Page 1 of 1

Article "The Thrill of the Paper, the Agony of the Review"

PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2017 10:39 am
by Dave Jensen
I thought this was a very good paper for young scientists on how to work with submitting papers and receiving reviewer's comments.

The link:


Dave Jensen, Moderator

Re: Article "The Thrill of the Paper, the Agony of the Review"

PostPosted: Sat Aug 26, 2017 4:04 pm
by Nate W.
Informative article. The key word used to describe peer review was game. But the author didn't explained why it was a game. I'll refer back to my previous post. The peer review process is hypercompetitive and thus not egalitarian nor objective. There are so many labs obsessed with getting a publication published in Cell, Nature, and Science. Remember, just because a paper is not published in the CNS trio doesn't mean it is not a solid publication and if it is published in the CNS trio, it doesn't mean that paper is better scientifically or more novel than publications found elsewhere. A CNS paper is more likely to mean that this laboratory has a solid track of performing high quality mechanistic research regularly. The reputation and track record of the PI is key in publishing in high impact journals like the CNS trio. So, why make it difficult for yourself join the right lab that has the right track record.

Also, chose your reviewers carefully and get to know PIs who sit on these review boards. They have profound influence on the success of your paper and your career. Use backdoor networking to get your paper reviewed carefully and taken seriously for publication.

Most importantly chose the right PI who has that track record of publishing in high impact journals and is respected by his peers in a given field. So important!!!!

See McKnight comments:


You can game this system. And you need it to be heard in this environment.