This module provides comprehensive training in scientific communication through writing and the peer review process. You’ll learn evidence-based strategies for effective scientific writing, practice transparent peer review techniques, and develop skills to respond constructively to reviewer feedback—all within the context of bioinspired communication research.
“A paper is not a scientific result; it is a communication about a scientific result. The goal of writing is communication, not the documentation of research activity.” This seminal guide from Harvard’s Whitesides Group provides practical advice on structuring papers, writing clearly, and avoiding common pitfalls.
This comprehensive video from the Prof. Whitesides covers essential strategies for effective scientific writing, including structure, clarity, and communication principles specifically for bioinspired and interdisciplinary research.
This detailed resource covers the entire publication journey from literature reviews through post-acceptance tasks, with specific sections on:
- Publication Process (6-part series covering presubmission to acceptance)
- Scientific Figure Preparation (including color theory and design basics)
- Literature Review strategies Particularly valuable for understanding the “Art of Rebuttal” when responding to reviewer comments.
Detailed guidelines from one of the world’s leading scientific publishers on manuscript preparation, ethical standards, and the submission process.
Practical advice for authors on structuring papers, creating effective figures, and navigating the publication process in top-tier journals.
“Peer review is the backbone of the scholarly publication system. It helps editors decide which papers to publish and provides authors with constructive feedback to improve their work.” This guide outlines the responsibilities of reviewers and provides a structured approach to evaluation.
“eLife publishes review reports alongside accepted papers, creating a transparent record of the scientific evaluation process.” This resource shows actual examples of published review histories, including:
- Initial reviewer comments
- Author responses
- Final editorial decisions Excellent for understanding how transparent peer review works in practice.
Transparent criteria used by one of the world’s largest open-access journals, emphasizing methodological rigor over perceived impact.
The Committee on Publication Ethics provides essential guidelines for maintaining integrity throughout the review process.
Learning from Real Examples
One of the most effective ways to learn peer review is by examining actual published review reports and author responses.
Browse complete review histories for published eLife papers, including initial submissions, reviewer comments, author responses, and editorial decisions.
Nature Communications offers authors the option to publish peer review reports alongside their articles.
Practical guidance on crafting professional, effective responses to reviewer comments.
Scenario: You’ve received reviewer comments on your bioinspired communication manuscript. Some comments are straightforward, while others challenge your methodology and question your conclusions.
Task:
- Categorize the reviewer comments as major/minor and valid/questionable
- Draft a professional response addressing each comment
- Identify which changes you would make to your manuscript
- For questionable comments, develop a respectful but firm justification for maintaining your approach