• Peer review is the critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to journals by experts who are usually not part of the editorial staff. • “The investigator’s final manuscript of a peer-reviewed article accepted for journal publication, including all modifications from the peer review process.” Reference : https://pubrica.com/services/publication-support/peer-review-pre-submission/ Continue Reading : http://bit.ly/3bg2YwA Why Pubrica? When you order our services, Plagiarism free|onTime|outstanding customer support|Unlimited Revisions support|High-quality Subject Matter Experts. Contact us : Web: https://pubrica.com/ Blog: https://pubrica.com/academy/ Email: sales@pubrica.com WhatsApp : +91 9884350006 United Kingdom: +44- 74248 10299

1. An Academic presentation by
Dr. Nancy Agnes, Head, Technical Operations, Pubrica
Group: www.pubrica.com
Email: sales@pubrica.com
WHAT IS PEER-REVIEW
OF A MANUSCRIPT.
LIST OUT THE BENEFITS OF PEER-
REVIEWING A MANUSCRIPT

2. Outline
Today's Discussion
In-Brief
Introduction
Manuscript Should AlsoInclude
Methodology
Benefits of Peer-reviewingaManuscript
Conclusion

3. Peer review is the critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to journals
by experts who are usually not part of the editorial staff. “The investigator’s
final manuscript of a peer-reviewed article accepted for journal publication,
including all modifications from the peer review process.”
In-Brief

4. Introduction
Peer review can be described as a process in which a
person reads, checks and gives his or her opinion on a
piece of work written by another scientist or expert
working in the same field.
Generally speaking, two forms of peer review can be
distinguished: ‘in-class peer review’ for undergraduate
students and academic peer review’ for research scholars.
During an in-class peer review, undergraduate students
read articles written by fellow classmates and offer input on
their work as part of the teaching aspects of the program.
Contd..

5. Academic peer review (hereafter “peers review”) is, on the contrary, a more
complicated process. Peer review is a central aspect of academic study.
Authors were submitting a manuscript outlining their findings, editors determining
whether the paper will be offered for peer review and eventually accepted for
publication, and peer reviewers performing evaluations that will allow the editor to
make a better-informed decision on suitability.
These reviewers play an understated yet crucial role in the process, utilizing their
capability to constructively critique a piece of work for the benefit of the broader
scientific community.

6. Manuscript
Should Also
Include
Figures, charts, tables and images
Supplemental materials associated with the work
Title page
Names and affiliations of the authors
The corresponding author’s name and email address
Grant award acknowledgements
Contd..

8. Methodology
To gain insight into the attitudes towards the
participation of ecrs in peer review, we have distributed
a survey to academics in ten countries across the globe.
The survey covered numerous aspects of the peer
review process, including how many peer-review invites
are commonly accepted by academics, if they included
ecrs postgraduate researchers only in their evaluations,
and if so, what was their motivation to involve ecrs.
We requested that academics determine the effect of
peer review on the essential skills of their students
based on their previous experience.
Contd..

9. Besides, a separate survey was distributed to the ecrs (student survey) to assess
their attitudes towards peer review participation.
Complete details of survey questions for both the academic and the ecr surveys can
be found in the supplementary materials section.
For the survey, terminology graduate students (pgrs) is used instead of ecrs
(supplementary materials).
It was to be differentiated explicitly from undergraduate researchers who were not
the subject of our study.

10. Benefits of
Peer-
reviewing
a Manuscript
While i use an online thesaurus every time i write to
find the right word to describe a concept, in some
cases, some words seem to be incorrect or vague.
Having input from peers lets me determine whether i
have to adhere to my terms or consider what they say.
I do not hesitate to alter the words in question if the
idea sounds fine.
Contd..
CORRECTS VAGUE TERMS

11. PROVIDES FEEDBACK AS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF YOUR COMMUNICATION
If grasped the points you advanced in your manuscript, you can readily see from the
reactions of your peer group.
Suppose that after a page has been displayed to provide their input, it takes them a
little longer than expected, which will possibly mean that something is wrong with the
flow of thinking or conversation.
Questions for clarity will most likely come next. And yes, they have.
Contd..

12. PREVENTS YOU FROM COMMITTING SERIOUS BLUNDERS IN YOUR ARGUMENTS
You may have made points that may be based on incorrect assumptions.
Once the beliefs are false, then everything you’ve published is wrong.
This result observes the laws of logic.
If the premises are defective, so it is unreliable with anything that goes beyond it.
FACILITATES CONCISE WRITING
More than what is required, you might have written.
Contd..

13. The elimination here and there of needless paragraphs or phrases gives rise to a
short, adequately written manuscript.
Some people are fond of focusing on spelling and grammatical mistakes.
While attention should be given to the substance or claims of your research paper,
your grammar matters a lot.
As the reading flow is made more efficient, good grammar encourages reading.
ALLOWS YOU TO EXPOUND ON YOUR POINTS
Perhaps you felt you had written sufficiently to clarify the matter at hand.
Contd..

14. Then you know that you have brought your peers halfway to the expected
ideas you want to project.
This situation requires clarification on the questions you have raised to
understand and illustrate concepts.
ENCOURAGES YOU TO PERFORM BETTER NEXT TIME
The next time you are on the watch for the possible comments, suggestions,
or criticism of your book, if the peer review exercise has shown you any
positive feedback.
Contd..

15. When you add all the terms and recommendations of colleagues, you will then
compose better than ever.
Thus in your previous article, you stop making the same errors.
There are tremendous advantages to peer-review.

16. Conclusion
In conclusion, the method of peer-review is collegial at
its best, not adversarial.
Finally, when guided by attentive, detailed, insightful
reviews, and they have the privilege of seeing papers
and journal reputations improve as part of the process,
editors gain trust in their decisions to accept an article.

17. UNITEDKINGDOM
+44-1143520021
INDIA
+91-9884350006
EMAIL
sales@pubrica.com
Contact Us