SlideShare uma empresa Scribd logo
1 de 36
Baixar para ler offline
The Peer Review
Process
The Academic Peer Review Process
Peer Review in This Module
Carrying Out a Detailed Peer Review
The Academic Peer Review Process
Paper is submitted
to conference
Paper
Assigned to AC
Sent to
Reviewers
Reviews
Created
Scores GivenNormally 3/4
AC Summary
Created
Paper Sent
back to Author
Rebuttal
Period
Rebuttal
Submitted
2-Weeks
Based on
Reviews
Re-Scoring Accept/Reject
Rebuttal Sent
to Reviewers
Can go up OR
down
Submitted Accepted % Accepted
2014 2043 465 23%
2015 2120 486 23%
2016 2435 565 23%
2017 2400 600 25%
• Very detailed process with lots of people involved at
each stage
• Relies on the expertise within a group in order to judge
whether a contribution is valid
• Lets reviewers see the level that others are performing at
and adjust their own effort levels
• The significance of the paper's contribution to HCI and
the benefit that others can gain from the contribution:
why do the contribution and benefits matter?
Aspects to Cover
• The validity of the work presented: how confidently can
researchers and practitioners use the results?
Aspects to Cover
• Replicability: how easily would a researcher be able to
carry out this work again based on the methodology
discussion
Aspects to Cover
• Presentation clarity;
Aspects to Cover
• Relevant previous work: is prior work adequately
reviewed?
Aspects to Cover
******* This paper is as good as any top paper in a conference/journal
****** This paper is as good as any standard paper in a conference/journal
*****
This paper may appear in a conference/journal but I wouldn't argue
for it to be there
**** I don't like this paper but wouldn't object to others liking it
*** I would rather not see this paper in a conference/journal
** I would argue for this paper to not be in a conference/journal
*
I would strongly argue for this paper to not be in a conference/
journal
******* This paper is as good as any top paper in a conference/journal
****** This paper is as good as any standard paper in a conference/journal
*****
This paper may appear in a conference/journal but I wouldn't argue
for it to be there
**** I don't like this paper but wouldn't object to others liking it
*** I would rather not see this paper in a conference/journal
** I would argue for this paper to not be in a conference/journal
*
I would strongly argue for this paper to not be in a conference/
journal
Average Cut
Off Point
Peer Review in This Module
Paper is submitted
to conference
Paper
Assigned to AC
Sent to
Reviewers
Reviews
Created
AC Summary
Created
Paper Sent
back to Author
Rebuttal
Period
Rebuttal
Submitted
Re-Scoring Accept/Reject
Rebuttal Sent
to Reviewers
Paper Given to
Mike
Sent to Peers/
Classmates
Mike Makes
Comments
Grade Awarded
• Gives you an opportunity to critically evaluate your peers
work and to comment on strengths and weaknesses
• Allows you to understand the level of quality that is
present within the class
• Presents you with an opportunity to learn from others
work
Carrying Out a Detailed Peer Review
The First Read Through
The first read-through is a skim-read. It will help you form an initial
impression of the paper and get a sense of whether your eventual
recommendation will be to accept or reject the paper.
1. What is the main question addressed by the research? Is it relevant and interesting?
2. How original is the topic? What does it add to the subject area compared with other
published material?
3. Is the paper well written? Is the text clear and easy to read?
4. Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented? Do they
address the main question posed?
5. If the author is disagreeing significantly with the current academic consensus, do they have
a substantial case? If not, what would be required to make their case credible?
6. If the paper includes tables or figures, what do they add to the paper? Do they aid
understanding or are they superfluous?
Spotting Major Flaws
While you should read the whole paper, making the right choice of
what to read first can save time by flagging major problems early
on.
1. Drawing a conclusion that is contradicted by the author's
own statistical or qualitative evidence
2. The use of a discredited method
3. Ignoring a process that is known to have a strong influence
on the area under study
Spotting Major Flaws
If methodology is less of an issue, it's often a good idea to look at
the data tables, figures or images first. Especially in science
research, it's all about the information gathered.
1. Insufficient data
2. Statistically non-significant variations
3. Unclear data tables
4. Contradictory data that either are not self-consistent or
disagree with the conclusions
5. Confirmatory data that adds little, if anything, to current
understanding - unless strong arguments for such
repetition are made
Concluding the First Reading
After the initial read and using your notes, including those of any
major flaws you found, draft the first two paragraphs of your
review - the first summarising the research question addressed
and the second the contribution of the work.
Concluding the First Reading
This should state the main question addressed by the research and
summarise the goals, approaches, and conclusions of the paper. It
should:
First Paragraph
1. Help the editor properly contextualise the research and add
