The Paper Chase: A Team Science Training Exercise

Abstract

Over the past few decades of psychological research, there has been an important increase in both the application of multidisciplinary or collaborative science and in training and research that emphasizes social justice and cultural humility. In the current paper, we report on the use of the “Paper Chase” as a team science training and research experience that also facilitates cultural humility in research and when working in teams. The Paper Chase is a synchronous writing exercise originally conceptualized by a cohort of health service psychology interns to reduce lag time between manuscript writing and submission (Schaumberg et al., 2015). The Paper Chase involves a group of trainees coming together for a predetermined amount of time (e.g., 9 or more hours) with the aim of writing and submitting a full manuscript for publication. In the current paper, we extend a previous report on the Paper Chase by formally linking the training experience to the four phases of team science: development, conceptualization, implementation, and translation. We also discuss ways in which the Paper Chase as a training experience can promote cultural humility. Finally, we provide updated recommendations for successfully completing a Paper Chase project. Overall, the authors of this manuscript who were predoctoral psychology interns across two recent cohorts at one academic medical center reported positive experiences from the Paper Chase. In addition, the current study suggests the Paper Chase can be used as one activity that facilitates critical training in team science.

Trends over the past few decades demonstrate that research is increasingly being conducted in teams (Hall et al., 2018). Scientists have been presented with increasingly complex scientific challenges, and technology has continued to evolve to facilitate multiple modes of communication and data sharing, both of which have contributed to this increase (Hall et al., 2018). Team science can be defined as the “approach to conducting research in teams within complex social, organizational, political, and technological milieu that heavily influence how that work occurs” (Hall et al., 2018, p. 533). Not only has team science been identified as a key feature of an academic career (Byars-Winston et al., 2011), but psychologists have been encouraged to collaborate clinically with medical providers and other health professionals in medical centers (Hong & Robiner, 2016) and outpatient settings (Tovian, 2006). In fact, Drotar (2013) identified the development of interprofessional collaborations in team science as a central challenge to a career in conducting clinical research. Team science may be particularly important for early career scholars because participation in team science can increase opportunities for collaboration; provide recommendation letters for future job applications and the tenure and promotion processes; and increase access to data, statistical techniques, and measures that can facilitate an individual’s independent program of research (Deng et al., 2022). There has also been an important and increasing emphasis on ensuring that research is clinically and socially just (Galán, Bekele, et al., 2021). Team science may be one way to help increase clinically and socially just research because collaborations ensure that there are more perspectives and can facilitate increased accountability relative to research conducted independently.

Despite its importance, formal training in team science within psychology training programs is variable and highly dependent on a trainee’s mentor. Trainees may need more training within a supportive mentored environment to feel comfortable implementing a team science approach. One such experiential activity that provides training in this type of work and the fundamental skills of team science is the ‘Paper Chase,’ a collaborative writing effort in which a group of scholars write a manuscript in a predetermined amount of time (see Schaumberg et al., 2015). The Paper Chase is an opportunity to work within a diverse (e.g., discipline, gender, race and ethnicity, academic history) research team and have discussions about ensuring a culturally humble research process. The present work expands upon the original manuscript outlining the Paper Chase (Schaumberg et al., 2015), by formalizing the Paper Chase as a training opportunity in team science and discussing how the Paper Chase can be used to facilitate training in cultural humility. Additionally, we build on prior work by presenting the experiences of two Paper Chase teams, both cohorts of predoctoral psychology interns, who completed Paper Chase training experiences in sequential training years. Finally, we update recommendations for the Paper Chase based on two research teams’ experiences (see Table 1 for recommendations from the research teams).

Table 1.

