The aim of the Materials Science and Technology Literature Review Prize is to encourage definitive, critical reviews of the literature by students and to make these available to a wider readership by publication in the journal Materials Science and Technology (MST).
Each submission will undergo a full peer review and revision process. While all accepted reviews will be published, only six contributors will continue as finalists in the competition. They will present the reviews orally during Spring 2018, to a panel of judges compiled from the Editorial Board of MST, who will then select the winner and runners-up. There will be a monetary prize for the winner and any runners-up.
The prize is open to any postgraduate studying for a materials science and engineering related qualification at either a UK or international institution. Submission is via Editorial Manager for Materials Science and Technology no later than Friday 12th January 2018. The review should be authored by the candidate alone and accompanied by a declaration that the review is the candidate’s own work and that any assistance received has been fully acknowledged.
The submitted manuscript should provide a concise, critical review of the literature on the chosen topic:
- Critical review: An example of a critical assessment is when there are two papers containing data on the same topic, it is useful to plot the data together, compare and see if the conclusions of each paper are justified. Alternatively, if data are presented without clear interpretation, you can search the literature to see whether others can provide a solution.
- Concise: “It is to be noted that the authors  conducted a large number of experiments that generated data which led to the conclusion that the fatigue strength improves in the presence of retained austenite in the microstructure” can be expressed concisely as “Many experiments  suggest that the fatigue strength is enhanced by austenite that is retained in the microstructure.”
- Chosen topic: The topic should be focused so that the literature can be comprehensively assessed. Thus, “Biomaterials” is too broad, whereas “hydroxyapetite coated titanium” may be manageable. The topic must relate to materials science with significant structure-property-processing aspects.
- Limit yourself to about 6000 words (excluding contents page, references and tables); a concise abstract not exceeding 200 words must be included.
- Avoid the use of topic specific jargon, and an excessive use of abbreviations. The subject matter should be readable by non-specialists who are nevertheless materials scientists.
- Permission must be obtained for any figures obtained from the literature. All work on which you base the review should be explicitly acknowledged via references. You must read and understand the references that you quote.
- Plagiarism is unethical and entries may be subject to iThenticate checks for duplication against the CrossCheck database.
- Detailed author guidelines are available from the MST homepage and a list of common mistakes can be found here.
- Editor: H. K. D. H. Bhadeshia, FRS, FREng , University of Cambridge, UK (email@example.com)
- Editor: Dr. J. A. Francis , University of Manchester, UK (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Editor: A. Horsewell , Technical University of Denmark (email@example.com)
- Editor: Dr. A. A. Howe , Beta Technology, UK (firstname.lastname@example.org)