weight to your judgement
2. Show the author what key messages are conveyed to the
reader, so they can be sure they are achieving what they set
out to do
3. Focus on successful aspects of the paper so the author gets
a sense of what they've done well
Concluding the First Reading
This should provide a conceptual overview of the contribution of
the research. So consider:
Second Paragraph
1. Is the paper's premise interesting and important?
2. Are the methods used appropriate?
3. Do the data support the conclusions?
Second Read Through
The Introduction and Literature Review
A well-written introduction:
1. Sets out the argument
2. Summarises recent research related to the topic
3. Highlights gaps in current understanding or conflicts in
current knowledge
4. Establishes the originality of the research aims by
demonstrating the need for investigations in the topic area
5. Gives a clear idea of the target readership, why the research
was carried out and the novelty and topicality of the
manuscript
Second Read Through
Methodology
Academic research should be replicable, repeatable and robust -
and follow best practice.
Methodology should give enough detail so that other researchers
are able to carry out the same research. For example, equipment
used or sampling methods should all be described in detail so that
others could follow the same steps. Where methods are not
detailed enough, it's usual to ask for the methods section to be
revised.
Second Read Through
Results and Discussion
This section should tell a coherent story - What happened? What
was discovered or confirmed?
Discussion should always, at some point, gather all the
information together into a single whole. Authors should describe
and discuss the overall story formed. If there are gaps or
inconsistencies in the story, they should address these and suggest
ways future research might confirm the findings or take the
research forward.
Second Read Through
Results and Discussion
Certain patterns of good reporting need to be followed by the
author:
1. They should start by describing in simple terms what the data show
2. Once described, they should evaluate the trends observed and explain
the significance of the results to wider understanding. This can only be
done by referencing published research
3. The outcome should be a critical analysis of the data collected
Second Read Through
Conclusions
This section is usually no more than a few paragraphs and may be
presented as part of the results and discussion, or in a separate
section.
The conclusions should reflect upon the aims - whether they were
achieved or not - and, just like the aims, should not be surprising.
If the conclusions are not evidence-based, it's appropriate to ask
for them to be re-written.
Second Read Through
References
You will need to check referencing for accuracy, adequacy and
balance.
• Accuracy - Where a cited article is central to the author's
argument, you should check the accuracy and format of the
reference - and bear in mind different subject areas may use
citations differently.
• Adequacy - Are important parts of the argument poorly
supported? Are there published studies that show similar or
dissimilar trends that should be discussed?
• Balance - Check for a list that is helpful for the reader,
doesn’t rely overly on self-citations.
Structuring Your Report
Structure your evaluation of the paper into three sections:
• Summary
• Major Issues
• Minor Issues
Structuring Your Report
Summary
• Give positive feedback first. Authors are more likely to read your
review if you do so. But don't overdo it if you will be recommending
rejection
• Briefly summarise what the paper is about and what the findings are
• Try to put the findings of the paper into the context of the existing
literature and current knowledge
• Indicate the significance of the work and if it is novel or mainly
confirmatory
• Indicate the work's strengths, its quality and completeness
• State any major flaws or weaknesses and note any special
considerations. For example, if previously held theories are being
overlooked
Structuring Your Report
Major Flaws
• Are there any major flaws? State what they are and what the severity
of their impact is on the paper
• Has similar work already been published without the authors
acknowledging this?
• Are the authors presenting findings that challenge current thinking?
Is the evidence they present strong enough to prove their case?
Have they cited all the relevant work that would contradict their
thinking and addressed it appropriately?
• Are there any major presentational problems? Are figures & tables,
language and manuscript structure all clear enough for you to
accurately assess the work?
• Are there any ethical issues? If you are unsure it may be better to
disclose these in the confidential comments section
Structuring Your Report
Minor Flaws
• Are there places where meaning is ambiguous? How can this be
corrected?
• Are the correct references cited? If not, which should be cited
instead/also? Are citations excessive, limited, or biased?
• Are there any factual, numerical or unit errors? If so, what are they?
• Are all tables and figures appropriate, sufficient, and correctly
labelled? If not, say which are not
The Academic Peer Review Process
Peer Review in This Module
Carrying Out a Detailed Peer Review

