Report on the 2025 <em>Royal Studies Journal</em> and Winchester University Press Biennial Early Career and Postgraduate Researcher Article Prize

How the Biochemical Society and Portland Press are engaging with and supporting early career researchers

The article reports results that compare the self‐perceptions of Chinese early career researchers (ECRs) with those of senior career researchers (SCRs) as peer reviewers, aiming to show the characteristics of the increasing number of Chinese ECRs as reviewers. An investigation was conducted with 207 Chinese researchers (including 116 ECRs and 91 SCRs) using an online questionnaire from October to November 2021. The results show the differences and similarities between ECRs and SCRs in five dimensions: views, motivations, preferences, behaviours and self‐confidence. It was found that ECRs are more inclined than SCRs to regard peer review as an extra‐role responsibility. ECRs' self‐focused motivations for peer review are stronger than SCRs' self‐focused motivations, while other‐focused motivations of ECRs and SCRs are equally strong. ECRs are more willing to accept review invitations from high‐quality indexed journals (such as SCI/SSCI/A&HCI journals) than SCRs. In terms of peer review behaviour, ECRs and SCRs have a similar degree of conscientiousness and agreeableness. In addition, ECRs are more lacking in self‐confidence as reviewers than SCRs.

Purpose – This paper aims to give an overview of OpenCon 2014, organized by the Right to Research Coalition, SPARC (The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition) and an organizing committee of students and early career researchers from around the world that took place between the 14th and 17th of November 2014 in Washington DC. Design/methodology/approach – A narrative approach was used to describe events. Findings – OpenCon 2014 is an exciting new conference that targets early career librarians and researchers who are involved with and/or interested in aspects of the open-access movement. It is attempting to galvanize the upcoming generation of scholars to demand more of traditional publishing models by bringing together a selective group that spans diverse interests and experience levels. Originality/value – This report outlines the author's takeaways and opinions concerning the events of the conference, as well as identifies some of the themes and issues that were relevant to librarians in research institutions.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented challenges to researchers worldwide, and extensive studies have demonstrated that its impacts since March 2020 have been unequal, including across research discipline, gender, and career status. In 2023, as we navigate the post-pandemic times, questions persist regarding potential disparities and enduring effects faced by volcanology researchers, whose activities range from field work in remote areas to laboratory experiments and numerical modelling. In this study, we explore the multifaceted impacts of the pandemic on volcanology researchers through an online survey distributed globally from January to March 2023. Our survey findings reveal that a considerable fraction of volcanology researchers (44%–62%) face longer-term challenges from the pandemic that continue to impact their research, with a notably higher proportion among early career researchers (62%) and researchers with disabilities (76%). In addition, over half (52%) of all surveyed researchers indicated that they had left or considered leaving academia due to pandemic-related factors. A significantly higher proportion of disabled researchers (56%–70%) had left or considered leaving academia compared to researchers without disabilities (42%). Our findings underscore the pandemic’s long-lasting and disproportionate impacts on early career and disabled volcanology researchers. We emphasis the need for concerted efforts by research organisations and funding bodies to mitigate the pandemic’s enduring impacts, and stress the importance of making conferences accessible to support disabled researchers’ participation. As the pandemic’s long-lasting impacts ripple across the broader scientific community, the insights from this research can be used for fostering equitable practices and shaping policies beyond volcanology to other research disciplines.

1. Two senior ecologists summarised their experience of the scientific publication process (Statzner & Resh, Freshwater Biology, 2010; 55, 2639) to generate discussion, particularly among early career researchers (ECRs). As a group of eight ECRs, we comment on the six trends they described. 2. We generally agree with most of the trends identified by Statzner & Resh (2010), but also highlight a number of divergent perspectives and provide recommendations for change. Trends of particular concern are the use of inappropriate metrics to evaluate research quality (e.g. impact factor) and the salami slicing of papers to increase paper count. We advocate a transparent and comprehensive system for evaluating the research. 3. We stress the importance of impartiality and independence in the peer review process. We therefore suggest implementation of double-blind review and quality control measures for reviewers and possibly editors. Besides such structural changes, editors should be confident to overrule biased reviewer recommendations, while reviewers should provide helpful reviews but be explicit if a submission does not meet quality standards. Authors should always conduct a thorough literature search and acknowledge historical scientific ideas and methods. Additionally, authors should report low-quality copy editing and reviews to the editors. 4. Both early and late career researchers should jointly implement these recommendations to reverse the negative trends identified by Statzner & Resh (2010). However, more senior scientists will always have to take the lead with respect to structural changes in the publication system given that they occupy the majority of decision-making positions.

How can publishers support early career journal editors?

