The Writer’s Camp Journal: Issues 2026
Volume 2, Number 3, Autumn 2026
Volume 2, Number 3, Summer 2026
- Nyirati CM. Trail Stop 3: Reading like a reviewer. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(3):1. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20382350
- Abstract: Christina M. Nyirati emphasizes that becoming an excellent peer reviewer involves shifting focus from mere reading to deep understanding of a manuscript’s purpose and contribution. Effective reviewing requires analytical and constructive skills, balancing attention to details with an appreciation for broader concepts. Thoughtful, organized feedback aids both editors and authors in enhancing scholarly work.
- Nicoll LH, Oermann M, Eisenhauer E, Mastorovich M. Trail Pack: Predatory publishing: Beyond lists and labels. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(3):2. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20706392
- Abstract: The article discusses predatory publishing, emphasizing that not all questionable journals are inherently predatory. It highlights the importance of evaluating journals beyond mere labels, focusing on their operational practices and transparency. The authors advocate for a nuanced understanding of publishing challenges, urging authors to ask critical questions when assessing journals to make informed decisions.
- Watson R, Hayter M. Trail Stop #4: Editors’ perspectives on peer review. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(3):3. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20388194
- Abstract: The article highlights the critical role of peer review in academic publishing, discussing its evolution and current importance. It emphasizes the responsibilities of both editors and reviewers, detailing expectations for quality reviews, the management of conflicting opinions, and the subjective nature of the process. Overall, effective peer review is essential for maintaining publication standards.
- Chicca J. Trail stop 5: Writing constructive feedback. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(3):4. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20966803
- Abstract: The article outlines essential guidelines for effective peer reviewing to enhance scholarly communication in nursing. Emphasizing constructive feedback, it encourages reviewers to be balanced, specific, transparent, and authentic in their critiques. By fostering a supportive environment, reviewers can help authors improve their manuscripts, thereby contributing significantly to the scholarly community.
- Ali P. Trail Stop 7: Reviewing methods and rigor. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026;2(3):5. doi:10.5281/zenodo.20709530
- Abstract: This article emphasizes the essential role of peer reviewers in the academic publishing process. It outlines effective evaluation practices, warns against common pitfalls like unconstructive criticism, and advises on setting clear boundaries within reviews. A good reviewer balances constructive feedback with respect, ultimately helping authors improve their work without overreaching.
- Gill M. Trail Stop 6: Distinguishing major and minor comments. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(3):6. doi:10.5281/zenodo.21284249
- Abstract: This articles outlines the essential skills for becoming an effective peer reviewer. It emphasizes the distinction between major and minor comments, advocating for organized, constructive feedback that prioritizes significant issues affecting a manuscript’s quality. By focusing on the severity and revisability of concerns, reviewers can facilitate meaningful revisions and improve publication readiness.
- Monsivais DB. Trail stop 8: Reviewing conceptual and theoretical papers. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026;2(3):7. doi:10.5281/zenodo.21687884
- Abstract: This article guides aspiring reviewers in “Becoming an Excellent Peer Reviewer” at Writer’s Camp. This learning experience focuses on enhancing skills vital for effective peer reviewing, fostering growth in writing and critical analysis, and ultimately contributing to the development of quality scholarly work.
- Waldrop J, Reynolds S, Dunap JJ, Joseph ML. Trail Stop 9: Fit the review to the manuscript. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(3), 8. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.21630195
- Abstract: Effective peer review requires matching review criteria to the purpose of the manuscript. This article provides practical guidance for reviewing clinical, educational, leadership, evidence-based practice, quality improvement, and policy manuscripts. By emphasizing manuscript-specific evaluation, reviewers can provide more constructive feedback, support editorial decisions, and strengthen nursing scholarship.
- Owens JK. Trail stop 11: Disagreement among reviewers. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026;2(3):9. doi:10.5281/zenodo.21227415
- Abstract: The article discusses the dynamics of peer review, emphasizing that disagreements among reviewers, or non-convergent reviews, are common and can enhance scholarly dialogue. It highlights the editor’s role in synthesizing feedback, encouraging humility among reviewers, and providing guidance to authors in addressing conflicting comments, ultimately supporting quality manuscript development.
