{"id":940,"date":"2017-09-02T20:16:16","date_gmt":"2017-09-02T19:16:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/?p=940"},"modified":"2017-09-02T20:16:16","modified_gmt":"2017-09-02T19:16:16","slug":"writing-to-reach-your-peers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/?p=940","title":{"rendered":"Writing to Reach Your Peers"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"Travis - Writing To Reach You (Official Music Video)\" width=\"604\" height=\"340\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/UeCcuH-EsuM?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>This is something I came up with a few years ago, but which I thought worth looking at again. It&#8217;s a reading of the video for Travis&#8217;s &#8220;Writing to Reach You&#8221; as an allegory of the peer review process. I&#8217;ve put in time markers in square brackets to coordinate your viewing of the video with my interpretation. \u00a0Feel free to let me know what you think in the comments.<\/p>\n<p>The whole process is a <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Dramaturgy_(sociology)#Stages\">&#8220;front stage&#8221; activity in Goffman&#8217;s sense<\/a>. Backstage, [0:04] you touch up the manuscript fixing all the punctuating and adjusting tour references to the style guide. You put on your best face. Then you submit it [0:20] and the manuscript is now &#8220;under review&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>The reviewers examine your paper [0:37] and you eventually get the answer back from the journal editor [0:55]. The reviewers, it turns out, have some hard words to say about your work, but the criticism they hurl art your paper sort of hurts them [1:16] as much as it hurts you. After reading their report you pick yourself up. You keep going.<\/p>\n<p>[1:25] Though their own projects are stuck in their own way, your colleagues are waiting and willing to help. They offer you support and you submit the paper again.<\/p>\n<p>[1:55] You receive the answer from the second round of reviews. A senior editor is now taking an active interest. [2:05] You feel like you have to run for cover, but [2:35] when the dust settles and the smoke clears you can see he was only taking one of your reviewers out of the equation [2:50].<\/p>\n<p>Still, you sort of like that reviewer&#8217;s style, and you try it out for few paragraphs in your next rewrite. You incorporate one of his ideas as a sort of scalp [2:53]. The other reviewer is not impressed [2:56]. Fortunately, you&#8217;ve developed a thick skin. You absorb the new criticism and cast off the more outrageous arrows [3:02]. That idea you took from the discarded reviewer&#8217;s comments wasn&#8217;t really you anyway [3:17].<\/p>\n<p>You get ready to resubmit another version [3:21]. There&#8217;s a brief moment of hesitation [3:29], but you do it anyway. When you get the letter saying your paper has been accepted it&#8217;s like coming home. [3:35] Your colleagues and your peers are in the same room, so to speak. In fact, one of your anonymous reviewers reveals who she is and congratulates you [3:40]. She loves your paper now, and she&#8217;s going to run with a few of your ideas. [3:43]<\/p>\n<p>You&#8217;re backstage again. [3:45] Your inside is outside.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This is something I came up with a few years ago, but which I thought worth looking at again. It&#8217;s a reading of the video for Travis&#8217;s &#8220;Writing to Reach You&#8221; as an allegory of the peer review process. I&#8217;ve put in time markers in square brackets to coordinate your viewing of the video with &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/?p=940\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Writing to Reach Your Peers<\/span> <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-940","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/940","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=940"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/940\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":941,"href":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/940\/revisions\/941"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=940"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=940"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inframethodology.cbs.dk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=940"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}