5 ms·

Not to defend peer review as it is now, but one of the things I've come to value from editorial gatekeepers is that they put the brakes on me publishing things

by xamuel 9y ago

Not to defend peer review as it is now, but one of the things I've come to value from editorial gatekeepers is that they put the brakes on me publishing things that in later years I might regret. I wrote some pretty mediocre papers as a grad student and I'm grateful some of them were rejected, because I wouldn't want them forever part of my legacy. As a matter of fact, I wrote some "papers" when I was a teenager, which, if I had been allowed to freely publish at that time, might have become permanent albatrosses around my neck :P

danieltillett 9y ago
Didn’t your supervisor step in and say this is not up to scratch? When I was a supervisor a good chunk of my time was spent going through my student’s and postdoc’s manuscripts to ensure nothing was in them that might embarrass us both.
- xamuel 9y ago
  I was reckless and wrote papers unrelated to my dissertation and submitted without going through my advisor. Fortunately, the bad ones were rejected. The good ones ended up making me well-recognized in some extremely tiny niches, and ultimately did way more for my career than my PhD work did :D I'm really glad some of the bad ones didn't see the light of day :P
  - danieltillett 9y ago
    mmm not wise :) I guess it depends on the field, but in mine (biological sciences) I can’t think of an example where a student would submit a paper without their supervisor knowing. Anyone thinking of doing the same as you should try and draw on their colleagues in the department to proofread the manuscript. I used to proof lots of manuscripts from my colleagues and their students.
  - tom_mellior 9y ago
    > I was reckless and wrote papers unrelated to my dissertation and submitted without going through my advisor. This is the opposite of reckless, this is how you make a name for yourself, and how you prove that you can develop an independent research agenda. As you say, it's good for your career, and it's good for science too (if the work is good, of course). Good for you!
jessaustin 9y ago
Do some of the alternative platforms offer a way to repudiate a "published" paper?

by xamuel 9y ago

danieltillett 9y ago

Didn’t your supervisor step in and say this is not up to scratch? When I was a supervisor a good chunk of my time was spent going through my student’s and postdoc’s manuscripts to ensure nothing was in them that might embarrass us both.

xamuel 9y ago
I was reckless and wrote papers unrelated to my dissertation and submitted without going through my advisor. Fortunately, the bad ones were rejected. The good ones ended up making me well-recognized in some extremely tiny niches, and ultimately did way more for my career than my PhD work did :D I'm really glad some of the bad ones didn't see the light of day :P
- danieltillett 9y ago
  mmm not wise :) I guess it depends on the field, but in mine (biological sciences) I can’t think of an example where a student would submit a paper without their supervisor knowing. Anyone thinking of doing the same as you should try and draw on their colleagues in the department to proofread the manuscript. I used to proof lots of manuscripts from my colleagues and their students.
- tom_mellior 9y ago
  > I was reckless and wrote papers unrelated to my dissertation and submitted without going through my advisor. This is the opposite of reckless, this is how you make a name for yourself, and how you prove that you can develop an independent research agenda. As you say, it's good for your career, and it's good for science too (if the work is good, of course). Good for you!

jessaustin 9y ago

Do some of the alternative platforms offer a way to repudiate a "published" paper?