(in Polish) Warsztat naukowca: pisanie artykułów naukowych, strategie publikacyjne, pozyskiwanie finansowania badań w dyscyplinie psychologia

obligatory courses

10h, workhop

teaching methods applied;

Classroom discussions, lectures, peer-education (students take the roles of reviewers)

There are two main purposes of the course. First is to equip doctoral students with essential knowledge of how to get their work published in (at least) decent social science journals. Second is to heighten their chances of obtaining funding for their research.

Regarding the first goal, the topics discussed will cover types of articles, journal prestige, and the structure of the publication market (e.g., general vs specialized journals, respectable vs predatory outlets). Students will be also walked through the publication process: from writing a manuscript and its initial submission, through the review and revision stage, to the article’s acceptance by a journal. Students will learn how to write both a letter to an editor, how to review an article, and how to respond to reviewers’ criticism. Practical advice will be offered on what should be done and what should be avoided in order to successfully publish a research article. Topics will be illustrated with real-world examples and comments from the lecturer who is not only an author and reviewer, but also an editor-in-chief of Psychology of Language and Communication. For the class, students will review their colleagues work and write a cover letter responding to this review.

Regarding the second goal, students will get an overview of where to apply for funding and we will discuss our experiences with doing so. We will also look at dos and don’ts when writing a research proposal. The lecturer will share her experience as a grant reviewer for the European Commission and Science Centers of Italy, USA, and UK.

Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2013). Six guidelines for interesting research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(5), 549-553.

Jensen, P.E. (2012) It’s not personal! Pointers for responding to reviewers. AAI Newsletter, 17-19.

Marusić, M., Sambunjak, D., & Marusić, A. (2005). Guide for peer reviewers of scientific articles in the Croatian Medical Journal. Croatian Medical Journal, 46(2), 326-332.

Nosek, B.A., Spies. J.R., & Motyl, M. (2012) Scientific utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6): 615–631.

Knowledge: Knows and understands:

WG_01 - world achievements, covering theoretical foundations as well as general issues and selected specific issues of a given scientific or artistic discipline, to a degree allowing revision of existing paradigms

WG_02 - main development trends of the scientific or artistic disciplines which are the object of studies

WG_03 - methodology of scientific research

WG_04 - rules for disseminating results of scientific research, also in the open access mode

WK_01 - fundamental dilemmas of modern civilization

WK_02 - economic, legal, ethical and other significant determinants of academic activity

Skills: Can:

UW_01 - use knowledge of various scientific or artistic disciplines to creatively identify, formulate and innovatively solve complex problems or perform research tasks, and specifically: define the purpose and subject of research and formulate a research hypothesis, develop and creatively use research methods, techniques and tools, draw conclusions from research results

UW_02 - make a critical analysis and evaluation of the results of scientific research, expert activity and other creative works and their contribution to the development of knowledge

Social competences: Is ready to:

KK_01 - critically evaluate the achievements of a given social sciences

KK_02 - critically evaluate own contribution to the development of a given scientific or artistic discipline

KK_03 - recognise the importance of science in solving cognitive and practical problems

description of requirements related to participation in classes, including thepermitted number of explained absences;

Due to the structure of the course, one absence (one day) is allowed

During the course students will review work of a colleague and prepare an answer to the review.

principles for passing the classes and the subject (including resit session);

Passing based on attendance and the preparation of a review of a colleague’s work and an answer to the review.

methods for the verification of learning outcomes;

Attendance list, two homeworks sent via email.

evaluation criteria

Attendance, quality and timeliness of the task performed.

-