- Nicoll LH. Trail stop 10: Ethical responsibilities of reviewers. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026; 2(3):10; doi: 10.5281/zenodo.21464077
- Abstract: Trust is essential in peer reviewing, requiring confidentiality, unbiased assessments, and professional conduct. Reviewers must navigate potential conflicts of interest, maintain respectful communication, and handle new artificial intelligence technologies carefully. Upholding these ethical responsibilities enhances the credibility of scholarly publishing and fosters trust among authors, editors, and the academic community.
- Saver C. Shh! Editor Confidential: An interview with Heather Carter-Templeton, PhD, RN, NI-BC, FAAN. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(3),11. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.21514510
- Abstract: Heather Carter-Templeton, Editor-in-Chief of CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, discusses her editorial journey and the significance of the journal, which has served nurses for nearly 35 years. She emphasizes the importance of AI in both healthcare and writing, while encouraging authors to establish good habits and actively participate in the publishing process.
- Rohan AJ. Trail Stop 12: Writing the recommendation. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(3):12. doi:10.5281/zenodo.22016067
- Abstract: At the end of a review, reviewers are typically asked to make a recommendation: accept, revise, or reject. This step can feel daunting, especially for newer reviewers. It is important to remember that your recommendation is advisory—editors make the final decision. This Trail Stop focuses on making thoughtful recommendations, aligning comments with recommendations, and avoiding mixed messages.
- Saver C. Self-edit your way to publication success. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026; 2(3):15. doi:10.5281/zenodo.22083319
- Abstract: Cynthia Saver emphasizes the importance of self-editing in manuscript preparation to enhance its quality before submission. Through a structured approach involving broad assessments and detailed checks, authors can identify gaps and errors, ensuring their work communicates effectively and is free of common pitfalls. Engaging peers for feedback is also recommended.
- Davidson JE. Trail Pack: Publication is not the finish line. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026;2(3):16. doi:10.5281/zenodo.22163340
- Abstract: Judy E. Davidson traces the winding path from an unanswered question to scholarly publication—and then beyond it. Using a Nursing Outlook commentary and a companion MedPage Today editorial, she shows why publication is not the finish line and offers practical strategies for extending the reach of new knowledge.
Volume 2, Number 2, Spring 2026
- Chinn PL. Nursing theory think tanks: Bridges between knowledge and action. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(2):1. doi:10.5281/zenodo.19025284
- Abstract: This month’s Trail Pack features a discussion on nursing theory, with contributions from experts Peggy Chinn, Afaf Meleis, and Jacqueline Fawcett. It includes an engaging article, video conversation, and insights into the significance of informal scholarly gatherings for fostering intellectual growth and exploring nursing theory. Participants are encouraged to reflect and form their own think tanks.
- Watson R. Academic publishing survives despite its flaws. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026; 2(2): 2. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18285119
- Abstract: Roger Watson critiques the academic publishing model, emphasizing its resilience despite ethical concerns surrounding profit extraction from publicly funded research. He highlights issues like paywalls, predatory journals, and the impending threat of AI-generated content. While reforms are necessary, he questions their feasibility due to existing financial incentives linking universities, publishers, and academics.
- Kirton, C. Wordcraft at camp: Healthcare versus health care. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(2):3. doi:10.5281/zenodo.19442225
- Abstract: Carl A. Kirton discusses the orthographic variants “healthcare” and “health care,” emphasizing the importance of consistency in writing. Different style guides vary in their preferences for these terms, often treating them as interchangeable. Ultimately, authors should follow the style requirements of their target journal while maintaining clarity in their manuscripts.
- Chicca J. Dear Colleague: Show your article title some love with these tips. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026; 2(2): 4. doi:10.5281/zenodo.19696693
- Abstract: Jenny Chicca highlights the importance of crafting an accurate and captivating title for scholarly articles, emphasizing how titles significantly affect discoverability. She provides tips on starting with the title, reviewing journal requirements, considering typical titles in the discipline, and utilizing help from colleagues or AI to enhance the title’s effectiveness.
- Kelly L. The publication meeting you keep forgetting to attend. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(2):5. doi:10.5281/zenodo.19665392
- Abstract: Lisa Kelly emphasizes the importance of personal accountability in writing through the practice of monthly “publication meetings.” These sessions help writers review their work, identify stalled pieces, and clarify commitments, fostering sustained progress without relying on external deadlines. This approach encourages intentional engagement with multiple projects, reducing the emotional stakes of rejection.