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados (20)

Session 2 Literature Review
Session 2 Literature ReviewSession 2 Literature Review
Session 2 Literature Review
 
Scientific writing
Scientific writing Scientific writing
Scientific writing
 
Referencing and Citation
Referencing and CitationReferencing and Citation
Referencing and Citation
 
The peer review process
The peer review processThe peer review process
The peer review process
 
Abstract writing
Abstract writingAbstract writing
Abstract writing
 
Publishing Scientific Papers
Publishing Scientific Papers Publishing Scientific Papers
Publishing Scientific Papers
 
Analyzing and evaluating arguments
Analyzing and evaluating argumentsAnalyzing and evaluating arguments
Analyzing and evaluating arguments
 
BOOK REVIEW.pptx
BOOK REVIEW.pptxBOOK REVIEW.pptx
BOOK REVIEW.pptx
 
Lecture 14 peer review
Lecture 14  peer reviewLecture 14  peer review
Lecture 14 peer review
 
Developing A Research Question
Developing A Research QuestionDeveloping A Research Question
Developing A Research Question
 
Writing a scientific research paper
Writing a scientific research paperWriting a scientific research paper
Writing a scientific research paper
 
Claims
ClaimsClaims
Claims
 
Writing Research Paper
Writing Research PaperWriting Research Paper
Writing Research Paper
 
WRITING A REVIEW PAPER.pptx
WRITING  A REVIEW PAPER.pptxWRITING  A REVIEW PAPER.pptx
WRITING A REVIEW PAPER.pptx
 
Format of The Research Paper
Format of The Research PaperFormat of The Research Paper
Format of The Research Paper
 
How to write a great research paper
How to write a great research paperHow to write a great research paper
How to write a great research paper
 
Referencing citation
Referencing  citationReferencing  citation
Referencing citation
 
Critical reading
Critical readingCritical reading
Critical reading
 
Evaluating Sources
Evaluating SourcesEvaluating Sources
Evaluating Sources
 
Scientific Writing Series: Title, Abstract, and Keywords
Scientific Writing Series: Title, Abstract, and KeywordsScientific Writing Series: Title, Abstract, and Keywords
Scientific Writing Series: Title, Abstract, and Keywords
 

Semelhante a The Peer Review Process

Mba dissertation
Mba dissertationMba dissertation
Mba dissertationMANOJ1121
 
11. Professional and Academic Writing.pptx
11. Professional and Academic Writing.pptx11. Professional and Academic Writing.pptx
11. Professional and Academic Writing.pptxJoy Marie Domingo
 
Ppt on Report Writing
Ppt on  Report WritingPpt on  Report Writing
Ppt on Report WritingShruti Mishra
 
Introduction for scintfic writing
Introduction for scintfic writingIntroduction for scintfic writing
Introduction for scintfic writingNahid Sherbini
 
GUIDE FOR WRITING AND PUBLISHING OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PAPER
GUIDE FOR WRITING AND PUBLISHING OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PAPERGUIDE FOR WRITING AND PUBLISHING OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PAPER
GUIDE FOR WRITING AND PUBLISHING OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PAPERSmiqgen
 
How to write a scientific paper 27.11.16
How to write a scientific paper 27.11.16How to write a scientific paper 27.11.16
How to write a scientific paper 27.11.16Ghizal Fatima
 
Research problem, indexing, scopus, web and publication strategies
Research problem, indexing, scopus, web and publication strategiesResearch problem, indexing, scopus, web and publication strategies
Research problem, indexing, scopus, web and publication strategiesDr Kirpa Ram Jangra
 
Purc111 (week 13)
Purc111 (week 13)Purc111 (week 13)
Purc111 (week 13)AnnTalavera
 
Publishing research papers
Publishing research papersPublishing research papers
Publishing research papersVikram Singh
 
Writing a research proposal: Key chapters Explanation
Writing a research proposal: Key chapters ExplanationWriting a research proposal: Key chapters Explanation
Writing a research proposal: Key chapters ExplanationMohammad Ibrahim
 
Nzcom writing for the journal.pptx with sound
Nzcom writing for the journal.pptx with soundNzcom writing for the journal.pptx with sound
Nzcom writing for the journal.pptx with soundNZCollegeofMidwives
 
