Reflections on reviews

Bill Matney
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08098131.2024.2353462
2024-06-06
Nordic Journal of Music Therapy
Abstract:We often find ourselves – as clinicians/health musickers, researchers, educators, and advocates – engaged in the process of review. Review of our work with clients/participants is a part of our ongoing assessment; it allows us to reflect, change, and act ethically. Our review activity in other areas (research, andragogy, advocacy) most often seeks to inform this clinical work, either directly or indirectly. Review can evoke reflection (our serious consideration of a topic) and can foster reflexivity (our ability to unearth our assumptions and values on a topic; Thompson, Citation 2022 ). Review, whether done by oneself or with others, is a process that can facilitate growth and understanding.
rehabilitation
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
This paper attempts to explore and reflect on the review process in the field of music therapy. The author, Bill Matney, discusses the importance of review in clinical practice, research, education, and advocacy from multiple perspectives, emphasizing review as a tool to promote personal and professional growth. Specifically, the paper focuses on the following aspects: 1. **Application of Review in Different Fields**: The author points out that review is not only used to evaluate and improve work in clinical practice but also plays an important role in research, education, and advocacy. These review activities help to form theories, establish ethical practices, convey results, and discuss findings. 2. **Collaborative and Formalized Review**: In research, review is often conducted in a more collaborative and formal manner. For example, the human subjects review process within or outside the research team, as well as the review of potential publications by manuscript editors, journal editorial teams, and university peers. 3. **Challenges and Value of Review**: The author shares his experience as a reviewer, noting that while collaborative review is valuable, it is also full of challenges and complexities. By observing good and bad review examples, as well as the mistakes he made during the review process, he learned how to conduct better reviews. 4. **Critical Analysis of Book Reviews**: The author mentions that during his tenure as associate editor of the Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, he required book reviews to include critical analysis. He believes this update is very important because book reviews themselves can contribute to the knowledge system, helping to clarify and present different perspectives. 5. **Artistry of Review**: The author emphasizes that review is not only a procedural process but also has an artistic aspect. Review needs to promote strong knowledge contributions while also considering human interaction, balancing gatekeeping and procedures with effective communication and a humane experience. He suggests that reviewers should remain open, listen, and use words carefully to promote opportunities for education and being educated. In summary, this paper aims to explore the multifaceted role of review in the field of music therapy, emphasizing its importance in promoting knowledge development and personal growth.