Why this, why now, why me

When the reviewers say “it’s unclear which is the relevance this study may have"...😖

When I first started doing proper research, everybody in the lab I worked in wanted to cure cancer. At least, that’s what all their papers said… Why?

  • Set the scene

Cancer is one of the main causes of death worldwide, accounting for nearly 10 million deaths in 2020, or nearly one in six deaths (WHO). 

👆 This is what is called setting the scene.

A claim comprised by one or two sentences, often backed up by one or more citations, that highlights the relevance and timeliness of the research. 🕕

It should be within the 1st paragraph of your introduction, and accurately reflect what the paper is about.

Here are some examples of this I wrote myself:

Most of us at least know someone that died, survived, or is still struggling with cancer, so curing cancer would make a massive difference in everybody’s lives.

But not all research is obviously relevant.


  • Background and research gap

In the broad field of study that you research, the contribution you can make with the findings in your study will add to the mounting evidence.

Science is iterative. It builds on what was discovered before. It is important to place your study in the context of what has already been done, to identify what is still missing. 👀

If the 1st paragraph described the field of research, the 2nd paragraph tells the specific story of what is known, and what remains to be discovered.

 

  •  Objectives

This is like prompting for ChatGPT. 😊 

At this point, your readers should be hooked and ready to immerse themselves in the story you are about to tell them.💡So, don’t forget to introduce the study you'll be describing.💡

Adverbs and linking words are your best friends. You will describe how you conducted your research in the next section. So, start your 3rd paragraph with an expression such as:

  • Here we show…

  • Therefore, our main goal was…

  • We tested the hypothesis that…

  • Using…, we assessed whether… 

Yes, even reviewers are human, and presenting an engaging story in an otherwise technical and matter-of-fact piece of literature will help you get them on board with what you're trying to say. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Leave a comment!

London Book Fair 2024: challenges for publishers

Image
I went to London with a purpose. It’s always good to meet collaborators and friends, but I had other goals with my visit. You see, it’s never good when the decisions that impact us are arrived at without our input. I wanted to bring awareness of my new peer review standards project to those in the publishing industry that can benefit from them. I'm comfortable researching and reviewing, even editing and managing the peer review process, but hearing editors and publishers speak of the big picture issue was an eye-opener. Change is ever present The publishing industry fancies itself as having evolved to explore the heritage and lived experience of minorities, by more frequently placing a spotlight on hidden and undervalued communities. Jonathan Karp, who spoke on the current model of employee ownership that underpins his role as CEO at Simon & Schuster , perfectly exemplified this—with profits now being reinvested in the company, there’s a new collaborative
Read more

How to spot fake reviewers: a beginner's guide

Image
For those unfamiliar with or new to academic publishing, peer review manipulation is hard to spot. This is mainly because most peer review reports are still confidential documents that stay buried deep in academic journal's editorial offices. As long as this continues to be the default, recognising good and bad peer reviews is difficult enough... now we have to worry about fake peer review as well?! 😒 Well, yes. Yes, we do. The peer review process in academic publishing is unlike any other. The style and content of a manuscript are criticized, as are the thought processes that birthed it. Everything from word choice to significance of the research focus is under scrutiny. In traditional peer review formats, reviewers recommend that manuscripts be accepted or rejected. This much power may make some less scrupulous people guiddy... or yearning to rig the system. The refereeing work that is supposed to be one of the garantors of research integrity is itself highly susceptible to ma
Read more

London Book Fair 2024: OA and AI

Image
In a survey on the trends of academic publishing conducted in 2023, reflecting on the need to reformulate the current business model was front of mind. The need to optimize operational efficiencies may stem from the increased adoption of open access (OA) policies. For those not in the know, OA is a practice that enables research outputs to be distributed online, free of access charges or other barriers, including the ability for copy or reuse, by applying an open license for copyright. The mandates  advocated by the Holdren Memo in the US, the Nelson Memo in the UK, and Plan S for the EU consolidated the view that unrestricted access to research publications is part of an integral right for transparency—we want to view the outcomes of taxpayer-funded research. However, many publishers follow a gold OA model and charge an article processing charge (APC), which is typically paid through institutional or grant funding. This means that readers don't pay, because t
Read more