{"id":3526,"date":"2019-05-16T17:48:00","date_gmt":"2019-05-16T08:48:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/163.180.4.222\/lab\/?p=3526"},"modified":"2019-05-16T17:48:00","modified_gmt":"2019-05-16T08:48:00","slug":"junior-researchers-are-losing-out-by-ghostwriting-peer-reviews","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?p=3526","title":{"rendered":"Junior researchers are losing out by ghostwriting peer reviews"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h5>Graduate students and postdocs who produce reviews under a senior colleague\u2019s name receive no credit or acknowledgement for their work, and miss a chance to become acquainted with journal editors.<\/h5>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<div class=\"article__body serif cleared\">\n<figure class=\"figure\">\n<div class=\"embed intensity--high\">\n<div class=\"embed intensity--high\"><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"figure__image\" src=\"https:\/\/media.nature.com\/w800\/magazine-assets\/d41586-019-01533-8\/d41586-019-01533-8_16719302.jpg\" alt=\"Man looking at laptop computer in office at night\" data-src=\"\/\/media.nature.com\/w800\/magazine-assets\/d41586-019-01533-8\/d41586-019-01533-8_16719302.jpg\" \/><\/div>\n<\/div><figcaption>\n<p class=\"figure__caption sans-serif\"><span class=\"mr10\">Numerous graduate students and postdocs around the world ghostwrite peer reviews for senior colleagues, receiving no authorship credit.<\/span>Credit: Taxi\/Getty<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>A large proportion of graduate students and postdocs ghostwrite peer reviews for senior colleagues and supervisors, receiving no professional credit for their work, finds a study<sup><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/d41586-019-01533-8?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nature%2Frss%2Fcurrent+%28Nature+-+Issue%29#ref-CR1\" data-track=\"click\" data-action=\"anchor-link\" data-track-label=\"go to reference\" data-track-category=\"references\">1<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n<p>Co-authors of the article, which was posted on the preprint server bioRxiv on 26 April, surveyed 498 early-career researchers at institutions in the United States (74%), Europe (17%), Asia (4%) and elsewhere to assess how often junior scientists contribute to such reports and how they feel about them. Half of survey respondents said that they had ghostwritten a peer review, but 80% of those said that they felt the practice was unethical, according to the article.<\/p>\n<p>The survey took pains to distinguish ghostwriting from co-reviewing, a well-established form of training in which an invited reviewer shares a manuscript with junior researchers to solicit their assessment of the paper\u2019s quality; those researchers can expect to receive some type of credit for their efforts. With ghostwriting, by contrast, a principal investigator (PI) uses part or all of a junior researcher\u2019s review contributions and provides no credit. Roughly 75% of survey respondents said that they had co-reviewed; 95% found it to be a beneficial practice and 73% deemed it ethical.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cCo-reviewing and ghostwriting get conflated, and one is used to justify the other as a normal part of training,\u201d says study co-author Rebeccah Lijek, a molecular biologist at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts. \u201cBut they are separable; some can be done as training exercises and some deserve named credit.\u201d She says that senior researchers have expressed disbelief that ghostwriting is a widespread practice, whereas early-career researchers in the study indicated no surprise at all.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<aside class=\"recommended pull pull--left sans-serif\" data-label=\"Related\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/collections\/pmlcrkkyyq\" data-track=\"click\" data-track-label=\"recommended article\"><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"recommended__image\" src=\"https:\/\/media.nature.com\/w400\/magazine-assets\/d41586-019-01533-8\/d41586-019-01533-8_16656230.jpg\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"recommended__title serif\">Collection: How to grow a healthy lab<\/p>\n<\/aside>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Sabina Alam, associate editorial director of medicine and health journals for Taylor &amp; Francis Group, an academic publisher based near Oxford, UK, was also unsurprised. As journal editors, she says, \u201cwe know it happens.\u201d Alam adds that she was pleased to finally see data quantifying the practice. \u201cThis form of ghostwriting has to be brought out of the shadows,\u201d she says. \u201cNot knowing who has had a hand in writing the review is totally unethical. It\u2019s a system we\u2019ve allowed to continue for too long.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Alam notes that ghostwriting breaches the confidentiality of peer review. \u201cEditors make publishing decisions based on reviews and on an understanding that the person they invited wrote the review,\u201d she says. And journal editors make great efforts to find the most appropriate manuscript reviewers; they do not expect reviewers to share manuscripts, unless the journal explicitly says that it is acceptable for a colleague to co-review. Both co-reviewing and ghostwriting can pose ethical issues beyond the absence of credit, she adds. \u201cIf a researcher wants to co-review, let the editors know \u2014 preferably before you ask a junior colleague \u2014 so we can make sure the person is a good fit, free of conflicts of interest.