Practical-Research-Gr.5.pptx............
Practical-Research-Gr.5.pptx............Practical-Research-Gr.5.pptx............
Practical-Research-Gr.5.pptx............AbigailPilapil2
 
Thesis and dissertation
Thesis and dissertationThesis and dissertation
Thesis and dissertationjamshed1122
 
Guidelines on writing a research paper
Guidelines on writing a research paperGuidelines on writing a research paper
Guidelines on writing a research paperMuizz Anibire
 
Types of article in a journal
Types of article in a journalTypes of article in a journal
Types of article in a journalRia Ganguly
 
Mba dissertation
Mba dissertationMba dissertation
Mba dissertationMANOJ1121
 
1588493350-7-how-to-write-proposal-for-a-research-paper.pptx
1588493350-7-how-to-write-proposal-for-a-research-paper.pptx1588493350-7-how-to-write-proposal-for-a-research-paper.pptx
1588493350-7-how-to-write-proposal-for-a-research-paper.pptxssuser4f4440
 

Semelhante a The Peer Review Process (20)

Reviewing a journal article - Professor Jenny Rowley
Reviewing a journal article - Professor Jenny RowleyReviewing a journal article - Professor Jenny Rowley
Reviewing a journal article - Professor Jenny Rowley
 
Mba dissertation
Mba dissertationMba dissertation
Mba dissertation
 
11. Professional and Academic Writing.pptx
11. Professional and Academic Writing.pptx11. Professional and Academic Writing.pptx
11. Professional and Academic Writing.pptx
 
Ppt on Report Writing
Ppt on  Report WritingPpt on  Report Writing
Ppt on Report Writing
 
Introduction for scintfic writing
Introduction for scintfic writingIntroduction for scintfic writing
Introduction for scintfic writing
 
GUIDE FOR WRITING AND PUBLISHING OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PAPER
GUIDE FOR WRITING AND PUBLISHING OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PAPERGUIDE FOR WRITING AND PUBLISHING OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PAPER
GUIDE FOR WRITING AND PUBLISHING OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PAPER
 
How to write a scientific paper 27.11.16
How to write a scientific paper 27.11.16How to write a scientific paper 27.11.16
How to write a scientific paper 27.11.16
 
Research problem, indexing, scopus, web and publication strategies
Research problem, indexing, scopus, web and publication strategiesResearch problem, indexing, scopus, web and publication strategies
Research problem, indexing, scopus, web and publication strategies
 
Purc111 (week 13)
Purc111 (week 13)Purc111 (week 13)
Purc111 (week 13)
 
Publishing research papers
Publishing research papersPublishing research papers
Publishing research papers
 
Writing a research proposal: Key chapters Explanation
Writing a research proposal: Key chapters ExplanationWriting a research proposal: Key chapters Explanation
Writing a research proposal: Key chapters Explanation
 
Nzcom writing for the journal.pptx with sound
Nzcom writing for the journal.pptx with soundNzcom writing for the journal.pptx with sound
Nzcom writing for the journal.pptx with sound
 
Thesis presentation
Thesis presentationThesis presentation
Thesis presentation
 
Practical-Research-Gr.5.pptx............
Practical-Research-Gr.5.pptx............Practical-Research-Gr.5.pptx............
Practical-Research-Gr.5.pptx............
 
Thesis and dissertation
Thesis and dissertationThesis and dissertation
Thesis and dissertation
 
Guidelines on writing a research paper
Guidelines on writing a research paperGuidelines on writing a research paper
Guidelines on writing a research paper
 
Types of article in a journal
Types of article in a journalTypes of article in a journal
Types of article in a journal
 
Mba dissertation
Mba dissertationMba dissertation
Mba dissertation
 
Thesis Report Review and Analysis
Thesis Report Review and AnalysisThesis Report Review and Analysis
Thesis Report Review and Analysis
 
1588493350-7-how-to-write-proposal-for-a-research-paper.pptx
1588493350-7-how-to-write-proposal-for-a-research-paper.pptx1588493350-7-how-to-write-proposal-for-a-research-paper.pptx
1588493350-7-how-to-write-proposal-for-a-research-paper.pptx
 

Mais de Mike Crabb

Hard to Reach Users in Easy to Reach Places
Hard to Reach Users in Easy to Reach PlacesHard to Reach Users in Easy to Reach Places
Hard to Reach Users in Easy to Reach PlacesMike Crabb
 