Updated Paper Chase Recommendations for Trainees: The Do’s and Don’ts

Do	Don’t
Complete prep work before Paper Chase including developing research question(s), obtaining a dataset, conceptualizing study aim(s), hypotheses, framework, planning and running of some or all analyses, and collaboratively deciding on a journal for submission. We recommend that these meetings occur for months leading up to the writing day to promote discussions of cultural humility and the scientific process.	Write parts of the manuscript before the assigned Paper Chase Day or write sections of the manuscript alone or away from other team members. Rush the research process. Allow for enough time to get thorough feedback on all aspects of the research procedures prior to the writing day.
Obtain support from senior faculty including requesting a senior faculty member as a primary mentor for the project.	Submit paper without all authors reading and editing the full manuscript for flow, clarity, and stylistic consistency.
Select projects and research questions that expose trainees to issues related to social justice.	Reduce collaborative effort or write less due to being lower in the authorship order.
Select projects and research questions that appeal to multiple team members’ area of interest and expertise.	Submit paper without review, edits, and approval of any collaborating senior faculty mentors.
Have collaborative and transparent conversations regarding authorship order or how authorship order will be decided prior to Paper Chase Day.	Assign authorship based on pre-existing relationships with co-authors or reduce cohesion and inclusion by not including all the team members in authorship discussions.
Focus on individuals unique and diverse strengths and backgrounds by dividing work and writing sections according to individual areas of expertise.
Keep camaraderie high on Paper Chase Day through regular breaks, jokes, and snacks.

Note: Information in the table was adapted from Schaumberg et al., 2015 and updated based on the two teams’ recommendations.

The Paper Chase and Updated Recommendations

The Paper Chase was originally conceptualized by a health service psychology internship class to reduce the notable lag time between manuscript writing and manuscript submission (Schaumberg et al., 2015). The group of predoctoral interns split into two teams of six to draft two complete manuscripts, one per team, in the span of 24 hours. Despite some challenges, Schaumberg and colleagues (2015) reported an overall positive experience with the original Paper Chase. Specifically, the predoctoral interns described the Paper Chase as a unique learning experience: interns worked collaboratively and efficiently, learned new statistical techniques and reviewed relevant literatures.

We recommend an adapted version of the original Paper Chase format, with several meetings occurring prior to the Paper Chase day and primary editing occurring in the weeks following the Paper Chase. Specifically, preparation prior to the Paper Chase should include locating a usable data set for secondary data analyses, formulating the research questions and study hypotheses, planning and running analyses, and coordinating a writing time and location (see Table 1). The scientific rigor and ethical justification of the research questions and hypotheses, dataset and measures to be used, and data analytic plan should be discussed with the entirety of the research team, including the mentor prior to the writing day. These meetings allow for multiple iterations of the research question and methods before being finalized, which gives trainees the time to work through the research process thoroughly and collaboratively.

One of the key advantages of the Paper Chase, is that it reduces the lag time between science and publication through focused synchronous writing, which is a prominent hurdle to disseminating research to the public. In fact, scientists indicate that the act of writing is one of the primary difficulties for progressing within the scientific process (Grogan, 2021; Kwok, 2020). The Paper Chase addresses this skill by giving trainees the opportunity to write efficiently with support from one another after an initial research question and approach have been thoroughly vetted. Moreover, the process of the Paper Chase allows for trainees to act as the core scientific team, which allows for them to gain experience in applying critical scientific skills, such as working alongside others, collaboratively creating research questions, and deciding authorship and paper responsibilities, all of which are key features of science not typically explicitly taught within programs. Therefore, the process of the Paper Chase gives trainees the opportunity to practice writing efficiently and effectively and experience with several practical components of the scientific process of working within teams.

The Paper Chase and Team Science

The effectiveness of team science heavily relies on the successful communication and interpersonal skills of the team (Cheurvelil et al., 2014; Deng et al., 2022). Therefore, training in team science not only contributes to an individual’s research skillset but also fosters navigating interpersonal dynamics within a team, an invaluable skill for future psychologists. In fact, recommendations from the medical literature suggest that training programs should increase focus on team science skills (Libby et al., 2016). Training in interdisciplinary science can be facilitated by “exposure to theory and practice of building and sustaining a high-functioning team, and opportunities to practice interdisciplinary team building, management, and communication skills” (p. 22; Begg et al., 2014). Therefore, some critical components of training in team science are learning soft skills like teamwork, problem solving, and intercultural fluency.

