If you like the type of content that I post, check out a site that has content like this but so much more.  The site is called “Edge for Scholars” and it is a fabulous resource, written by a wide variety of authors. It is targeted not just to doctoral students (as is my blog here), but to all levels of academic folks.  I just wanted to learn more about preprints, and the first place I looked for reputable opinions was this site.  I love their generosity of advice and the positive vibe!

https://edgeforscholars.org/

Guiding Principles

• Stay up to date on best practices.
• Don’t go it alone.

Why is publication a good thing?

• Publication is a way of sharing knowledge to make the world a better place (improve the public’s health).
• Publication is part of the “oxygen mask” that keeps us employed and keeps our careers going so that we can do our best work.
• Publication meets our obligations to funders.
• Publication meets our commitments to our colleagues/co-authors.

Before submission

1. Have an important question that “fills a gap” (doesn’t recreate the wheel and builds logically from what before).
2. Do good science.
3. Write clearly.

 Submission

4. Be strategic about the journal you submit to
   • What is the mission/topical area/audience of the journal?
   • Consider journals about the exposure, methods, and outcome. Here are some examples in my field of looking at environmental exposures and autism using epidemiology:

Exposure journal – JESEE, EHP, Environmental Research

Methods journal – AJE, Epidemiology, IJE

Outcome journal – Autism Research, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

1. • Ask co-authors for advice.
   • What is the impact factor? But – keep the impact factor in mind as only one part of your consideration.  Sometimes impact factor is highest for clinical journal but might not be the right audience, or might not yield the highest quality reviews.
   • Has similar work been published in this journal (which is a good thing)?
   • Do you or your colleagues have prior positive experiences with the journal, which includes decent turn-around times for review and sensible and helpful reviews?
   • Do you have a prior relationship with the journal (you have published there before or reviewed for them?)
   • Pay attention to journals where work that you are interested in is being published.
   • Almost any journal indexed in reputable databases (like pubmed) is OK.
   • Beware of for profit journals – predatory journals. They will solicit to you by email.  Do not respond.

5. Along side of peer-reviewed publication, consider a preprint publication. Check your journals rules and check with your co-authors.  One used often in health sciences is  – https://www.medrxiv.org/
6. Prepare for submitting several times, by considering a “suite” of journals initially that have a similar audience and similar format (to reduce re-write time). This planning ahead will save you time and also be a mindset that helps buffer a possible rejection, by reminding you that resubmission to another journal is very common!  (Thanks KB for this sound advice!).
7. Recommend reviewers to the journal at the time of submission. (There is typically a place for this).  Editors these days often have to invite dozens of reviewers before they can find people to review a manuscript.  It will help to get the right people to consider your work by recommending those people directly. Consider a reputable and quality junior researcher as opposed to a senior researcher who will be more likely to be swamped and say no. Note that reviewers do not have to be at “arm’s length” to avoid conflict in the same way that grant reviewers are.

You Got a R&R (revise and resubmit)!

8. This is the best outcome you can get!  I have *never* heard of a manuscript being accepted on the first submission.  In my experience a R&R always turns into an acceptance.
9. Read the comments from reviewers and editors and allow yourself to be frustrated or annoyed. Acknowledge those feelings and move on.
10. Submit a revision ASAP – make it a priority.
11. Don’t go it alone. Get help from your co-authors. This could include something where their expertise is needed, something where you feel stuck, or simply sharing the load.  But note that typically a first author will do the bulk of the work of revising.
12. Respond to every comment of the reviewers in writing, taking this perspective:
    1. Remember that you have 2 audiences for your responses:
       • The editor, who will be looking for you to be responsive to the reviewers and has the point of view of preserving the quality and citation rate of the journal’s published articles.
       • The reviewers, who are often asked to review again, who have the point of view of being listened to for their hard work in reviewing.
    2. The reviewer is almost-always right.
    3. Say “thank you” and use polite language.
    4. You don’t need to over explain where you have chosen NOT to take a recommendation. Instead, say what you DID do.
    5. Realize that sometimes things simply weren’t clear or emphasized enough. In this case, improve the clarity of the writing and tell the reviewer how you did this.
    6. When you can’t address a consideration that you find valid, remember that you can add a discussion of the limitation and how it impacts the conclusions.
    7. If you don’t understand a comment from a reviewer, ask your co-authors to weigh in.
    8. If you feel “on the fence” about a recommendation of the reviewer, go ahead and do their recommendation, assuming that it doesn’t take a ton of time (e.g. major new analysis).
    9. At times you may need to “throw a bone” to the reviewer – improving wording or changing something minor – to show your responsiveness to their point of view.
    10. Keep a balance between the time it will take to improve the work, keeping in mind the “cost-benefit” of the time invested, but –
    11. Don’t be lazy and fail to do something that would improve the paper but would only take a few days.