Accessible and Assistive Interfaces
Accessible and Assistive InterfacesAccessible and Assistive Interfaces
Accessible and Assistive InterfacesMike Crabb
 
Accessible Everyone
Accessible EveryoneAccessible Everyone
Accessible EveryoneMike Crabb
 
Managing Quality In Qualitative Research
Managing Quality In Qualitative ResearchManaging Quality In Qualitative Research
Managing Quality In Qualitative ResearchMike Crabb
 
Analysing Qualitative Data
Analysing Qualitative DataAnalysing Qualitative Data
Analysing Qualitative DataMike Crabb
 
Conversation Discourse and Document Analysis
Conversation Discourse and Document AnalysisConversation Discourse and Document Analysis
Conversation Discourse and Document AnalysisMike Crabb
 
Ethnographic and Observational Research
Ethnographic and Observational ResearchEthnographic and Observational Research
Ethnographic and Observational ResearchMike Crabb
 
Doing Focus Groups
Doing Focus GroupsDoing Focus Groups
Doing Focus GroupsMike Crabb
 
Doing Interviews
Doing InterviewsDoing Interviews
Doing InterviewsMike Crabb
 
Designing Qualitative Research
Designing Qualitative ResearchDesigning Qualitative Research
Designing Qualitative ResearchMike Crabb
 
Introduction to Accessible Design
Introduction to Accessible DesignIntroduction to Accessible Design
Introduction to Accessible DesignMike Crabb
 
Accessible Everyone
Accessible EveryoneAccessible Everyone
Accessible EveryoneMike Crabb
 
Texture and Glyph Design
Texture and Glyph DesignTexture and Glyph Design
Texture and Glyph DesignMike Crabb
 
Pattern Perception and Map Design
Pattern Perception and Map DesignPattern Perception and Map Design
Pattern Perception and Map DesignMike Crabb
 
Dealing with Enterprise Level Data
Dealing with Enterprise Level DataDealing with Enterprise Level Data
Dealing with Enterprise Level DataMike Crabb
 
Using Cloud in an Enterprise Environment
Using Cloud in an Enterprise EnvironmentUsing Cloud in an Enterprise Environment
Using Cloud in an Enterprise EnvironmentMike Crabb
 
Teaching Cloud to the Programmers of Tomorrow
Teaching Cloud to the Programmers of TomorrowTeaching Cloud to the Programmers of Tomorrow
Teaching Cloud to the Programmers of TomorrowMike Crabb
 
Sql Injection and XSS
Sql Injection and XSSSql Injection and XSS
Sql Injection and XSSMike Crabb
 
Forms and Databases in PHP
Forms and Databases in PHPForms and Databases in PHP
Forms and Databases in PHPMike Crabb
 
Using mySQL in PHP
Using mySQL in PHPUsing mySQL in PHP
Using mySQL in PHPMike Crabb
 

Mais de Mike Crabb (20)

Hard to Reach Users in Easy to Reach Places
Hard to Reach Users in Easy to Reach PlacesHard to Reach Users in Easy to Reach Places
Hard to Reach Users in Easy to Reach Places
 
Accessible and Assistive Interfaces
Accessible and Assistive InterfacesAccessible and Assistive Interfaces
Accessible and Assistive Interfaces
 
Accessible Everyone
Accessible EveryoneAccessible Everyone
Accessible Everyone
 
Managing Quality In Qualitative Research
Managing Quality In Qualitative ResearchManaging Quality In Qualitative Research
Managing Quality In Qualitative Research
 
Analysing Qualitative Data
Analysing Qualitative DataAnalysing Qualitative Data
Analysing Qualitative Data
 
Conversation Discourse and Document Analysis
Conversation Discourse and Document AnalysisConversation Discourse and Document Analysis
Conversation Discourse and Document Analysis
 
Ethnographic and Observational Research
Ethnographic and Observational ResearchEthnographic and Observational Research
Ethnographic and Observational Research
 
Doing Focus Groups
Doing Focus GroupsDoing Focus Groups
Doing Focus Groups
 
Doing Interviews
Doing InterviewsDoing Interviews
Doing Interviews
 
Designing Qualitative Research
Designing Qualitative ResearchDesigning Qualitative Research
Designing Qualitative Research
 
Introduction to Accessible Design
Introduction to Accessible DesignIntroduction to Accessible Design
Introduction to Accessible Design
 