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><b>Ethical line<\/b><\/p>\n<p>David Resnik, a bioethicist at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, says that ghostwriting can even be considered a form of plagiarism. \u201cUnder the federal research regulations, misconduct applies not only to publishing research but also reviewing research,\u201d he notes.<\/p>\n<p>Beyond misrepresentation, the lack of academic credit short-changes the junior researcher or ghostwriter in intangible ways. For example, peer review gives early-career scientists an opportunity to become known to journal editors, says Resnik. Reviewing papers, he adds, can build a graduate student\u2019s or postdoc\u2019s reputation; it can lead to an invitation to join a journal\u2019s editorial board, and can serve as a form of networking that can help to advance a career. \u201cThe idea that credit for peer review is not important doesn\u2019t stand up to scrutiny,\u201d says Resnik. Alam agrees: \u201cThis is scholarly work at the end of the day, and should be recognized,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n<p>The report laments that there is \u201cno systematic way of training people to do peer review\u201d. Yet it is pivotal to the scientific enterprise, notes co-author Gary McDowell, executive director of Future of Research, an advocacy group for junior researchers that is based in Abington, Massachusetts. \u201cWe need more establishment of best practices of peer review,\u201d adds Resnik. \u201cPeer review is one of the most important aspects of scientific research [and it] just does not get enough attention in terms of ethics, objectivity and fairness.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Alam says that the study could help to catalyse long-needed changes to the peer-review process. Both she and Resnik agree with the study\u2019s recommendation that journals revise their policies to explicitly ask for the names of co-review contributors. McDowell suggests that greater transparency would benefit the scientific enterprise as a whole \u2014 for example, by legitimately increasing the pool of reviewers, who are often in short supply. \u201cJournals are going to have graduate students and postdocs doing this regardless; they just won\u2019t be known,\u201d says McDowell.<\/p>\n<p>McDowell and Lijek encourage PIs and early-career researchers to clearly discuss their expectations regarding co-reviewed reports and the apportioning of credit. Resnik agrees: \u201cI would advise PIs to not involve other people in the review of a paper without permission from the editors, and without a clear understanding from the person involved about how they will be credited for their work.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Alam advises early-career researchers who are eager to write peer reviews to ask their PI for opportunities to do so, as well as for feedback on their efforts; they should also ask their PI to let journals know about their contributions. Then, she says, junior researchers should take necessary steps to verify their contributions on\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/publons.com\/about\/home\" data-track=\"click\" data-label=\"https:\/\/publons.com\/about\/home\" data-track-category=\"body text link\">Publons<\/a>, an online database through which academics can track and highlight their peer-review and editorial contributions. That way, the junior researchers can build their profiles as peer reviewers.<\/p>\n<p>Lijek says she hopes that this study will arm junior researchers with evidence that they can use to advocate for credit for their contributions. \u201cIt may sound cheesy and naive, but we want peer review to be the best it can be,\u201d she says. Ultimately, she says, the problem can be resolved. \u201cWe all agree \u2014 we need to fix it.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"emphasis\">doi: 10.1038\/d41586-019-01533-8<\/div>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>(\uc6d0\ubb38: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/d41586-019-01533-8?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nature%2Frss%2Fcurrent+%28Nature+-+Issue%29\">\uc5ec\uae30<\/a>\ub97c \ud074\ub9ad\ud558\uc138\uc694~)<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&nbsp; &nbsp; Graduate students and postdocs who produce reviews under a senior colleague\u2019s name receive no credit or acknowledgement for their work, and miss a<a href=\"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?p=3526\" class=\"more-link\">(more&#8230;)<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[32,29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3526","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-essays-on-science","category-lets-do-science"],"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":1499,"url":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?p=1499","url_meta":{"origin":3526,"position":0},"title":"Ways\ufeff to promote and foster collaborative research in your lab","author":"biochemistry","date":"August 30, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 (\uc6d0\ubb38) \u00a0 \u00a0 Top tips for principal investigators to help junior scientists navigate the travails