期刊评论和修订:来自早期职业小组讨论的建议

Q3 Engineering
C. Paul, Dossick Carrie, H. Miriam, Hartmann Timo, J. Amy, M. Ashwin, Vedran Vedran
{"title":"期刊评论和修订:来自早期职业小组讨论的建议","authors":"C. Paul, Dossick Carrie, H. Miriam, Hartmann Timo, J. Amy, M. Ashwin, Vedran Vedran","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2020.00101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Peer review is a cornerstone of high-quality research. While attending PhD programmes, we mostly interact with advisors, however the academic quality of our work is ultimately judged by a broader range of academic peers. For early career researchers, transitioning into independent thought-leaders requires increasing exposure with our community of peers, and inevitably engaging with review practices - both as authors and\nreviewers. Whilst many PhD programmes around the world offer training on paper and grant reviews, journal paper reviews remain somewhat vague to many researchers at all levels who haven’t had extensive exposure to advisors, editors, and peers who share their understanding of expectations and best practices. This article provides a discussion of the review and revision process for journal articles, including a check-list for each section.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Journal Reviews and Revisions: Advice from an Early Career Panel Discussion\",\"authors\":\"C. Paul, Dossick Carrie, H. Miriam, Hartmann Timo, J. Amy, M. Ashwin, Vedran Vedran\",\"doi\":\"10.25219/epoj.2020.00101\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Peer review is a cornerstone of high-quality research. While attending PhD programmes, we mostly interact with advisors, however the academic quality of our work is ultimately judged by a broader range of academic peers. For early career researchers, transitioning into independent thought-leaders requires increasing exposure with our community of peers, and inevitably engaging with review practices - both as authors and\\nreviewers. Whilst many PhD programmes around the world offer training on paper and grant reviews, journal paper reviews remain somewhat vague to many researchers at all levels who haven’t had extensive exposure to advisors, editors, and peers who share their understanding of expectations and best practices. This article provides a discussion of the review and revision process for journal articles, including a check-list for each section.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Engineering Project Organization Journal\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Engineering Project Organization Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2020.00101\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Engineering\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2020.00101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

同行评议是高质量研究的基石。在攻读博士课程时,我们主要与导师互动,但我们工作的学术质量最终由更广泛的学术同行来评判。对于早期的职业研究人员来说,过渡到独立的思想领袖需要增加与同行社区的接触,并且不可避免地参与评审实践——无论是作为作者还是作为观众。虽然世界各地的许多博士课程都提供论文和拨款审查方面的培训,但期刊论文审查对许多各级研究人员来说仍然有些模糊,因为他们没有广泛接触过顾问、编辑和同行,他们分享了他们对期望和最佳实践的理解。本文提供了对期刊文章的审查和修订过程的讨论,包括每个部分的检查表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Journal Reviews and Revisions: Advice from an Early Career Panel Discussion
Peer review is a cornerstone of high-quality research. While attending PhD programmes, we mostly interact with advisors, however the academic quality of our work is ultimately judged by a broader range of academic peers. For early career researchers, transitioning into independent thought-leaders requires increasing exposure with our community of peers, and inevitably engaging with review practices - both as authors and reviewers. Whilst many PhD programmes around the world offer training on paper and grant reviews, journal paper reviews remain somewhat vague to many researchers at all levels who haven’t had extensive exposure to advisors, editors, and peers who share their understanding of expectations and best practices. This article provides a discussion of the review and revision process for journal articles, including a check-list for each section.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Engineering Project Organization Journal
Engineering Project Organization Journal Engineering-Engineering (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信