- Keen A. & Rader, R. INQUIRE—Your project compass to choosing QI, EBP, Innovation, or Research. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(2):6. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.19896031
- Abstract: The INQUIRE Model provides a structured approach for healthcare professionals to select appropriate problem-solving methods, including Quality Improvement (QI), Evidence-Based Practice (EBP), Innovation, and Research. This model aids in identifying triggers, assessing projects, and ensuring effective solutions, ultimately fostering data-driven decision-making in healthcare improvement efforts.
- McCullough M. Confessions of a highlighter addict. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026; 2(2):7. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18363717
- Abstract: Molly McCullough discusses her journey from relying on highlighters to recognizing effective paraphrasing’s role in writing and retaining information. She highlights the importance of understanding plagiarism and provides strategies for better paraphrasing. This approach enhances clarity, integrity, and academic success, emphasizing the need for proper citation practices.
- Nicoll LH. Reference managers, artificial intelligence, and the integrity of scholarly writing. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(2):8. doi:10.5281/zenodo.20101699
- Abstract: Leslie H. Nicoll emphasizes the critical role of reference managers in maintaining integrity in scholarly writing, especially in an age where AI can generate fabricated citations. Authors must engage directly with cited sources to ensure accurate references, as the failure to do so undermines research integrity and accountability within academic publishing.
- Saver C. Shh! Editor Confidential: An interview with Rita Pickler, PhD, RN, FAAN. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(2):9. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20139222
- Abstract: Cynthia Saver interviews Rita Pickler, editor of Nursing Research, in the first installment of “Shh! Editor Confidential.” They discuss the journal’s focus on nursing-related research, offer publishing advice to aspiring authors, and outline the editorial process. Pickler also addresses concerns about the role of generative artificial intelligence in publishing and emphasizes the importance of clear writing.
- Nicoll LH, Chicca J. Commentary from camp leadership: Make it look N.I.C.E. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(2):10. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20445225
- Abstract: Leslie Nicoll and Jenny Chicca emphasize the importance of presenting written work effectively in their guide to making manuscripts N.I.C.E.—Neat, Intentional, Correct, and Eye-catching. They highlight common writing pitfalls and offer strategies to enhance clarity and engagement, ultimately aiming to bolster credibility in academic publishing.
- Pesut DJ. Whose shoulders are you standing on? Cultivating historical consciousness in nursing scholarship. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(2):11. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20347938
- Abstract: Daniel J. Pesut emphasizes the importance of recognizing intellectual lineage in nursing scholarship. He argues that foundational ideas often become “common knowledge,” losing their historical context and acknowledgment. By honoring sources, scholars promote a culture of reciprocity and responsibility, ensuring that knowledge remains linked to its origins, enhancing integrity in the profession.
- Nicoll LH. Trail stop 1: Why peer review matters. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026; 2(2):12. doi:10.5281/zenodo.19559925
- Abstract: Peer review is a crucial process in academic publishing, yet many reviewers lack formal training. As submission volumes rise, the demand for skilled reviewers increases, creating challenges. Despite potential biases in the process, peer review remains essential for improving manuscript quality and supporting scholarly dialogue. Aspiring reviewers are encouraged to engage.
- Foli KJ. A conversation about The Conversation. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(2), 13. doi: doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20577111
- Abstract: Karen J. Foli discusses her experience publishing with The Conversation, a nonprofit news organization that collaborates with experts to present accessible content. She highlights the distinctive features of this model compared to traditional scholarly publishing, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasizing the broad readership and opportunities that followed her article on nurses’ psychological trauma.
- Raber A. Becoming a peer reviewer and accepting (or declining) the invitation. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(2):14. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20137489
- Abstract: Peer review is a crucial process in academic publishing, yet many reviewers lack formal training. As submission volumes rise, the demand for skilled reviewers increases, creating challenges. Despite potential biases in the process, peer review remains essential for improving manuscript quality and supporting scholarly dialogue. Aspiring reviewers are encouraged to engage.
- Kelly L. Write what hasn’t been written: A tribute to the writing legacy of Dr. Wyona M. Freysteinson. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(2):15. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20750435
- Abstract: Dr. Wyona Freysteinson’s legacy in nursing extends beyond her scholarship; she inspired countless individuals to challenge norms and explore uncharted territories in their writing. Lisa Kelly reflects on Wyona’s directive to “write what hasn’t been written,” emphasizing her profound impact on fostering creativity and confidence among emerging scholars in the profession.
