“I believe scientific journals should aim to be well-facilitated spaces for dialogue that are essential for impactful and cooperative marine research. This mentorship seemed like a great opportunity to further explore how journals can achieve that.”
“I was surprised by the fact that reviewers ‘learn by doing’. There’s a lot of human effort behind any editorial decision. This also implies a big responsibility for everyone to be aware of their potential biases when assessing scientific work.”
“A good editorial board is one that is diverse and self-aware of their cultural, economic, and social biases. From what I’ve seen to date, there’s a big effort put into this at ICES Journal.”
Mentored by Jan Jaap Poos and Sam Subbey
Why does this mentorship matter?
“Since publishing my first peer-reviewed article, I have largely relied on informal guidance from peers and self-learning. The lack of standardized guidelines across journals often left me grappling with inconsistent expectations. The ICES Journal Editorial Mentorship Programme presents a much-needed bridge… I am especially drawn to this programme for hands-on experience with the editorial workflow and the chance to learn directly from experienced editors.”
What do you feel is the long-term value of mentorship?
“The kind of guidance provided through this mentorship is rare and invaluable. Gaining insider knowledge of the Journal's editorial criteria has led me to critically reflect on my own research programme and scientific writing. I’ve also gained valuable insights through community discussions on a range of topics from editorial practices to emerging scientific trends, such as the use of AI in research, and professional development opportunities.”
What are your goals?
“Participating in this mentorship programme has already had a significant impact on my career trajectory. As I work toward becoming a fisheries scientist who contributes to both theoretical advancements and practical management solutions, a comprehensive understanding of the publishing process is essential. I look forward to continuing my contributions to ICES Journal!”
Thomas Clegg
Mentored by Mike Pol and Edd Hind-Ozan
What motivated you to apply?
“Scientists are communicators, but few get the opportunity of formal training in writing or the peer-review process. I wanted to understand how journal policy is discussed and implemented, from shaping the direction of a leading journal to the use of specific tools in scientific publishing.”
What do feel is the value of mentorship?
“Formal education often neglects the soft skills needed as a scientist. Mentorship can be a very effective tool to train early-career researchers who have not had the opportunities yet. It also allows learning through conversation, which lets mentees question the system and understand more complex topics than a classroom environment would allow.”
What do you think makes a good editor?
“The highest standards come from the additional efforts made by editors and reviewers to provide a constructive, honest, and ethical service. This involves transparency in decisions, addressing inappropriate reviews, and being aware of unconscious biases in all roles. I have enjoyed stepping out of my comfort zone as an editor, as it has forced me to reflect on what good science is more fundamentally, rather than focusing on technical aspects of my own field.”
The programme provides mentees with a rare chance to sit alongside experienced editors and learn how scientific decisions are made - from matching manuscripts to reviewers, to navigating conflicting feedback, to ensuring ethical standards.
Tom finds the programme both engaging and challenging, and therefore very rewarding. “No two manuscripts are the same, and each one has offered a different insight into how high-quality science is produced,” he reflects. “I was also interested in learning the patterns that make a manuscript vulnerable to rejection, and the strategies that editors and peer reviewers use to improve those manuscripts with potential.”
The editorial programme showcases the value of mentorship in science, and the need for more dialogue and collaboration even amongst experts in the field. Julia adds, “I think a proper education in peer-reviewing and journal editing is more important than we ever thought. Sometimes we fail to identify inadequate or unethical behaviours in the process of publishing our studies…the possibility to discuss these practices with peers in safe spaces makes a huge difference. I have participated in very interesting discussions on ethical, societal, and technical issues surrounding the mechanisms of scientific publishing - in the little time I have been part of this programme, I have already learned a lot.”
Ming highlights the professional rigour required: “I’ve developed a deep appreciation for the complexities of editorial decision-making, especially when faced with conflicting reviews and nuanced scientific arguments.”
Beyond the technical, mentees also appreciate the values-driven editorial culture at ICES Journal. “I am honoured to be a part of this community,” Alex shares, “which is comprised of impressive scientists who are conducting fascinating and impactful research, and values high-quality science and peer-review. The mentorship programme has already influenced the way I approach my scientific writing and has inspired me to think more broadly about the impact of my research. I’m excited to continue engaging and learning from all the impressive professionals in ICES community.”
A word from the mentors
ICES Journal Editorial Mentorship Programme is as enriching for the mentors as it is for the mentees.
“My mentees have consistently been very capable researchers with clear talents for editing," says Jan Jaap Poos, mentor to Ming. “I really enjoyed reflecting with them on the manuscripts that we dealt with. Meanwhile, I loved seeing them grow towards being independent editors."
Mike Sieracki, who mentored Tom, underscores the broader value, “Marine science, like all science, rests on a credible publishing process. Mentoring early-career scientists on editing contributes to the quality and credibility of publishing… giving me hope for a better future."
Attending ICES Annual Science Conference 2025?
Two sessions at this year's ICES Annual Science Conference (ASC) will explore the world of scientific publishing.
Specifically for early-career scientists- but open to all interested researchers a lunctime Q and A session will take place with ICES Journal Editor-in-Chief Howard Browman and the Journal's editorial board at 12:00 on Tuesday 16 September.
Want to develop your peer-review skills? Join offers a chance to learn best practices in peer reviewing and engage in hands-on exercises. Join the network session Peer review - Best practices and hands-on training at 08:30 on Wednesday 17 September to discuss challenges, solutions and strategies for becoming an effective reviewer.:
Celebrating 100 Years of ICES Journal of Marine Science
As ICES Journal approaches a century of groundbreaking research in oceanography and fisheries science, a call for articles that explore the past, present, and future of marine science is open for a special celebratory issue to be released for its 100th anniversary.
Interested in contributing to this milestone?
Read more about Celebrating a century of marine science and find details on how to submit an article to ICES Journal of Marine Science.
