Choosing a journal IV: peer review procedure

22nd Jan 2012

This the fourth post in my series on choosing a journal, following posts on getting your paper published quickly, getting it noticed, and practicalities. Most journals use the usual procedure for peer review: The editors first decide whether to reject the manuscript immediately or send it to peer reviewers Unless the manuscript is rejected, the editors send the manuscript to 2-3 reviewers The reviewers provide reports on the manuscript The editors decide, using the reports, whether to reject... Read more

(0) comments

Journal News

19th Jan 2012

A brief summary of recent news related to journals and scientific publishing. Journal of Errology A new venture came to my notice this week that aims to provide "an experimental online research repository that enables sharing and discussions on those unpublished futile hypothesis, errors, iterations, negative results, false starts and other original stumbles that are part of a larger successful research in biological sciences." It is not clear whether the Journal of Errology will succeed, but it... Read more

(0) comments

Choosing a journal II: getting your paper noticed

18th Jan 2012

This is the second in a series of posts on factors to consider when choosing which journal to submit your paper to. Here, I will look at how your choice of journal can affect the extent to which your work is noticed. Part one of the series, on getting your paper published quickly, is here. How well known is the journal? It goes without saying that papers in very well known journals like Nature, Science, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA and Cell will be seen by more people than those in other journals. The... Read more

(1) comment