The COVID-19 pandemic has put diabetes at the forefront of conversation. The prevalence of type 2 diabetes in the United Kingdom is high1 and has links to adverse COVID-19 outcomes.2 Research investigating the links between these two public health issues are moving at pace. However, the pandemic has seen early career researchers (ECRs) in diabetes face professional and personal challenges that have the potential to slow down or derail bourgeoning careers. These challenges are not unique to ECRs working in the diabetes field—and they compound a challenging decade that included the fallout from an economic crisis and uncertainties arising from a protracted Brexit. In May 2021, 15 ECRs gathered online as part of the Diabetes UK annual Innovators in Diabetes (IDia) training programme. A discussion on the career challenges faced and possible solutions to facilitate a healthy future for diabetes ECRs was initiated and facilitated by senior leaders in diabetes research. This letter summarises the themes from that discussion. Academic progression is precarious and often without a well-defined career pathway.3 Timing is crucial when applying for fellowships or institutional posts with strict criteria related to number of years worked post-PhD. Probationary periods have demanding goals combining research, teaching, clinical and citizenship achievements. ECRs whose career routes are seen as 'non-conventional' (e.g., changing fields, spending time in industry, time off for caring duties) are particularly vulnerable to inflexible criteria. The pandemic's impact; through the redirection of research council and NIHR funding, in combination with reductions to medical research charities income now exceeding £292 million,4 third-level recruitment-freezes and juggling personal and clinical duties will only exacerbate this. The pandemic-associated lockdowns have meant laboratory closures, disruption to support services and an increase in teaching workload due to pivoting from in-person to online teaching. For many ECRs, their laboratory-based research slowed down or halted. Human studies paused due to restrictions and social distancing, studies were redesigned to minimise face-to-face contact and staff were retrained in the use of virtual methods. Research support services such as ethics committees have, rightly, prioritised COVID-19 studies. Navigating teaching duties alongside skills to develop research independence is challenging, resulting in long working hours5 which is of concern due to increased risk of burnout and physical health risks.6 The impact of the additional COVID-19-related pressures is as yet unclear but may be significant.7 Institutions are facing unprecedented demands on their resources; however, support must remain in place to equip ECRs to manage teaching workloads with research time ring-fenced and investment in training in areas such as grant writing, public engagement, and financial and staff management. While the format of the next Research Excellence Framework8 is under review, it is imperative that it be cognisant of the diversity of career pathways and the demonstrable benefit of supporting ECRs and the impact COVID-19 will have had. The demonstrable benefit of taking a long-term view of research funding over decades has ultimately resulted in the UK's successful vaccination programme. Since government allocation of funds is a core part of many universities' funding models, real change must emanate from the government assessment and funding models of UK research and include a long-term view of scientific research funding—which we hope will include financial support to the medical research charities recently affected. The opportunity to network with other researchers is a vital source of support, information and career-direction for ECRs. Networking may happen informally or be formally institutionally facilitated. External organisations, professional conferences and professional and personal development courses also enhance ECRs support networks. While meetings remain online, we advocate for the inclusion of virtual networking sessions that create new sharing opportunities. We encourage senior members of the research community to consider formal or informal mentoring of ECRs and a repository of names and links be made available. ECRs are employees of research institutions. The introduction of formalised 'Tenure Track' schemes across the sector, designed to support ECRs on a path to independence, has been welcome. However, to support ECRs through the COVID-19 pandemic and work to limit its long-term impact on research careers, institutions should consider that original expectations regarding grant capture or publication set within pre-pandemic timeframes will need to be modified to help mitigate against irrevocable damage to careers. In summary, with the majority of the adult UK population now vaccinated and restrictions on distancing being eased, there is light at the end of the tunnel. The years ahead will undoubtedly be tough and there will be as yet unrecognised outcomes from the pandemic that will be far reaching. However, with recognition and support from organisations such as the Diabetes UK IDia programme and intra- and interinstitutional mentorship and training programmes, we hope our return to full strength will be facilitated.

In the community of Health Professions Education (HPE), early career educators and researchers often find themselves in the so-called “missing middle.” In this space, we are required to navigate the gap between joining this professional community and becoming established educators or researchers. This experience is shared globally across regions and contexts. At AMEE 2025, five diverse early career educators and researchers came together to give voice to the experience of being “in the gap,” outlining their journeys, aspirations, and reflections. As scientific advances continue to shape how healthcare is taught and delivered, understanding the transitional journey of early career educators and researchers becomes critical—directly influencing the scholarship and innovations we hope to see in both education and healthcare worldwide. The relevance of early career educators and researchers extends far beyond the classroom; they are foundational to the future of healthcare. Yet, this group is often expected to navigate the complexities of professional growth with limited guidance, resources, and institutional support. The session addressed key challenges faced by this community, including the scarcity of mentorship opportunities, struggles in professional identity formation, and the pervasive issue of burnout—particularly among those balancing demanding clinical responsibilities with educational roles. Moreover, fostering environments grounded in equality, diversity, and inclusivity (EDI) and promoting a genuine sense of belonging are essential to ensuring that all early career educators and researchers, regardless of their intersectional identities, have equitable opportunities for growth and leadership. The symposium was presented in a storytelling format, highlighting the unique challenges and successes experienced by early career educators and researchers. It concluded with a reflective discussion envisioning contemporary pathways for academic progression and proposing ways to strengthen and promote what we define as intentionally “nurturing” leadership: how today’s leaders can actively contribute to cultivating the leaders of the future.