It should be noted that the two teams discussed in this manuscript comprised psychology interns and therefore, despite having diverse research interests, were from one discipline. We see utility in creating interdisciplinary teams for a Paper Chase and see this as a critical future application of this activity. In fact, interdisciplinary professional competence has been identified as a core component of competency for health service professionals (Interprofessional Education Collaborative, 2016). Therefore, we strongly urge future Paper Chase teams to take an interdisciplinary approach (e.g., pediatric and psychology residents collaborate on a Paper Chase, a research center conducts a Paper Chase across epidemiology and psychology trainees, etc.).

Although many researchers recognize the importance of team science, only half of Clinical Translational Science Award institutions report having specific training opportunities in this domain (Begg et al., 2014). Experiential training opportunities have been identified as an effective way to learn about team science (Begg et al., 2014), and the Paper Chase is one such experiential method which offers this opportunity. Specifically, the Paper Chase gives trainees the opportunity to implement the following four phases of team science: 1) development phase, 2) conceptualization phase, 3) implementation phase, and 4) translation phase (Hall et al., 2012).

Development Phase

Hall and colleagues (2012) stated that the “primary goal of the development phase is to define the scientific or societal problem space of interest, including identifying the breadth of possible intricacies and interconnections of concepts that fall within the problem space and establishing the boundaries of the problem space to be addressed” (p. 417). Within the development phase, there are several tasks that need to be accomplished. First, the team must come with a shared mission which arises from preliminary ideas and discussions to solve a scientific problem (Hall et al., 2012). For the Paper Chase, this includes assessing which datasets the team has access to and what research questions can be answered from these datasets. It is critical that the team has sufficient time prior to the writing day to review the literature, consider the limitations of the methods that will be used, familiarize with the relevant statistical software, and effectively understand the generalizability and limitations of the sample (see Table 1).

The development phase should also foster an environment of psychological safety, where each person feels comfortable expressing their opinions and thoughts (Hall et al., 2012) as the Paper Chase may be the first time that researchers are working with a large and diverse network of collaborators. It is important for research teams to be aware of their own perspectives and power dynamics among the team and to display sensitivity towards other team members (Reich & Reich, 2006). Given that the Paper Chase is a training exercise, the presence of an active mentor is essential to guide and model appropriate interpersonal skills for the team (see Table 2 for tips from the research mentor who oversaw both teams). The mentor should be impartial and easily approachable to any member of the research team and should model delivery of feedback. Prior to the writing day, there should be several meetings with the mentor to receive feedback on the research questions, hypotheses, methods, and analytical plan. Second, it is critical that there is a clear team leader for the Paper Chase. In earlier phases of training, the mentor may also serve as the leader for the Paper Chase experience. In later phases of training, students may elect a leader in several ways—for example, based on access to the data that will be used, time to commit to a leadership role, and level of expertise on the topic.

Table 2.

Updated Paper Chase Recommendations for Mentors: The Do’s and Don’ts

Do	Don’t
Ensure program commitment to the Paper Chase experiential activity and foster environment that encourages trainee collaboration.	Expect all groups of trainees to be enthusiastic about participating in the Paper Chase activity.
Schedule protected time to allow trainees preparation meetings and discussions focused on the Paper Chase project.	Anticipate final product to be ready for submission immediately after writing day.
Provide additional program time and encourage non-program unstructured time for trainees to interact and build relationships with each other.	Limit feedback regarding the common scientific principles.
Encourage program faculty to identify clinical research data that may be of interest to trainees and could be used for Paper Chase experiential activity.	Be unavailable. Some groups of trainees may need more support and guidance than other groups.
Provide ongoing mentoring and support to trainees in regard to managing aspects of team science and developing leadership skills.
Get training in providing discussions around cultural humility and facilitate these discussions throughout the research process.
Encourage consultation with multiple research faculty and senior collaborators.
Disseminate information to program and related stakeholders regarding success of the experience.
Be open to modifying the experience based on trainee and mentor feedback.

Note: Information in the table was adapted from Schaumberg et al., 2015 and updated recommendations from the mentor of the two research teams.

Team One’s Experience.