Volume 2, Number 1, Winter 2026
- Owens JK, Nicoll LH, Carter Templeton H, Chinn PL, Oermann MH, Edie AH, De Gagne JC. Trail Pack: Evidence-based recommendations to inform currency and number of references. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):1. doi:10.5281/zenodo.17724399
- Abstract: The inaugural Trail Pack at Writer’s Camp features a unique learning experience combining a research report, a podcast, and an article discussing reference currency and quantity in scholarly writing. It emphasizes the importance of recent literature while acknowledging the relevance of historical sources, offering guidelines and decision-making algorithms for effective literature selection.
- Watson R, Hayter M. Misuse of methods in academic publishing: A growing concern. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026; 2(1):2. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18039465
- Abstract: Editors Roger Watson and Mark Hayter highlight the troubling trend of method misuse in nursing research. Many complex studies lack theoretical foundations and meaningful contributions, driven by a “publish or perish” mentality. They urge a focus on substantive research questions and propose education reform for editors, reviewers, and academic leaders to combat this issue.
- Nicoll LH. Journals as Systems: Rethinking How Scholarly Publishing Works. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):3. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.18099850
- Abstract: Leslie H. Nicoll discusses the complexities of scholarly journal publishing, emphasizing the need to view journals as systems rather than mere labels like “predatory” or “legitimate.” This perspective fosters more meaningful conversations about journal operations and integrity, ultimately promoting a clearer understanding of their diverse functions within scholarly communication. The upcoming Journal Systems Framework will facilitate this approach.
- Nicoll, LH. How journals work: A systems-based framework for understanding scholarly publishing. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):4. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18037409
- Abstract: Scholarly journals are often judged by prestige or impact, yet these signals reveal little about how journals actually function. The Journal Systems Framework offers a systems-based way to understand differences in editorial intent, capacity, infrastructure, and governance—helping authors, editors, and institutions move beyond simplistic labels toward clearer, more informed conversations about publishing.
- Fawcett J. Writing a Column for a nursology journal: A personal experience. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):5. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18215212
- Abstract: Jacqueline Fawcett reflects on her journey with HumanBecoming Theory and her writing experience for Nursing Science Quarterly, initially influenced by Rosemarie Rizzo Parse. She emphasizes the significance of precise language in nursing discourse and shares insights on collaborating with colleagues and the meaningful engagement with nursing’s metaparadigm in her columns.
- Dunlap JJ, Waldrop JB. Writing retreats your way. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):6. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18213788
- Abstract: Jayne Jennings Dunlap and Julee Briscoe Waldrop emphasize the adaptability of writing retreats, detailing their experience with a virtual retreat due to unforeseen circumstances. They highlight the importance of dedicated time for writing, whether solo or group-based, and encourage readers to envision their own dream retreats to enhance creativity and productivity.
- Chicca J, Shellenbarger T. Don’t hate on the percolate. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):7. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18250562
- Abstract: Drs. Jenny Chicca and Teresa Shellenbarger compare writing to coffee brewing methods, emphasizing the importance of percolation. While Chicca favors quick writing, Shellenbarger believes in allowing ideas to develop over time. They discuss how percolation enhances creativity and organization, encouraging writers to take their time and refine their thoughts for better outcomes.
- Richards AJ. From one minute to five: designing a collaborative writing assessment that works. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):8. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18235834
- Abstract: The content introduces the Five-Minute Peer Writing Activity (FMPWA) developed by Andrew Richards to enhance nursing students’ engagement and learning. This collaborative assessment replaces the traditional one-minute paper, fostering effective peer feedback and improving understanding. Research shows significant increases in student satisfaction and performance, affirming its adaptability in educational settings.
- Pickler RH. We get letters. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):9. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18270341
- Abstract: Rita H. Pickler discusses the roles of queries and letters to the editor in the publication process. Queries help authors assess manuscript fit with journals, while letters engage in critical discussions about published papers. Adhering to guidelines is essential for both, ensuring meaningful contributions to scholarly dialogue.
- Waldrop JB, Reynolds SS, Dunlap JJ. When reporting methods, accurate language matters. The Writer’s Camp Journal. 2026; 2(1):10. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18355843
- Abstract: Julee Briscoe Waldrop, Staci S. Reynolds, and Jayne Jennings Dunlap discuss the importance of precise language in reporting quality improvement (QI) initiatives versus research studies in nursing. They highlight common misconceptions, provide examples, and stress that correct terminology enhances publication acceptance and improves understanding for better healthcare practice.
