24th): 15.
  2. Regmi, P., Poobalan, A., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2021) PhD supervision in Public Health, Health Prospect: Journal of Public Health 20(1):1-4.
  3. Wasti, S.P. Regmi, P.R., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V. (2022) Writing a PhD Proposal, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 176-183.
  4. Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Converting your Master’s or Doctoral Thesis into an Academic Paper for Publication, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 184-189.
  5. van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, B., Regmi, P., Simkhada, P., Hundley, V., Poudel, K.C. (2022) Reflections on variations in PhD viva regulations: “And the options are….”, Journal of Education & Research 12(2): 61-74.

New sociology paper led by Dr. Orlanda Harvey

PG research, Publishing, student research, Women's Academic Network, writing

Congratulations to Dr. Orlanda Harvey and Dr. Margarete Parrish in the Department of Social Sciences & Social Work on the publication of our article “Using a Range of Communication Tools to Interview a Hard-to-Reach Population” in Sociological Research Online [1].  The paper highlights that online communication tools are increasingly being used by researchers; hence it is timely to reflect on the differences when using a broad range of data collection methods. Using a case study with a potentially hard-to-reach substance-using population who are often distrustful of researchers, this article explores the use of a variety of different platforms for interviews. It highlights both the advantages and disadvantages of each method. Face-to-face interviews and online videos offer more opportunity to build rapport, but lack anonymity. Live Webchat and audio-only interviews offer a high level of anonymity, but both may incur a loss of non-verbal communication, and in the Webchat a potential loss of personal narrative. This article is intended for sociologists who wish to broaden their methods for conducting research interviews.

This methods article was developed based on the recruitment issues faced during Orlanda’s PhD research from which she has published several previous papers [2-6].

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

References:

  1. Harvey, O., van Teijlingen, E., Parrish, M. (2023)  Using a Range of Communication Tools to Interview a Hard-to-Reach Population. Sociological Research Online [online first]
  2. Harvey, O., Keen, S., Parrish, M., van Teijlingen, E. (2019) Support for people who use Anabolic Androgenic Steroids: A Systematic Literature Review into what they want and what they access. BMC Public Health 19: 1024
  3. Harvey, O., Parrish, M., van Teijlingen, E., Trenoweth, S. (2020) Support for non-prescribed Anabolic Androgenic Steroids users: A qualitative exploration of their needs Drugs: Education, Prevention & Policy 27:5, 377-386. doi 10.1080/09687637.2019.1705763
  4.  Harvey, O., Parrish, M., van Teijlingen, E, Trenoweth, S. (2022) Libido as a reason to use non-prescribed Anabolic Androgenic Steroids, Drugs: Education, Prevention & Policy 29(3):276-288.
  5. Harvey, O., van Teijlingen, E., Parrish, M. (2022) Mixed-methods research on androgen abuse – a review, Current Opinion in Endocrinology & Diabetes 29(6):586-593.
  6. Harvey, O., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) The case for ‘anabolics’ coaches: selflessness versus self-interest? Performance Enhancement & Health 10(3) August, 100230

The PhD viva and then….

BU research, Centre for Excellence in Learning, Featured academics, international, PG research, Postgraduate Research, Publishing, student research, Women's Academic Network, writing

Today the Journal of Education and Research published online our paper ‘Reflections on Variations in PhD Viva Regulations: “And the Options Are …”’. [1]   The paper outlines that examining PhD research in the form of a doctoral thesis is specialist work, which is why few people know the potential variations. This paper highlights the different options that are available for PhD examiners. There are four general options: (1) pass, (2) rewrite and resubmit; (3) lower degree, with or without resubmission; and (4) fail the PhD. However, from our experience, of both being examined for our own PhDs and examining others at a range of different universities, we have noted a considerable variety in detail within these common options. This paper outlines a variety of outcomes of a PhD examination, followed by four short case studies, each reflecting on a particular aspect /differences we experienced as examinees or as examiners. This paper further aims to alert PhD candidates and examiners to study the examination rules set by the awarding university, as the details of the PhD examination outcome, and hence the options available to both examiners and the students may differ more than one might expect.

This publication adds to our earlier work on the roles of PhD supervisors providing in-depth discipline-specific Public Health knowledge and technical (e.g., methodological) support to the students, encouraging them towards publications or conference presentations, offering pastoral support for student wellbeing, and finally preparing them to defend their thesis by conducting a mock viva. Our earlier paper focused on the responsibilities, opportunities, and sometimes the challenging nature of being a PhD supervisor in the field of Public Health in Nepal. [2]

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

References:

  1. van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, B., Regmi, P. ., Simkhada , P. ., Hundley, V. ., Poudel, K. C. (2022). Reflections on Variations in PhD Viva Regulations: “And the Options Are …”. Journal of Education and Research, 12(2), 61-74. https://doi.org/10.51474/jer.v12i2.624
  2. Regmi, P., Poobalan, A., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2021). PhD supervision in public health. Health Prospect, 20(1), 1-4.

It is all about experience

BU research, Delicious links, Featured academics, international, Knowledge Exchange, PG research, Publishing, research methods, student research, Uncategorized, Women's Academic Network, writing

This week we published a paper on the experience of conducting fieldwork in the public health field in the Journal of Health Promotion. [1] Fieldwork is usually a crucial part of PhD research, not only in the health field. However, few researchers write about this, often challenging, process. This paper highlights various occasions where fieldwork in the area of public health, health promotion or community health was more difficult than expected or did not go as planned. Our reflections on working in the field are aimed at less experienced researchers to support them in their research development. Moreover, this paper is also calling upon health researchers to share more details about the process of doing fieldwork and its trials and tribulations. Our key advice is to be inquisitive and open-minded around fieldwork, followed by: be prepared for your fieldwork, conduct a risk assessment of what might go wrong, and consider your resources and options to overcome such trials and tribulations. Fieldwork can be unpredictable.  We believe it is important to share practical lessons from the field which helps other to better understand these tribulations, and learn from them. Finally, sharing such information may guide new researchers and help them identify strategies that can address those issues and challenges in their future studies.

Dr. Preeti Mahato (at Royal Holloway, University of London), Dr Bibha Simkhada and Prof. Padam Simkhada (both based at the University of Huddersfield) are all BU Visiting Faculty.  Moreover, I have had the pleasure of acting as PhD supervisor for five of my co-authors.  I have included in this blog what is probably my favourite fieldwork photo taken a decade ago by former BU PhD student Dr. Sheetal Sharma.

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH (Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health)

 

References:

  1. Mahato, P., Tamang, P., Simkhada, B., Wasti, S. P., Devkota, B., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E.R. (2022) Reflections on health promotion fieldwork in Nepal: Trials and tribulations. Journal of Health Promotion 10(1): 5–12. https://doi.org/10.3126/jhp.v10i1.50978

New BU Social Work publication

BU research, Featured academics, international, Publishing, Research news, Uncategorized, writing

Yesterday the European Journal of Social Work published a new article co-authored by Prof. Jonathan Parker in the Department of Social Sciences & Social Work.  The paper ‘Alice Salomon: critical social work pioneer’ examines the theory and practice of early German social work researcher, activist, author and educator, Alice Salomon (1872–1948).  Salomon’s work is characterised by her orientation on social justice, her internationalism, her concern with the structural inequalities that shape clients’ lives, her sensitivity to oppression in society, and her commitment to feminist social work.

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

Reference:

  1. Kuhlmann, C., Frampton, M., Parker, J. (2022) Alice Salomon: critical social work pioneer, European Journal of Social Work, [online first]  DOI:
    10.1080/13691457.2022.2161484