Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello All, This is just a friendly reminder to read the Forum Charter where you wish to post before posting in it. :)

Publishing and the peer review process

  • 27-01-2014 9:32pm
    #1
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,994 Mod ✭✭✭✭ sullivlo


    Taking my scientific brain / scientific writing hat off for a few moments:

    The whole publishing and peer review process is a pile of poo :mad:

    And being rational again...

    How do others feel about the entire process?

    I'm an early stage researcher (read: unemployed post PhD) and am using my time "constructively" to get the final push on the publishable data from my PhD. I've 3 out already and 2 submitted.

    We got word back today from one journal who requested some minor changes (structural - update figure legends, standardise a few bits) and that they would welcome a resubmission, but that as of yet they have not accepted it for publication as it is their policy to only accept without revision. This irritates me hugely for some reason. Okay it's not going to be a lot of work to get it to their new expectations, but if they are going to publish it (both reviewers said "publish with minor revisions"), why could the editor not just say that?!

    I think the process (not this journal, in general) is flawed. I mean I've reviewed papers on behalf of my PI. I'm sure my papers were reviewed by other PhD students! In the current form for some journals they send the paper out to 10/12 people and accept the first 2/3 people to get back to them.

    I don't know, maybe I'm just being critical.

    Anyway, rant over.

    But one quick question - when is the right time to not get excited about being published? I got super excited the first time. Is it okay to be a little bit chuffed still?


Comments

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Regional East Moderators, Regional Midlands Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators, Regional North Mods, Regional West Moderators, Regional South East Moderators, Regional North East Moderators, Regional North West Moderators, Regional South Moderators Posts: 7,890 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Gaspode


    It can be frustrating at times alright, some reviewers are idiots! Mist of the time it's ok though and you learn to politely point out when they are wrong.

    As for being chuffed, it's always a good feeling to see another paper published!


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,099 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Black Swan


    Publish or perish. When the editor asks for revisions, do them quickly and to his/her specifications. Once in print, then celebrate.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,994 Mod ✭✭✭✭ sullivlo


    Black Swan wrote: »
    Publish or perish. When the editor asks for revisions, do them quickly and to his/her specifications. Once in print, then celebrate.

    Ah yes. I am doing the corrections. It's just frustrating. There are two reviewers and the editor. R1 says restructure. R2 says publish as is. Editor says nothing of substance!!

    On the upside, no experiments needed. Just highlights my poor writing skills.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,426 ✭✭✭ Dr Strange


    Gaspode wrote: »

    As for being chuffed, it's always a good feeling to see another paper published!

    This! It never gets boring, I always get excited and a great feeling of achievement when a research paper or case report I have been working on is finally accepted. I actually got quite addicted to it :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭ djpbarry


    sullivlo wrote: »
    We got word back today from one journal who requested some minor changes (structural - update figure legends, standardise a few bits) and that they would welcome a resubmission, but that as of yet they have not accepted it for publication as it is their policy to only accept without revision. This irritates me hugely for some reason. Okay it's not going to be a lot of work to get it to their new expectations, but if they are going to publish it (both reviewers said "publish with minor revisions"), why could the editor not just say that?!
    Because ultimately, the decision to publish rests with the editorial team. They have the right to reserve judgement until they are completely satisfied with the manuscript. At the end of the day, they're just covering their asses - who knows what unforeseen circumstances lie in wait?!?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1 Oasis _2014


    Hello every one

    I didn’t do the publication only lately--- trying to find a job in the last 2 years with no luck
    I can get few papers out but I gave one small project more priority and I have sent it to three journals already now is with the fourth review and there was an option to publish it as a preprint which I did!
    2 journals come back to me after nearly three month after submitting the paper saying it’s not in scope of their journal.

    The first journal the reviewers questioning my finding and request to go back to the more lab work.....which in this case not possible?

    This only a hypothesis and reporting some of the finding.....if it’s the way they want...I am just wondering why there are few thousand of publications related to HIV diagnosis no final cure for it yet?

    Peace


Advertisement