The development phase began during a team member’s research mentorship meeting with their research preceptor, who is a faculty member in a health service psychology internship program. The preceptor and mentee identified a dataset through the preceptor’s collaborations across university departments that contained variables of interest to the mentee and could be used to answer novel research questions. Importantly, this dataset was gathered from a population that was also of interest to fellow research trainees. The University of Mississippi Medical Center internship program is divided into two groups of trainees: child-focused interns and adult-focused interns. Thus, to have a successful collaboration, the Paper Chase combined these two foci. The dataset used by this team allowed for this overlap by addressing substance use during pregnancy and child development outcomes (see Gissandaner et al., in press). Once trainees agreed to the collaboration, several meetings were scheduled to identify strengths and weaknesses of the team, develop an outline of the paper, and brainstorm methodological and analytical approaches to appropriately address the team’s research questions. Importantly, these meetings were also used to determine who would be involved in which aspects of the paper and to collaboratively agree on an authorship order for the manuscript. Given the mentee worked to identify the dataset, developed the initial research questions, and initiated the collaboration, it was agreed upon by the research team that they would serve as the “team leader” for the Paper Chase. Lastly, the mentee’s research preceptor agreed to serve as the primary mentor and be available to provide feedback on the team’s approach.

Team Two’s Experience.

For Team two, the development phase began with discussions as a psychology internship trainee cohort (similar to above - six members, three child-focused and three adult-focused). The team had a standing monthly meeting and began to dedicate part of this time to planning for their Paper Chase experience. First, the team decided together to pursue a Paper Chase project and to develop a research question that involved both child and adult mental health data. One team member (who later became first author) then discussed availability of datasets within the medical center with their training director and brought these ideas back to the team. For feasibility reasons, the team decided to use de-identified patient data that was made available for research through an internal database. This also enhanced the scientist-practitioner training experience as the team was able to use data from the same medical center where they were gaining clinical experience. After determining the data source, the team used their monthly discussions to determine a topic and research questions. Early in the training year, the team had identified both the COVID-19 pandemic and health disparities as issues of importance to the group; these themes informed the Paper Chase topic. Roles were also determined in advance during these monthly discussions, a few months prior to the scheduled writing day. Based on the plan for analysis to be conducted in advance by the first author, with additional preparatory work for second and third authors, roles were determined quickly based on time availability, interest, and individual authorship goals. Research questions evolved and became more specific over time as the first author examined the data and brought questions to the team. The first author took unresolved questions to the training director, who agreed to be the faculty mentor for this paper.

Conceptualization Phase

Once the scientific problem is defined during the development phase and team members begin integrating their unique expertise, the team can turn to the conceptualization phase. Hall and colleagues (2012) specify that “the primary task of the conceptualization phase is to develop novel research questions, hypotheses, a conceptual framework, and a research design that integrate collaborators’ disciplinary perspectives and knowledge domains to address the target problem in innovative ways” (p. 421). At this point, the team should have a shared conceptual model of study hypotheses, there should be consistent terminology among the team, each member’s specific expertise should be clear, and each member should believe in the value of the team approach (Hall et al., 2012). For the Paper Chase, this includes integrating theoretical perspectives, creating hypotheses, and refining the statistical techniques that will be used. An outline of the paper is critical to achieving these aims. The outline should include key theories and a preliminary statistical approach, and each member of the team can be assigned sections based on their expertise. Team members should be involved in developing the outline and provide feedback and input prior to the scheduled Paper Chase writing date.

One particularly promising procedure that could be used through the Paper Chase process at the conceptualization phase is that of pre-registration. After finalizing the hypotheses, methods, and analytic approach, the team could pre-register this plan on an outlet such as Open Science Framework (OSF) and then proceed with the analyses prior to the writing day. This would give a concrete plan as to how the paper will proceed on the writing day. Additionally, this would give trainees exposure to open science, which is critical for replicability and reproducibility in science (see Table 1).

Team One’s Experience.

