Do You Know…How to Prevent Feedback Fallout: Make Your Peer Edits a Compassionate Critique

Imagine this: a colleague asks you to peer edit her manuscript. You say yes because you respect her and want her to succeed. After several hours of re-reads and crafting comments intended to strengthen her manuscript, you email your feedback. There's no response. The next time you pass in the h...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Nurse author & editor 2014-03, Vol.24 (1), p.1-3
1. Verfasser: Heinrich, Kathleen T.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Imagine this: a colleague asks you to peer edit her manuscript. You say yes because you respect her and want her to succeed. After several hours of re-reads and crafting comments intended to strengthen her manuscript, you email your feedback. There's no response. The next time you pass in the hall she, instead of gushing with gratitude, avoids eye contact and barely says hello. You get the feeling that she's more insulted than complimented by your input. You're not quite sure what to do next. Should you let it drop and pray you can keep your relationship polite, if distant? Give her the time and space to see that your insights actually did help with her revisions? Or just screw up your courage and ask her what went wrong? If you peer edit manuscripts for nurse authors, it's easy to miss the mark when delivering your feedback. Miss that mark and the discomfort and uncertainties that come with feedback fall-out can upend the most collegial of relationships. This is the final column in a year long series on delicate dilemmas that nurse authors find it difficult to discuss. After defining terms, a replay of the opening scenario demonstrates how making peer edit critiques more compassionate can prevent feedback fallout. 3 references
ISSN:1750-4910
1750-4910
DOI:10.1111/j.1750-4910.2014.tb00174.x