4 ms·
> Why is it considered hard to get into those journals Journals only publish so many papers in a given time. Its not just a matter of submitting a good enough
by ufo 11y ago
> Why is it considered hard to get into those journals
Journals only publish so many papers in a given time. Its not just a matter of submitting a good enough paper.
Dunno why this is the case for journals but when it comes to conferences (where lots of CS research is published) there are obvious time limits regarding the number of presentations that can be accepted.
> why do people give them prestige and won't give a new startup journal prestige?
For historical reasons and perverse incentives, sadly. Young researchers cannot afford to publish on new startup journals because advancing your carrer depends on publishing in prestigeous journals (universities evaluate researchers based on the prestige of where they publish). Meanwhile, tenured professors are under less pressure when it comes to career advancement but they also need to publish on prestigeous journals to secure grant money to fund their labs and to accomodate for their younger co-authors (who are still trying to advance their carrers).
It also doesn't help when the "journal prestige categorization" is defined by the government, as happens in my country[1]. Not only are our journal ratings always outdated (punishing startup journals and conferences) but they also emphasize publishing in journals over publishing in conferences (which is terrible for CS research in particular)
[1] http://qualis.capes.gov.br/ http://qualis.capes.gov.br/
- ikeboy 11y ago>Journals only publish so many papers in a given time. Its not just a matter of submitting a good enough paper. And how does that happen without any staff evaluating papers, as you claimed above?
- p4bl0 11y agoCould you stop faking to be an idiot, please? We already responded to that question and you know it.
- ikeboy 11y agoufo claimed above that "The only thing the publisher does is own the name of the prestigious journal." This is false. Why is calling them on it now "faking to be an idiot"? I pointed out that there's curation, and that imposes costs. Denying that it exists doesn't help.
- p4bl0 11y agoPfffffff. Once again: the curation is not performed by the publisher, but by the editorial board and the reviewers, who are researchers, and are not paid by the publishers for this work.
- ikeboy 11y agoA cursory google search turns up plenty of counterexamples. See http://blog.journals.cambridge.org/2012/06/14/recruiting-a-journal-editor-an-hss-challenge/ http://blog.journals.cambridge.org/2012/06/14/recruiting-a-j... and http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2002/02/editorial-boards-step-academic-career-ladder http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2002/02/editorial-boards-s... I'll note that even PLOS medicine wasn't able to get editors for free, as an open access journal http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/competing-interests-of-the-plos-medicine-editors http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/competing-interests-...
- p4bl0 11y agoPaid academic journal editors are rare exceptions. From one of your own links: Carol Barnes, professor of psychology and neurology at the University of Arizona in Tucson, is a reviewing editor at the Journal of Neuroscience, a 3-year appointment for which *she receives no compensation*. (…) Barnes has received funding from the university to hire an assistant to provide clerical support to assist her with the manuscript review process. She considers herself fortunate, because "without this help, I would have had to decline this position." Not only she was still paid by the university for whats seems to be a full time job during 3 years according to the article, but in addition to that the university, not the publisher, paid for an assistant to this job!
- ikeboy 11y agoThat journal appears to be owned by a non profit.
- 11y ago