Novel research questions were identified following a literature review that was conducted by the first author and a graduate student the first author mentored. The first author identified variables included in the dataset that could be used to answer research questions and provide a novel contribution to the literature base. The first author distributed background literature, the dataset codebook, and the dataset IRB protocol to the team ahead of Paper Chase planning meetings. He had previously been in contact with the project coordinator to obtain these documents and was able to get clarification on specific aspects of the data collection procedures and data coding. During these planning meetings, the second author suggested the analytical approach to answering the research questions; the team refined the study’s research questions and the analytical approach (e.g., identified additional variables to include in the models) and generated a priori hypotheses. Once the statistical approach was agreed upon, the first author prepared the dataset for analyses and shared the prepared data. The second author then conducted the data processing and analyses prior to the scheduled Paper Chase writing day. The third author created a shared drive to house relevant documents (e.g., manuscript drafts, background literature, the dataset codebook and IRB protocol, datafiles, and analyses syntax and output). These files were available for simultaneous viewing and multiple users could open and edit documents simultaneously, further facilitating a collaborative culture.

Team Two’s Experience.

Given the phenomenon of interest (i.e., mental health disparities in the COVID-19 pandemic) had only recently emerged, there was limited existing literature to draw on, and it had yielded conflicting findings. The authors reviewed other relevant literature on mental health disparities, with a particular focus on factors relevant to the region of interest, to formulate hypotheses. Additionally, prior research had focused on characterizing the phenomena of interest through descriptive analyses. However, after discussion as a team, it was decided that the Paper Chase paper would include tests of significance to increase the likelihood of publication. The first author prepared the data for analysis and consulted with the second and third authors and the faculty mentor as questions arose. She completed the analyses and an outline of the manuscript, which was guided by team discussions, prior to the writing day. The second author created folders in Google Drive for each relevant body of literature that would need to be reviewed and summarized for inclusion in the manuscript and assigned folders to various members of the Paper Chase team. She also assigned specific writing tasks to team members. The assignment decisions were based on area of expertise and by authorship order.

Implementation Phase

Now that the research problem is defined, hypotheses have been generated, and an outline has been created, it is time for Paper Chase Day. Hall and colleagues (2012) state that the primary goals of the implementation phase are to, “launch, conduct, and refine the planned research” (p. 422). To facilitate a successful implementation phase, there should be coordination and cooperation among the team and flexibility to change the plan as necessary (Hall et al., 2012). Coordination and cooperation are critical on the Paper Chase Day, as writing, statistical analyses, and manuscript preparation occur with all team members adjusting to others’ writing and ideas in the moment (see Tables 1 & 2). Even though the Paper Chase writing occurred over one day and in person for the two teams discussed in the current manuscript, it could also be implemented in a virtual format and/or be implemented over multiple days.

Both Teams’ Experiences.

The writing process occurred during one protected 9-hour business day with the date predetermined by internship faculty and approved by the interns. A room with a computer, projector, white boards, and tables was reserved prior to the writing day to allow interns a shared workspace. All interns brought personal laptop computers and documents were uploaded to a shared folder that allowed all interns to write and see each other’s progress simultaneously. The day began with a review of the goals, primary hypotheses, and analytic approach. For Team two, results were also reviewed prior to beginning the writing phase. Both teams divided the paper into three sections: introduction, methods and results, and discussion. As interns finished a task, additional shared tasks were completed (e.g., formatting, creating tables and figures). All interns were available to consult on other sections as needed. Both teams created a full draft of the manuscript by the end of the writing day. Both drafts were formatted for submission with the target journals having been collaboratively chosen beforehand. After the formally designated writing day, each intern on Team one independently edited the document after which the manuscript was sent to faculty co-authors for feedback. The interns were responsible for edits related to their originally assigned sections. For Team two, the first two authors performed most of the edits following the writing day and then sent the manuscript to co-authors and the faculty mentor for additional review and editing. After a final manuscript was agreed upon by all co-authors, the first author submitted the manuscript for publication. Time from the writing day to initial submission was two months for both teams. For both teams, time from the writing day to acceptance for publication was 10–12 months and involved multiple sets of revisions and resubmissions (Gissandaner et al., in press; Penner et al., 2022).