You Got a Rejection

13. Allow yourself to be disappointed or frustrated. Move on.
14. Consider the many reasons for rejection, such as:
    1. The right editor or reviewer was not found, yielding a sub-optimal review.
       • It happens. Submit again!
    2. The topic or findings just didn’t meet the bar for the journal.
       • It happens. It can especially happen with null results, which is unfortunate for the field!  Submit again, OR – consider packaging your findings with more findings.  Consider a different type of journal that might understand your topic better.
    3. There were serious flaws, and the flaws could be addressable, or might not be.
       • This is tricky and hopefully your talents at finding a true gap that is important and doing good science prevented this. But – if something comes to light, first try to get some perspective.  Consult with your co-authors.  If you can address the flaws, do it!  There may be a rare situation where you realized that you no longer have confidence in the question or the approach, and be honest with yourself if this occurs.  Use the ”circular file” – put this work in the garbage and move on to something that matters.
    4. Luck of the draw. Peer review is a highly imperfect situation and has a random element to it.  Getting something published takes persistence and strategy!
15. Select the next journal.
16. Make changes if warranted because the reviewers had good points.
17. Submit.
18. Rinse and repeat.

When you have a course paper, a dissertation proposal, a draft manuscript, or anything that you will be asking someone else to grade or review, do this:

Make time. Put on their hat. Anticipate what they will look for. And grade or review your work, in detail.

Use available tools, such as instructions, rubrics, guidelines, and all of the things.

You may think that this is no different from the work you have already put in. You are wrong.

You WILL be able to put yourself into the mindset of the reviewer, and by doing this, you will have a different perspective on your work.

This will:
-Help you meta-think.
-Help improve the item you are working on.
-Be a stepping stone toward becoming a future course instructor, faculty member, journal referee, or grant reviewer.
-Show respect to the person who is grading or reviewing, because your work will be more thorough and easier to grade or review.

Try it. (It is disrespectful not to.)

You are on a journey to become something new – a more skilled version of yourself that will do big things in the world. Wow. Open, open, open to what will help you grow. Open yourself to a different perspective. Open yourself to unlearning. Open yourself to changing your mind. Open yourself to accepting criticism as a gift. Open yourself to something you didn’t even know you needed to learn. Open yourself to changing direction. Open yourself to the possibility of failure. Open yourself to being judged by others. Open yourself to becoming something new. Cultivate a growth mindset.

You may or may not have heard of a “growth mindset”. Be assured that it is an evidence-based concept, initially created by Dr. Carol Dweck, that is increasingly understood to be a major determinant of success. Given that evidence, it is worth your time to understand this concept.

About a Growth Mindset

Today I’d like to introduce you to a tool that has helped me so much show up in the world as my best self, in a way that supports my goal of making the world a better place: a rockin’ teacher. You already know the power of a good teacher to help you understand concepts, gain enthusiasm, and succeed in a discipline. Becoming a scholar isn’t just about academic knowledge. Your ability to succeed is directly related to your happiness, to your confidence, and to your courage. While walking along the conventional path of scholarly knowledge, I highly recommend that you simultaneously learn how to manage your mind. I cannot give enough credit to my primary teacher in this regard: Brooke Castillo. I have never met her. Yet because she generously provides a wealth of free podcast and video content, she has had a large influence on my life. Here is a 9-minute video of my teacher talking about confidence.

Brooke Castillo How to Be Confident

I don’t see academic pursuits as a zero sum game. Yes, funding may truly be limited at any given point of time. But academics can also be part of the force toward more funding, thereby increasing the size of the pie rather than fighting for each piece. And we can all support each other with the funding we do receive. So where then is the role of competition?

I have experienced 3 types of competition so far in my career. Let’s break it down:

Competition in my own mind that makes me feel inadequate
Comparing myself harshly to highly-productive colleagues is more likely to discourage me, rather than inspiring me toward good work. I try to be aware of this and give it a pause. (Hint: this feels yucky).

Friendly competition that builds connections
I have had fun, engaging, multi-year interactions with colleague-friends where a touch of competition feels like part of our connection with each other. This competition feels like something that inspires me and is a force gently pushing me forward with the other person (or group), strengthening our connection. (Hint: this feels good).