Accessible Everyone
Accessible EveryoneAccessible Everyone
Accessible Everyone
 
Texture and Glyph Design
Texture and Glyph DesignTexture and Glyph Design
Texture and Glyph Design
 
Pattern Perception and Map Design
Pattern Perception and Map DesignPattern Perception and Map Design
Pattern Perception and Map Design
 
Dealing with Enterprise Level Data
Dealing with Enterprise Level DataDealing with Enterprise Level Data
Dealing with Enterprise Level Data
 
Using Cloud in an Enterprise Environment
Using Cloud in an Enterprise EnvironmentUsing Cloud in an Enterprise Environment
Using Cloud in an Enterprise Environment
 
Teaching Cloud to the Programmers of Tomorrow
Teaching Cloud to the Programmers of TomorrowTeaching Cloud to the Programmers of Tomorrow
Teaching Cloud to the Programmers of Tomorrow
 
Sql Injection and XSS
Sql Injection and XSSSql Injection and XSS
Sql Injection and XSS
 
Forms and Databases in PHP
Forms and Databases in PHPForms and Databases in PHP
Forms and Databases in PHP
 
Using mySQL in PHP
Using mySQL in PHPUsing mySQL in PHP
Using mySQL in PHP
 

Último

Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICEQuality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICESayali Powar
 
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptxPractical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptxKatherine Villaluna
 
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17Celine George
 
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptxM-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptxDr. Santhosh Kumar. N
 
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptx
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptxPractical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptx
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptxKatherine Villaluna
 
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17Celine George
 
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptxEducation and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptxraviapr7
 
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationBenefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationMJDuyan
 
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptx
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptxIn - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptx
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptxAditiChauhan701637
 
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptx
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptxCAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptx
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptxSaurabhParmar42
 
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...CaraSkikne1
 
General views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepGeneral views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepobaje godwin sunday
 
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17Celine George
 
Clinical Pharmacy Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptx
Clinical Pharmacy  Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptxClinical Pharmacy  Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptx
Clinical Pharmacy Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptxraviapr7
 
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17Celine George
 
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdf
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdfDiploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdf
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdfMohonDas
 
The basics of sentences session 10pptx.pptx
The basics of sentences session 10pptx.pptxThe basics of sentences session 10pptx.pptx
The basics of sentences session 10pptx.pptxheathfieldcps1
 
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024UKCGE
 

Último (20)

Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICEQuality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
Quality Assurance_GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE
 
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptxPractical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
Practical Research 1: Lesson 8 Writing the Thesis Statement.pptx
 
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
How to Show Error_Warning Messages in Odoo 17
 
Personal Resilience in Project Management 2 - TV Edit 1a.pdf
Personal Resilience in Project Management 2 - TV Edit 1a.pdfPersonal Resilience in Project Management 2 - TV Edit 1a.pdf
Personal Resilience in Project Management 2 - TV Edit 1a.pdf
 
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptxM-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
M-2- General Reactions of amino acids.pptx
 
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptx
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptxPractical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptx
Practical Research 1 Lesson 9 Scope and delimitation.pptx
 
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
How to Add a many2many Relational Field in Odoo 17
 
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptxEducation and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
 
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive EducationBenefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
Benefits & Challenges of Inclusive Education
 
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptx
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptxIn - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptx
In - Vivo and In - Vitro Correlation.pptx
 
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptx
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptxCAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptx
CAULIFLOWER BREEDING 1 Parmar pptx
 
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...
5 charts on South Africa as a source country for international student recrui...
 
General views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and stepGeneral views of Histopathology and step
General views of Histopathology and step
 
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17
How to Make a Field read-only in Odoo 17
 
Clinical Pharmacy Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptx
Clinical Pharmacy  Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptxClinical Pharmacy  Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptx
Clinical Pharmacy Introduction to Clinical Pharmacy, Concept of clinical pptx
 
Prelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quiz
Prelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quizPrelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quiz
Prelims of Kant get Marx 2.0: a general politics quiz
 
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
How to Add a New Field in Existing Kanban View in Odoo 17
 
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdf
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdfDiploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdf
Diploma in Nursing Admission Test Question Solution 2023.pdf
 
The basics of sentences session 10pptx.pptx
The basics of sentences session 10pptx.pptxThe basics of sentences session 10pptx.pptx
The basics of sentences session 10pptx.pptx
 