Several decisions during the implementation phase facilitated progress. First, being in the same physical or virtual space is highly recommended as it facilitated communication throughout the day. This optimized efficiency as team members were able to ask for advice, clarify aspects of the output and the manuscript, coordinate their writing, and problem solve barriers in real time. Secondly, we recommend assigning roles based on interests, strengths, and effort each member is willing to contribute, paying particular attention to the expertise of different team members, availability to assist with preparatory work and work needed after the writing day is completed. Relatedly, transparency in the roles and authorship order is recommended. Team one elected to create three pairs of interns with the three child-focused researchers divided across the three sections of the manuscript and the two substance use researchers divided between the introduction and discussion, with the methodology-focused researcher designated to the methods and results. Playing to team members’ strengths and creating section pairs with different expertise allowed Team one to integrate perspectives and create a linear document. Team two took a different approach based on individual training goals, with the members having more of a research focus eager to take on first through third author roles, and those with a more clinical focus wanting to take on the later author roles. We also recommend reviewing the full manuscript following the writing day to allow time to have a fresh perspective.

Translational Phase

After the manuscript has been finalized, the Paper Chase team enters the translational phase. Hall and colleagues (2012) state that the primary goal of the translational phase is to “apply research findings to advance progress along the discovery–development–delivery pathway to ultimately provide innovative solutions to real world problems” (p. 424). Practically, this can include activities such as generating new research projects or extending findings to policies or programs. Additionally, at this stage there is often an evolution of the team (Hall et al., 2012). For example, the current manuscript was derived after Team one generated the idea to formalize the Paper Chase as a training exercise in team science. Through discussions with the original team, it was decided to include some members from Team two, who had a different Paper Chase experience than Team one and could therefore add a unique perspective. Other translational activities that were derived from the Paper Chase are discussed below.

Team One’s Experience.

Since the Paper Chase exercise, Team one has developed two subsequent manuscript ideas. The first is the present manuscript outlining the Paper Chase as a team science training opportunity. The second is a follow-up manuscript to the original Paper Chase project. The second collaboration came about due to a relationship with an external collaborator on the original paper. This collaborator was able to meet with several of the interns and the internal faculty supervisor to discuss a follow-up paper. This highlights the benefits of team science: connecting co-authors who otherwise may not have met to develop new research ideas and future collaborations. In addition to these ideas, members from Team one have continued to collaborate on research projects including grants, manuscripts, and presentations. Importantly, having interns with differing programs of research facilitated the development of novel research questions through the sharing of ideas and knowledge across psychology areas. This exemplifies the importance of team science and demonstrates how training programs can create rich research networks within and across training years, faculty, and disciplines.

Team Two’s Experience.

One translational outcome of Team two’s Paper Chase project was publishing data from the medical center’s internal database of de-identified patient data, underlining the utility of this type of data source both within the medical center and for other academic medical centers. This data can provide direct implications back to providers. Team two’s project, for example, may inform emergency medicine and psychiatry regarding utilization of the emergency department for mental health concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic. Because of the timing of Team two’s Paper Chase at the end of their training year, the team was not able to present results internally, but recommend that other teams plan for this if following a similar model and data source. A second translational and training implication of Team two’s Paper Chase was that it re-started the Paper Chase tradition within the training program, as it had been several years since a psychology internship cohort had completed a Paper Chase project.