Destructive competitive interactions
I have also been treated quite terribly by colleagues. I have been blocked from doing my work and have been accused of not being competent or supportive in front of other colleagues. It is only in retrospect that I realized this was largely due to competitive drives. Walk away from destructive competition. Remember that whenever someone cuts you down, it is about them. Another may be promoting herself in a non-skilled way, by cutting you down. Notice. Walk away. Protect yourself. (Hint: this feels awful).

Be aware of the competitive drive in yourself and coming from others. If it feels good, it may have a place in helping you make your maximum contribution to the world.

On airplanes, they warn you that during loss of cabin pressure, you must first secure your own oxygen mask before those of others. (You can’t help them if you pass out). Similarly, you must support your mental and physical health before you can do the work of graduate school. OK, so maybe there will be a crunch time that requires a lapse in sleep, food, breaks, (friends, procreation, nutrition, exercise, vacation, romance, pets, movies . . . .). Hey! You can’t keep that up! And it doesn’t have to be that way!
Rescue yourself before you rescue your class paper, or dissertation, or . . .

You cannot continue to make the world a better place if you pass out, or drop out, along the way.

What do you think of this sentiment: “Science writing and science communication should be neutral, objective, and devoid of human elements of emotion or point of view”? You might agree. I don’t, and I encourage your openness to my perspective here.

It is not possible (nor desirable) for a human to become a computer when selecting a research topic, designing a study, interpreting results, or writing. Indeed, there is no way that a computer could do these things. There is simply too much intention, awareness, accumulated lived experience, and understanding of the human world required to do these things. So, if it is not possible (nor desirable) to strip out the human element, what is a researcher to do to put ethical, balanced work into the world? (Side note. “Science” has f-ed up in so many big and small ways. If you find this a surprising sentiment, educate yourself about this).

It’s about awareness of yourself and your motivation. Are you going for fame? Are you out to get “the man”? Are you putting one foot in front of the other to earn a paycheck? Are you trying to “one up” other researchers that have come before? Are you entirely confused about your motivations? Do you have a burning hypothesis that you are out to prove, whether true or not? Are you running scared, obfuscating what you are doing, fearing that others will find out you aren’t measuring up?

Don’t despair if you see yourself in any of the previous questions. We are all human, and embody the mixture that is “human nature”. But be honest. Recognize where you may have work to do to bolster the better human elements inside you.

Surround yourself with others who want to contribute. Enhance your tolerance for revealing your weaknesses, or for not seeming cool. Aim for the truth. Strengthen your desire to make the world a better place, and your confidence that your small acts are a meaningful part of a collective effort to do this.

So here’s the idea. You cannot strip out your point of view. So be aware of it, strive to make it something you can be proud of, and when you write, let these points of view guide all of it.

A new semester is starting. If you have not yet, consider this the time to find your squad. In graduate school, more minds are better than one. They have to be the right folks, of course: smart, accountable, ready to work and collaborate, and someone you will enjoy spending time with. And remember that BOTH being the “teacher” and being the “taught” in any given interaction, have tremendous value to you.

I remain so very grateful to my squad during my doctoral studies. We divided up complex programming work for a course (when permitted) to knock out the work more efficiently. We would share code, teach each other, grapple verbally with complex concepts, and studied hard and frequently for our methodologic qualifying exam. It was more than the academic supports that we gave each other, of course. Graduate school can be isolating. Having others disclose their understanding gaps, celebrate your successes, and simply be there for a walk or a break, helps keep your entire mind-body ship afloat and sailing toward that PhD. I never would have learned epidemiology so deeply and clearly without them, nor enjoyed my time in doctoral studies, without my squad. I stay in touch with them to this day.

With deep gratitude to CHD, CA, and JL

Your publications will be out there. Others will be able to see the government funding (grants) you’ve received. Google Scholar and similar platforms allow easy summaries of your scholarly output. Your CV (should be) freely posted on your website. Your productivity is easily, publicly, visible.

I remember when someone asked me if the pressure to publish and get grants was a barrier to me wanting an academic career. My response? I’ve been prepared to hit these marks. They aren’t a mystery or a surprise. (And they should not be a surprise for you). Also, I believe in these activities. Publishing will share your new knowledge widely and lift the field. Grant receipt is a gate-keeper that fosters quality research, and will provide the resources that bring you independence and institutional support. While neither are perfect, of course, both play their part in making the world a better place. Furthermore, the visibility of these metrics helps academia function close to a meritocracy. The myth of meritocracy in many other careers (presidency, anyone?), is deep, but largely false.

Don’t be scared off by publishing, grant-getting, or the visibility of these metrics. Consider their pursuit part of your training. The good news is that both can be taught, and learned, and respond to practice. You can do this! And we (your mentors) will help!