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024
UKCGE Parental Leave Discussion March 2024
 

The Peer Review Process

  • 2. The Academic Peer Review Process Peer Review in This Module Carrying Out a Detailed Peer Review
  • 3. The Academic Peer Review Process
  • 4. Paper is submitted to conference Paper Assigned to AC Sent to Reviewers Reviews Created Scores GivenNormally 3/4
  • 5. AC Summary Created Paper Sent back to Author Rebuttal Period Rebuttal Submitted 2-Weeks Based on Reviews
  • 6. Re-Scoring Accept/Reject Rebuttal Sent to Reviewers Can go up OR down
  • 7. Submitted Accepted % Accepted 2014 2043 465 23% 2015 2120 486 23% 2016 2435 565 23% 2017 2400 600 25%
  • 8. • Very detailed process with lots of people involved at each stage • Relies on the expertise within a group in order to judge whether a contribution is valid • Lets reviewers see the level that others are performing at and adjust their own effort levels
  • 9. • The significance of the paper's contribution to HCI and the benefit that others can gain from the contribution: why do the contribution and benefits matter? Aspects to Cover
  • 10. • The validity of the work presented: how confidently can researchers and practitioners use the results? Aspects to Cover
  • 11. • Replicability: how easily would a researcher be able to carry out this work again based on the methodology discussion Aspects to Cover
  • 13. • Relevant previous work: is prior work adequately reviewed? Aspects to Cover
  • 14. ******* This paper is as good as any top paper in a conference/journal ****** This paper is as good as any standard paper in a conference/journal ***** This paper may appear in a conference/journal but I wouldn't argue for it to be there **** I don't like this paper but wouldn't object to others liking it *** I would rather not see this paper in a conference/journal ** I would argue for this paper to not be in a conference/journal * I would strongly argue for this paper to not be in a conference/ journal
  • 15. ******* This paper is as good as any top paper in a conference/journal ****** This paper is as good as any standard paper in a conference/journal ***** This paper may appear in a conference/journal but I wouldn't argue for it to be there **** I don't like this paper but wouldn't object to others liking it *** I would rather not see this paper in a conference/journal ** I would argue for this paper to not be in a conference/journal * I would strongly argue for this paper to not be in a conference/ journal Average Cut Off Point
  • 16. Peer Review in This Module
  • 17. Paper is submitted to conference Paper Assigned to AC Sent to Reviewers Reviews Created AC Summary Created Paper Sent back to Author Rebuttal Period Rebuttal Submitted Re-Scoring Accept/Reject Rebuttal Sent to Reviewers Paper Given to Mike Sent to Peers/ Classmates Mike Makes Comments Grade Awarded
  • 18. • Gives you an opportunity to critically evaluate your peers work and to comment on strengths and weaknesses • Allows you to understand the level of quality that is present within the class • Presents you with an opportunity to learn from others work
  • 19. Carrying Out a Detailed Peer Review
  • 20. The First Read Through The first read-through is a skim-read. It will help you form an initial impression of the paper and get a sense of whether your eventual recommendation will be to accept or reject the paper. 1. What is the main question addressed by the research? Is it relevant and interesting? 2. How original is the topic? What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material? 3. Is the paper well written? Is the text clear and easy to read? 4. Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented? Do they address the main question posed? 5. If the author is disagreeing significantly with the current academic consensus, do they have a substantial case? If not, what would be required to make their case credible? 6. If the paper includes tables or figures, what do they add to the paper? Do they aid understanding or are they superfluous?
  • 21. Spotting Major Flaws While you should read the whole paper, making the right choice of what to read first can save time by flagging major problems early on. 1. Drawing a conclusion that is contradicted by the author's own statistical or qualitative evidence 2. The use of a discredited method 3. Ignoring a process that is known to have a strong influence on the area under study
  • 22. Spotting Major Flaws If methodology is less of an issue, it's often a good idea to look at the data tables, figures or images first. Especially in science research, it's all about the information gathered. 1. Insufficient data 2. Statistically non-significant variations 3. Unclear data tables 4. Contradictory data that either are not self-consistent or disagree with the conclusions 5. Confirmatory data that adds little, if anything, to current understanding - unless strong arguments for such repetition are made
  • 23. Concluding the First Reading After the initial read and using your notes, including those of any major flaws you found, draft the first two paragraphs of your review - the first summarising the research question addressed and the second the contribution of the work.