The Paper Chase and Cultural Humility

Tervalon & Murray-Garcia (1998) suggest that cultural humility incorporates “a lifelong commitment to self-evaluation and self-critique, to redressing the power imbalances in the patient-physician dynamic, and to developing mutually beneficial and non-paternalistic clinical and advocacy partnerships with communities on behalf of individuals and defined populations.” Cultural humility should be infused in all steps of the research process. For the Paper Chase, this can be achieved through several different means. With the research question, team members can reflect on who this research is serving, on the ethics of the research question, and whether the question promotes or reduces harm (Galán, Bekele, et al., 2021). For example, the current research teams reflected on how social (e.g., gender roles), economic (e.g., poverty), and contextual (e.g., the COVID-19 pandemic) systems guided their respective research questions, analytic plans, and interpretation of results. We recommend that the mentor and team leader facilitate discussions around these topics to ensure that cultural humility is carefully implemented within the research process (see Table 2). Specifically, the current teams’ research documented how societal forces and group-level perceptions contribute to healthcare disparities. For instance, the members of Team one cited literature stating that Black individuals are more likely to be screened for drug use while pregnant, experience child protective service involvement after their child is born, and be victimized by anti-drug policies than White people (Harp & Bunting, 2020; Kemper et al., 2021). It is important to recognize that this exercise is a small step for trainees to work towards socially just research. Trainees should continue to learn about socially just research through formalized coursework, discussions with mentors, and feedback from the community. The two teams discussed effective ways to choose racially and socially just research questions, operationalize and analyze complicated sociodemographic variables, and highlight the limitations of our samples (Galán, Bekele, et al., 2021). Given that the Paper Chase is designed to be completed with previously collected data, it is important for discussions before the writing day to reflect on relevant issues in recruitment practices.

The Paper Chase allowed for a “bird’s-eye” view of intersectionality of identities and experiences, and their contributions towards healthcare disparities. Diversity among the Paper Chase team members allows for unique perspectives on social issues. Discussion among the co-authors can be focused on perspectives of those from different residential areas, acculturation levels, gender identities, and sexual orientations. In this way, team members can gain further understanding of the ways in which intersecting characteristics shape an individual’s healthcare outcomes, and the varying degree in which individuals that share the same characteristic (e.g., race) identify with it. In fact, discussion among trainees has been identified as one activity that can facilitate multicultural training outside of the classroom (Galán, Bekele, et al., 2021).

Overall, there is increasing awareness and support for integrating cultural humility into all aspects of scientific training (e.g., Galán, Stokes, et al., 2021). The unique perspectives in larger research teams offers increased chances for representation of minority identities, as well as opportunities for reflections related to social values and learning how to conduct culturally humble research. The Paper Chase activities described should be intentionally infused with cultural awareness, knowledge, and sensitivity; the team science approach can facilitate discussion and application of these values. Thus, in addition to increasing collaboration, participation in the Paper Chase can promote discussions around cultural humility throughout the research process. To achieve this, it is critical that the mentor or team leader prioritize these discussions and have training to effectively implement these discussions. For example, seeking out training resources from the American Psychological Association of Graduate Students multicultural database (APAGS, 2022) or taking Diversity and Inclusion courses available through universities would be two ways to learn how to facilitate these conversations. The Paper Chase allows for these discussions to occur throughout the research process, which can facilitate real time discussions as the team progresses. We echo previous calls that these discussions be infused in all training activities, including the Paper Chase (Galán, Stokes, et al., 2021).

Implications

The authors of this paper report that the Paper Chase was a rewarding and invaluable learning experience. It improved the camaraderie among the teams and set a foundation for future collaborations and friendships among the team members. A positive climate and positive peer relationships within a cohort can help mitigate stress (Veilleux et al., 2012), which is an important feat within itself given that trainees report high levels of stress during graduate school (El-Ghoroury et al., 2012) and internship (Rodolfa et al., 1988). To facilitate positive experiences, we echo previous recommendations that the Paper Chase be a voluntary experience for trainees (Schaumberg et al., 2015).

With an increasing focus on team science and the inherent challenges of academic writing, the Paper Chase provides one option for trainees to learn important skills in a safe environment. First, it offers the opportunity for the lead author(s) to gain experience managing a team of colleagues with the guidance of a mentor, and it offers the benefit of a publication and co-authorship opportunity for multiple trainees. Second, it offers the experience of navigating authorship order decisions among colleagues, a process which can be difficult for trainees who are not accustomed to being assertive or for whom authorship decisions were made by their graduate advisor. Moreover, depending on the authors’ expertise, the Paper Chase could create an opportunity for trainees to gain exposure to a new topic or a new statistical or methodological approach. Third, the Paper Chase allows for trainees with clinical aspirations to gain more research experience related to health service psychology, a critical feature of the scientist-practitioner model which is typically de-emphasized during the health service internship. Finally, it can help trainees learn to write quickly, an area of growth for many trainees. These practical skills will help trainees excel in their future positions.

