3 ms·
As framed above the story is little more than make-you-feel-good if you get rejection. The data makes sense only in the following contexts: - How many accept
by glofish 7y ago
As framed above the story is little more than make-you-feel-good if you get rejection. The data makes sense only in the following contexts:
- How many accepted papers did win the Nobel Prize?
- How many rejected papers did not win the Nobel prize?
- How many rejected papers are utter batshit nonsense?
Other way to say it, what is the likelihood that a rejected paper is Nobel prize-worthy?
...
- gmiller123456 7y agoOr, how many Nobel Prize papers required no revisions after the first submission.
- ncmncm 7y agoI read it as being about the incompetence of reviewers. Considering the dreck that does get published, rejecting Nobel-level work should be an enduring disgrace. Edit: had forgotten about submission fees. Yes, those were real. $100 was a lot more then, particularly for a grad student. Competion from open-access journals has been so good that people are forgetting how terrible it was. But paywall journals are still very, very bad. IMO it is irresponsible to use one.