of teamwork. \u00a0 \u00a0 Adapted from Getty \u00a0 \u00a0 Two of our PhD students were in a bind. They had collaborated on a research project that merged their interests and, as counselled by\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Essays on Science&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Essays on Science","link":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?cat=32"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":470,"url":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?p=470","url_meta":{"origin":3526,"position":1},"title":"How to fit in when you join a lab abroad","author":"biochemistry","date":"May 30, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 (\uc6d0\ubb38) \u00a0 \u00a0 Cultural differences can be both stimulating and challenging for researchers working or studying in a foreign country. \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Researchers who choose to study or work abroad must adapt to customs, hierarchies and expectations that can differ greatly from those they are used to.Credit:\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Essays on Science&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Essays on Science","link":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?cat=32"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":432,"url":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?p=432","url_meta":{"origin":3526,"position":2},"title":"Nine pitfalls of research misconduct","author":"biochemistry","date":"May 30, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 (\uc6d0\ubb38) \u00a0 \u00a0 Academic leaders must audit departments for flaws and strengths, then tailor practices to build good behaviour, say C. K. Gunsalus and Aaron D. Robinson. \u00a0 \u00a0 Illustration by David Parkins One of us (C.K.G.) teaches leadership skills and works with troubled departments. At almost every\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Essays on Science&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Essays on Science","link":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?cat=32"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":2508,"url":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?p=2508","url_meta":{"origin":3526,"position":3},"title":"Scientific progress is built on failure","author":"biochemistry","date":"January 11, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Learning to handle failure is just part of scientific life, writes Eileen Parkes. \u00a0 Good science can require a leap in the dark \u2014 and that leap might not be made if we\u2019re too afraid to fail.Credit: Getty \u00a0 \u00a0 When I moved from medicine into research, the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Essays on Science&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Essays on Science","link":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?cat=32"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1605,"url":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?p=1605","url_meta":{"origin":3526,"position":4},"title":"Largest-ever peer-review survey reveals growing \u201creviewer fatigue\u201d","author":"biochemistry","date":"September 10, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 (\uc6d0\ubb38: \uc5ec\uae30\ub97c \ud074\ub9ad\ud558\uc138\uc694~) \u00a0 \u00a0 Peer reviewers unmasked: largest global survey reveals trends Scientists in emerging economies respond fastest to peer review invitations, but are invited least. \u00a0 Scientists in developed countries provide nearly three times as many\u00a0peer reviews\u00a0per paper submitted as researchers in emerging nations, according to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Essays on Science&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Essays on Science","link":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?cat=32"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1445,"url":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?p=1445","url_meta":{"origin":3526,"position":5},"title":"No more excuses for non-reproducible methods","author":"biochemistry","date":"August 24, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 (\uc6d0\ubb38) \u00a0 \u00a0 Online technologies make it easy to share precise experimental protocols \u2014 and doing so is essential to modern science, says Lenny Teytelman. \u00a0 \u00a0 Here\u2019s a one-two punch to spark camaraderie among scientists. First, ask: \u201cHow long did it take to get your PhD?\u201d Then\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Essays on Science&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Essays on Science","link":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/?cat=32"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":false,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9Xo1j-US","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3526","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3526"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3526\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3527,"href":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3526\/revisions\/3527"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3526"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3526"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biochemistry.khu.ac.kr\/lab\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3526"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}