Writing is a very creative process and so it’s normal to become emotionally invested in your work. How to manage rejection as an academic?

What if something unexpected happens to my manuscript? How can I fix and address issues and problems?

Early career researchers almost never learn how to deal with peer review. Our webinars can help.

What if you could get your research design and methodology peer reviewed before you start with data collection?

Your next paper is more likely to pass successfully through peer review if the results and conclusions of your work are ‘as expected’.

We provide an extensive series of training courses and documentation via our education service Charlesworth Knowledge to help you survive the peer review process.

Write to an editor if you feel too much time has passed between submission and the return of reviews.

Charlesworth Knowledge provides a range of training services, including workshops and expert advice, aimed at helping you to become better at peer review.

Academics experience more rejection than almost any other profession. Learn to manage this with Charlesworth Knowledge.

Managing and responding to reviewer comments can be difficult. Our experts can help you decode the responses that come back from journals about your papers.

As part of our peer review training at Charlesworth Knowledge, we aim to help young researchers be as effective as possible when participating in this process. It can be daunting as well as flattering to receive a request from a journal to work on a paper; at the same time, how can you quickly and easily put together an effective set of comments to send back to an editor and be a ‘useful’ peer reviewer?

Acting as a peer reviewer is a serious responsibility, your chance to both evaluate (hopefully critically and positively) the research work of others in your field as well as to contribute to the development and overall quality of the scientific literature. We provide a range of training courses in this area at The Charlesworth Group through our education service, Charlesworth Knowledge, including how to carry out effective, positive, and ethical reviews of other peoples work.

No one likes getting rejection letters. Sadly, however, these are a fact of academic life; papers sent out to journals and grant applications are more likely to be rejected than accepted (or funded), especially if you are doing what you should be doing and aiming high with initial manuscript submissions (trying to get your work published in the best possible journals).

One of the issues that is most often discussed in the context of peer review is anonymity; is it better and more effective for authors to know the names of their reviewers, or not?

Perhaps you’ve recently been asked to review a paper for a journal? If so, read our blog where we give you some tips for being an effective peer-reviewer.

Peer review acts as a quality check on academic literature, defined as ‘a formal system whereby a piece of academic work is scrutinised by people who were not involved in its creation but are considered knowledgeable about the subject’. 

Single-Blind and Double-Blind Peer Review, find out what are the main differences between the two. In single-blind peer review, only the reviewers are anonymous. Reviewers know the authors, but authors don’t know the reviewers.  In double-blind peer review, both the authors and reviewers keep their anonymity.

Submitting your article to a journal is only the first step in the process to getting published.  In the vast majority of cases, papers will require at the very least some further changes or review based on the feedback from the journal editor and reviewers.

Open peer review (OPR) is a relatively new way of reviewing work before publication, but what exactly does it entail?