3 ms·
The intention of this journal (Nature Scientific Reports) was to peer review only for technical correctness and not judge "interesting-ness". I don't think it's
by caddemon 5y ago
The intention of this journal (Nature Scientific Reports) was to peer review only for technical correctness and not judge "interesting-ness". I don't think it's really panned out that way but nevertheless this journal has a pretty high acceptance rate. I'm sure there are still systemic pressures to follow a certain formula, but I don't think one needs to do so to publish in Scientific Reports.
- anonresearcher 5y agoIt's not so much the "interesting-ness" aspect. It's about recognizing where the papers fit and if there is a novel contribution in the first place. Even though they emphasize technical correctness, it's very easy for a reviewer to misread the intention of the paper and assert that it, for instance, uses too simple of a model for a different field, or didn't cite appropriate literature for that field. It obviously doesn't happen all the time, but the fact that there is that risk there encourages the general formulaic writing (at least for me).