Create accountLogin

Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Only available when logged in.
sciences.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
Non-profit, ad-free social media for social scientists. Join thousands of social scientists here and across the fediverse.

Administered by:

Server stats:

715
active users

sciences.social: AboutProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.3.7

#researchwriting

0 posts0 participants0 posts today
Public
EASE

It's not too late to submit your feedback on the draft of our Peer Review Committee's Recommendations on Use of Al in Scholarly Communication! 🤖🎓📢

Responses are voluntary and may be submitted anonymously until Monday, 15th September. ⌛

docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAI

accounts.google.comGoogle Forms: Sign-inAccess Google Forms with a personal Google account or Google Workspace account (for business use).
#AItools#LLMs#PublicationEthics
Replied in thread
Public
Jan R. Boehnke

@kfnagle
Thanks re #Checklists. Part of me totally agrees.

a) I have been part of checklist developments and tried to be against items like "strengths", "definite conclusions", "innovation" etc. I have been & am usually overruled. I personally think they should not be part of such lists as they do not increase the quality of reporting.

b) Should we slowly move into a world where it would be fine to write "For reasons x, y, z, "innovation was not the point of the project"? ☺️

#ResearchWriting
Public
Jan R. Boehnke

Another #PeerReview finished.

Paper ~ 5000 words
Review ~ 1700 words
Duration ~ 1.75 hours

I recently had a discussion with an editorial board whether reporting #checklists should be mandatory. The board suggested that this would limit creativity and openness.

Most checklists only say what should be minimally reported and are rarely otherwise normative.

It would have helped this manuscript, so that I would have understood what the authors had done.

#AcademicEditing#ResearchWriting
Public
Dr Julia Molinari PhD SFHEA

Hello @annamills, thank you for your work on literacies, pedagogies, and awareness raising. It's helping me, at least, raise awareness within my own academic writing contexts.

Are you aware of any similar and/or specific work - including your own that I'm not aware of - relating to the use of and other writing technologies in ?

#AcWri#AcademicWriting#AcademicIntegrity
Public
Jan R. Boehnke

Tried to find a GIF to illustrate our latest #RegisteredReport Stage 1 submission. Funnily enough most of the #TaskDone #Milestone #Achievement GIFs seem to imply that the job would actually have been finished with this 😂 😂

#DoneNotDone

While waiting for #PeerReview and editorial decision, you could maybe read the last RR we published about the impact of the #COVID19 pandemic on adolescent #mentalhealth
royalsocietypublishing.org/doi

#AcademicPublishing#ResearchWriting
Public
Jan R. Boehnke

The "Reviewer's guide to #QuantitativeMethods" provides a concise summary of what to learn about and how to plan & report studies employing 31 (2nd ed. apparently 35) methods: routledge.com/The-Reviewers-Gu

Since it is a book, it will be difficult for many to get access. Does anyone know whether at least the checklists have been published somewhere #OpenAccess?

And is there a #QualitativeMethods version?

Routledge & CRC PressThe Reviewer’s Guide to Quantitative Methods in the Social SciencesThe Reviewer’s Guide to Quantitative Methods in the Social Sciences provides evaluators of research manuscripts and proposals in the social and behavioral sciences with the resources they need to read, understand, and assess quantitative work. 35 uniquely structured chapters cover both traditional and emerging methods of quantitative data analysis, which neither junior nor veteran reviewers can be expected to know in detail. The second edition of this valuable resource updates readers on
#ResearchMethods#PeerReview#StudyDesign
Public
Dr Julia Molinari PhD SFHEA

Who else is doing research on artificial intelligence and academic writing that is policy and ethics-oriented?

Please boost, if you can, as I am hoping to reach voices & approaches to this, especially from the so-called , namely communities that don't seem to be getting much of a look-in right now on this 'western' concocted concern.

(e)

Public
Dr Julia Molinari PhD SFHEA

Dear , have any you budgeted for *writing time* when applying for research funding? I've never seen a grant bid that does so, which suggests that writing is not recognised as the it is and is not accounted for in grant time. For example, budgeting for a or a project assistant to ensure grant holders have time to at least draft for the dissemination of their findings would seem reasonable to me but ....?

Public
Dr Julia Molinari PhD SFHEA

If you had to read a on how academics (including and ) are actually using writing tools, what would you like the case study to cover?

Asking as part of ongoing research.

The whole thing is a moving target dictated by non-educational imperatives, so, I'm trying to design a case study that is, to some extent, future-proof.


Public *
Dr Julia Molinari PhD SFHEA

I may now get my thesis printed, 4 years on.

I literally couldn't afford to print it at the time. Then work, job applications, and suddenly, , just numbed the urgency & symbolism of having actually achieved a , supervised by 2 mentors I so admire.

Now that writing is being re-visited all over again (since Plato's Phaedrus), I need a physical record of the writing & thinking that came from human me.

eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/59439

This thesis is my freedom and invitation to dive between barriers. Rooted in a critical learning incident which took place in the academic year 1989/1990, my first year as an undergraduate at the University of St Andrews, my PhD is a promissory note to nurture understanding, respect and space for diverse literacies. I entered university as a promising multilingual and multidisciplinary high achiever, whose European Baccalaureate grades had been exemplary. That first undergraduate year ruined everything. My grades nose-dived, dragging my confidence in tow. The new demands of monolingual and monodisciplinary writing, and the threshold concepts they required, were so disorientating that I very nearly dropped out. I didn’t, but I was painfully alerted to the porous, permeable, fragile reality of being: just as human identities are multiple, often crashing against entrenched gate-keeping binaries that demand they be ‘one or the other’, so too are academic writings. Yes, there are barriers to who we can be and how we can write, but so too are there freedoms.
#WhatMakesWritingAcademic#AcWri#PhDLife
ExploreLive feeds
About