There is an intense pressure to publish, particularly for trainees who want a predominately research position, which can lead to lower quality publications and increased stress (Bradshaw, 2019). To ensure that the Paper Chase does not contribute to this ‘publish or perish’ and ‘fast science’ culture, we emphasize the importance of preparation prior to the writing day, with detailed discussions about theory, hypotheses, measurement of relevant constructs, and appropriate data analysis for the research question. The Paper Chase should be framed as a unique training opportunity on teamwork within the research process rather than a method for accruing publications quickly.

Overall, the Paper Chase experience gives trainees the opportunity to work in a team format to develop both research skills and cultural humility, aspects that are important for clinical psychologists in all settings. One of the primary limitations of the current manuscript is the lack of quantitative or qualitative data assessing the Paper Chase. Future research should empirically examine the team science process to evaluate whether trainees gain knowledge and comfort in these domains over time. Additionally, future applications of the Paper Chase should include incorporating an interdisciplinary team and using open science procedures, such as, pre-registration. In sum, the Paper Chase is a unique team science training opportunity that allows for trainees to strengthen their skills relevant to clinical and research domains.

Public significance:

Team science and interdisciplinary medical teams have become increasingly common in the psychological field. This paper highlights the Paper Chase, a collaborative writing effort in which a group of scholars write a manuscript in a predetermined amount of time, as a training exercise focused on developing skills related to team science in research.

Biographies

Biographies

¹ Kristin J. Perry, PhD, is a postdoctoral scholar in the Prevention and Methodology Training Program at the Pennsylvania State University. She received her doctorate from the University at Buffalo and completed a clinical internship at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Her research and professional interests include identifying risk and resilience factors for the development of externalizing behaviors in youth.

² Lauren M. Mutignani, PhD, is a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Rochester Medical Center. She received her doctorate from the University of Arkansas and completed a clinical internship at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Her research and clinical interests are centered around prevention and intervention efforts for externalizing behaviors in children.

³ Jordan A. Gette, PhD, is a postdoctoral fellow in the Center for Alcohol and Substance Use Studies at Rutgers the State University of New Jersey. She received her doctorate from Texas Tech University and completed a clinical internship at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Her research and professional interests include identifying cognitive and social factors related to substance use.

⁴ Kerry L. Kinney, PhD is a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. She received her doctorate from the University of Illinois at Chicago and completed a clinical internship at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Her research and professional interests include anxiety and related disorders and their treatment.

⁵ Tre D. Gissandaner, PhD is a postdoctoral fellow in the Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry at Columbia University Irving Medical Center. He received his doctorate from Texas Tech University and completed a clinical internship at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. His research and professional interests include understanding mechanisms related to intergenerational transmission of trauma and adversity.

⁶ Francesca Penner, PhD is a postdoctoral fellow at Yale Child Study Center. She completed her doctorate in clinical psychology at University of Houston and her clinical internship at University of Mississippi Medical Center. Her research and professional interests include parent psychopathology and emotion regulation and their effects on caregiving and child mental health.

⁷ Alainna Wen, PhD is a postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Psychology at University of California – Los Angeles. She received her doctorate in clinical psychology at the University of Notre Dame and her clinical internship at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Her research and professional interests include emotional processing and regulation in internalizing disorders and identifying transdiagnostic mechanisms for treatment.

⁸ Timothy Regan, MA a postdoctoral scholar in the Drug Dependence and Epidemiology Training at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. He graduated with his doctorate in clinical psychology at Texas A&M University and completed his clinical internship at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. His research and clinical interests center on substance use treatment and preventative health behavior change.

⁹ Crystal S. Lim, PhD, ABPP is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Health Psychology at the University of Missouri. She was training director of the University of Mississippi Medical Center internship program for 5 years. Her research interests are in pediatric psychology and professional interests focus on training and mentoring.