How to become a successful researcher: tips for early career researchers.

Effective mentoring is a key mechanism propelling successful research and academic careers, particularly for early career scholars. Most mentoring programs focus on models pairing senior and early career researchers, with limited focus on peer mentoring. Peer mentoring may be especially advantageous within emerging areas such as implementation science (IS) where challenges to traditional mentoring may be more prevalent. This special communication highlights the value of peer mentoring by describing a case study of an early career IS peer mentoring group. We delineate our curriculum and structure; support and processes; and products and outcomes. We highlight important group member characteristics to consider during group formation and continuation. The group's long-term (6 years) success was attributed to the balance of similarities and differences among group members. Members were in a similar career phase and used similar methodologies but studied different health topics at different institutions. Group members gave and received instrumental and psychosocial support and shared resources and knowledge. Peer mentoring can serve an important function to provide emotional, logistical, and professional development support for early career scholars. Our case study highlights strategies to foster peer mentoring groups that provide a generalizable blueprint and opportunity for improved outcomes for early career professionals.

Peer Reviewed

The COVID‐19 pandemic has disrupted autism research and services. Early career researchers (ECRs) are particularly vulnerable to the impact of the pandemic on job security and career development. The goal of this study was to capture the challenges ECRs are facing during the pandemic and the supports that are needed for career development and research. ECRs were invited to complete an online survey that focused on four major areas; the impact of COVID‐19 on their research; changes in productivity due to COVID‐19; changes to training due to COVID‐19; and current mental health. 150 ECRs were eligible and provided sufficient data for inclusion. All but one ECRs reported their research had been negatively impacted by the pandemic. Reductions in productivity were reported by 85% of ECRs. The biggest impacts included recruitment of participants, increased needs at home and personal mental health. ECRs reported a 3‐fold increase in burnout, as well as increased anxiety. ECR supports, such as funding, flexibility, and tenure extensions, are required to ensure ASD research does not suffer from a “lost generation” of researchers.Lay SummaryThe COVID‐19 pandemic has had negative impacts on research around the world. Loss of productivity impedes autism research discoveries. However, researchers in the earliest phases of their career, specifically postdoctoral fellows through individuals in assistant professor (or equivalent) positions, are particularly vulnerable to long‐lasting effects of pandemic‐related disruptions which may limit their ability to continue as autism researchers. This survey highlights the needs of this group and identifies mechanisms by which these early career researchers may be supported in this time. This is critical to ensure the next generation of ASD researchers and clinician scientists continue on the path to advancing understanding of autism in the decades to come.

Early career (doctoral and postdoctoral) researchers often lack experience with transdisciplinary research despite their interest in tackling societal challenges with colleagues. Engagement in transdisciplinary research may not be an obvious choice because of limited support from their academic environment, difficulties of publishing, or a lack of suitable methods. In this work, we focus on the last. In order to evaluate several possible methodologies, we brought together a group of 10 young researchers from various disciplines to consider the question ‘What is progress?’. They examined this question via essay writing, a workshop, and a full-day colloquium, using methods that were based on examples from literature. After this process, input from the participants was gathered by means of a survey. Here, we provide an evaluation of existing methods and introduce four new methods: orientation exercise, census, individual reflection, walking consensus. Our results show that such a transdisciplinary exercise can readily be performed by a group of young researchers if the process is methodologically well structured, opening up opportunities for integrating such transdisciplinary insights in early career research.

This article explores how novice researchers develop a scholarly identity as they cross geographic, cultural, institutional, identity, and methodological borders throughout their studies, experiencing insider, outsider, and in-betweener positions. It hypothesizes that researchers become more culturally proficient through their fieldwork and self-study. The autoethnographic narratives address the social justice issues encountered by two early career researchers who increased their cultural proficiency and self-awareness as they moved across multiple cultural contexts. By shifting back and forth between insider, outsider, and in-betweener, the researchers became more culturally proficient, developed their voices as researchers, and practiced inclusivity by amplifying marginalized voices. Their self-reflective analysis of autoethnographic writing speaks to early career and graduate qualitative researchers who must recognize their positionality and their placement on the cultural proficiency continuum to be effective scholars in cross-cultural research.

Development is a not-for-profit journal; our publishing company, The Company of Biologists, is a registered charity and it, as well as the journal itself, is run by scientists for scientists. What this means for us is that, alongside publishing high-quality articles, our mission is to support our communitystem cell and developmental biologists like you. As an important part of this mission, we aim to provide resources and support for early career researchers (ECRs). We recognise that undergraduate researchers, PhD students, postdocs and those recently appointed to their first independent position are at the heart of the field and represent its future. We also know that being an ECR is challenging: funding can be very competitive, employment can be insecure and gaining experience in the skills needed to be a successful researcher can be difficult. To support ECRs and help them navigate the hurdles and opportunities of a research career, Development has been working hard in recent years to establish and fund several initiatives designed specifically with ECRs in mind.