I disagree. First of all "Appetite" for which this article was accepted is decently ranked (whatever you think of these rankings). It's in Q1 for both Nutrition

I disagree. First of all "Appetite" for which this article was accepted is decently ranked (whatever you think of these rankings). It's in Q1 for both Nutrition and Psychology. H-Index of 80 is pretty solid. It's the 179th ranked Psychology journal which isn't bad for such a niche journal. For Nutrition it's ranked 23rd [1]. So as far as food related cognitive science is concerned I'd call this a pretty decent journal. Since it is accepted it has gone through a successfull review process already. More importantly though...why is it bad that unpublished research is linked to on HN. I'd rather read it and make up my own mind than wait for it to go through a review process. The topic at hand is at least tangentially related to core HN content, too as eating chocolate might make you a better programmer/entrepreneur. [1]: http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=29994&tip=sid&clean=0 http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=29994&tip=sid&c... It has a (whatever you think of these is another matter)