- Nicoll LH. How to read like a scholar (without drowning). The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):11. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18483975
- Abstract: Leslie H. Nicoll emphasizes the importance of purposeful reading for scholars to manage overwhelming reading loads. By defining clear goals, adapting reading speeds, and knowing when to stop, academics can engage with literature effectively. Nicoll advocates for maintaining pleasure reading to enhance overall comprehension and joy in the reading process.
- Normandin PA. Why nurse editors belong on Institutional Review Boards: Editorial leadership as patient advocacy. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):12 doi:10.5281/zenodo.18356806
- Abstract: Patricia A. Normandin emphasizes the critical role of nurses, particularly nurse editors, in Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). She argues that their unique clinical and editorial perspectives enhance research oversight by ensuring participant safety and clarity in protocols. By advocating for patient-centered practices, they address gaps in traditional research reviews, fostering more humane and effective studies.
- Nicoll LH. Wordcraft at Camp: False Precision. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(1):13 doi:10.5281/zenodo.18664075
- Abstract: False precision misleads readers by presenting numbers with inconsistent or unnecessary decimal places, suggesting greater accuracy than exists. This can create confusion about data analysis and distract from the main narrative. Maintaining consistent precision, usually with whole numbers for percentages, enhances clarity and effective communication.
- Rohan AJ, Nicoll LH. Email Etiquette for Authors: Editor Irks, Super Irks, and How to Avoid Them. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):14 doi:10.5281/zenodo.18391351
- Abstract: Annie J. Rohan and Leslie H. Nicoll present essential guidelines for professional email etiquette aimed at authors communicating with editors. They emphasize that emails should be clear, respectful, and appropriately formatted, with the correct use of salutations and avoiding casual language, such as emojis and textisms. Authors should be mindful of their relationship with editors, addressing them formally unless invited otherwise, and carefully considering the content and tone of their messages. Key “editor irks” identified include using generic salutations, improper journal names, and marking emails as high importance. Overall, professional email habits reflect one’s reputation and respect for the recipient.
- Patterson BJ. Mastering the research brief: the art of brevity and clarity. The Writers Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):15. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18733291
- Abstract: Barbara J. Patterson discusses the art of crafting a research brief, which condenses extensive research into a concise format for busy clinicians and policymakers. Emphasizing clarity and brevity, she advises focusing on the core message, actionable insights, and practical implications. This approach bridges the gap between evidence and decision-making in nursing practice.
- Shellenbarger T. Revisiting writing productivity: ten years later with ten additional tips. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):16. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18773461
- Abstract: Teresa Shellenbarger shares ten updated tips for enhancing writing productivity, building on her previous advice from a decade ago. Key strategies include writing about familiar topics, maintaining an idea file, developing a clear purpose statement, starting without perfection, breaking projects into smaller tasks, and seeking mentorship.
- Nicoll LH, Oermann M, Chinn PL, Conklin JL. Author guidance as editorial infrastructure: what we knew, what has changed, and why this still matters. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(1):17 doi:10.5281/zenodo.18776278
- Abstract: This month’s Trail Pack explores a part of scholarly publishing that is everywhere—and rarely examined: instructions for authors. Featuring two foundational 2018 studies by Marilyn Oermann and colleagues, along with a new original essay written for this Trail Pack, this collection revisits how journals communicate expectations to authors and how that guidance
- Nicoll LH. Version control is editorial kindness. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026; 2(1):18. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18838798
- Abstract: Leslie H. Nicoll emphasizes the significance of effective version control in collaborative writing, highlighting its impact on trust, momentum, and overall productivity. Confusion over document versions can lead to unnecessary stress and inefficiencies. By establishing clear systems and using shared platforms, collaborators can mitigate these challenges, fostering a more caring and efficient writing process.
- Saver C. The Power of Parallelism. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2026;2(1):19. doi:10.5281/zenodo.19002988
- Abstract: Parallel structure is a writing technique that enhances clarity and cohesion. By maintaining a consistent format for words and phrases, writers improve readability and help readers absorb key messages with less effort. This tool can be applied in various writing situations, transforming lists and sentences into well-organized, impactful text.
- Nicoll LH. Wordcraft at Camp: Frolleague. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(1):20. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.19192973
- Abstract: Leslie H. Nicoll reflects on her relationship with two deceased colleagues, Dr. Julia Snethen and Dr. Jacqueline Fawcett, and introduces the term “frolleague.” A frolleague is a professional peer who feels like a friend within a work context, without personal involvement outside of the workplace, helping maintain appropriate professional boundaries.