  • 24. Concluding the First Reading This should state the main question addressed by the research and summarise the goals, approaches, and conclusions of the paper. It should: First Paragraph 1. Help the editor properly contextualise the research and add weight to your judgement 2. Show the author what key messages are conveyed to the reader, so they can be sure they are achieving what they set out to do 3. Focus on successful aspects of the paper so the author gets a sense of what they've done well
  • 25. Concluding the First Reading This should provide a conceptual overview of the contribution of the research. So consider: Second Paragraph 1. Is the paper's premise interesting and important? 2. Are the methods used appropriate? 3. Do the data support the conclusions?
  • 26. Second Read Through The Introduction and Literature Review A well-written introduction: 1. Sets out the argument 2. Summarises recent research related to the topic 3. Highlights gaps in current understanding or conflicts in current knowledge 4. Establishes the originality of the research aims by demonstrating the need for investigations in the topic area 5. Gives a clear idea of the target readership, why the research was carried out and the novelty and topicality of the manuscript
  • 27. Second Read Through Methodology Academic research should be replicable, repeatable and robust - and follow best practice. Methodology should give enough detail so that other researchers are able to carry out the same research. For example, equipment used or sampling methods should all be described in detail so that others could follow the same steps. Where methods are not detailed enough, it's usual to ask for the methods section to be revised.
  • 28. Second Read Through Results and Discussion This section should tell a coherent story - What happened? What was discovered or confirmed? Discussion should always, at some point, gather all the information together into a single whole. Authors should describe and discuss the overall story formed. If there are gaps or inconsistencies in the story, they should address these and suggest ways future research might confirm the findings or take the research forward.
  • 29. Second Read Through Results and Discussion Certain patterns of good reporting need to be followed by the author: 1. They should start by describing in simple terms what the data show 2. Once described, they should evaluate the trends observed and explain the significance of the results to wider understanding. This can only be done by referencing published research 3. The outcome should be a critical analysis of the data collected
  • 30. Second Read Through Conclusions This section is usually no more than a few paragraphs and may be presented as part of the results and discussion, or in a separate section. The conclusions should reflect upon the aims - whether they were achieved or not - and, just like the aims, should not be surprising. If the conclusions are not evidence-based, it's appropriate to ask for them to be re-written.
  • 31. Second Read Through References You will need to check referencing for accuracy, adequacy and balance. • Accuracy - Where a cited article is central to the author's argument, you should check the accuracy and format of the reference - and bear in mind different subject areas may use citations differently. • Adequacy - Are important parts of the argument poorly supported? Are there published studies that show similar or dissimilar trends that should be discussed? • Balance - Check for a list that is helpful for the reader, doesn’t rely overly on self-citations.
  • 32. Structuring Your Report Structure your evaluation of the paper into three sections: • Summary • Major Issues • Minor Issues
  • 33. Structuring Your Report Summary • Give positive feedback first. Authors are more likely to read your review if you do so. But don't overdo it if you will be recommending rejection • Briefly summarise what the paper is about and what the findings are • Try to put the findings of the paper into the context of the existing literature and current knowledge • Indicate the significance of the work and if it is novel or mainly confirmatory • Indicate the work's strengths, its quality and completeness • State any major flaws or weaknesses and note any special considerations. For example, if previously held theories are being overlooked
  • 34. Structuring Your Report Major Flaws • Are there any major flaws? State what they are and what the severity of their impact is on the paper • Has similar work already been published without the authors acknowledging this? • Are the authors presenting findings that challenge current thinking? Is the evidence they present strong enough to prove their case? Have they cited all the relevant work that would contradict their thinking and addressed it appropriately? • Are there any major presentational problems? Are figures & tables, language and manuscript structure all clear enough for you to accurately assess the work? • Are there any ethical issues? If you are unsure it may be better to disclose these in the confidential comments section
  • 35. Structuring Your Report Minor Flaws • Are there places where meaning is ambiguous? How can this be corrected? • Are the correct references cited? If not, which should be cited instead/also? Are citations excessive, limited, or biased? • Are there any factual, numerical or unit errors? If so, what are they? • Are all tables and figures appropriate, sufficient, and correctly labelled? If not, say which are not
  • 36. The Academic Peer Review Process Peer Review in This Module Carrying Out a Detailed Peer Review