4

I am a mathematics PhD scholar (particularly in number theory). I have a question in mind.

In general, a PhD scholar doesn't have much publications (or no publication) upto a certain stage. Suppose I don't have a good CV or personal webpage to track me, except some information in research-gate/arxiv.

Suppose I think one of my research papers is good enough to communicate in some top most journals (e.g., Q_1 quartile in web of science). I also suppose most of the math journals follow single-blind peer review process.

Should I worry about my previous publication record when I try to communicate my research paper in a top journal?

Do the referees give think it is less important or become skeptical of the work of an unestablished researcher?

If this really happens, how to avoid such situations? Should I post my whole CV (academic record) in researchgate?

2
  • 1
    Is peer review single blind or double blind in your field, and specifically, in your target journal? Commented Dec 30, 2021 at 8:56
  • 8
    @henning, I suppose most math journals follow single-blind method
    – learner
    Commented Dec 30, 2021 at 8:57

3 Answers 3

11

Do the referees see the profile of authors?

No. Referees only get the manuscript. That's not to say referees cannot Google for the authors, but I don't know how many referees actually do that.

Do the referees give think it is less important or become skeptical of the work of an unestablished researcher?

It's possible, but I have never seen a report go "The author is an inexperienced researcher, so ..." - not even in confidential comments. There can still be subconscious bias, however, so it doesn't prove that it doesn't happen.

8

If you think you have results good enough for a top journal you should submit them. They will get a fair evaluation independent of your history. I think that is generally true for any journal.

That said, you might consult with your advisor about whether they think your results are that good.

I have never reviewed for a top journal. When I do review (single blind, for less prestigious journals) I sometimes look up the author after reading the paper if I am inclined to reject. If the author is new to the profession I try to make a rejection seem less discouraging.

4

When I referee, I note who the authors are for one reason only: to check for self-plagiarism.

Should I worry about my previous publication record when I try to communicate my research paper in a top journal?

No.

Do the referees give think it is less important or become skeptical of the work of an unestablished researcher?

Good referees do not care. In certain elitist journals, editors may be incentivized to increase the impact factor. The editor might try to estimate how many citations your paper will get by looking at your past publications. But they should not.

If this really happens, how to avoid such situations?

Write more good papers.

Should I post my whole CV (academic record) in researchgate?

ResearchGate: an asset or a waste of time?

3
  • Thanks. I agree almost except the answer of "how to avoid such situations ?". "Write more good papers" is an answer by default and trivial. I want to know if there are other ways too
    – learner
    Commented Dec 31, 2021 at 8:08
  • 4
    I'd disagree with the comment about "elitist journals". The very top journals don't need to engage in shabby behaviour to raise their profile; they get enough great submissions that they don't need to. This sort of behaviour -- favouring papers by famous names in order that their fame rubs off on the journal -- is something I'd associate with lower-ranking "wannabe" journals (and perhaps even more so with conference proceedings). Commented Dec 31, 2021 at 13:12
  • @DavidLoeffler I am not suggesting that editors engage in shabby behavior to raise their journal's profile. I am suggesting they do it because it is easier than reading and understanding every submission. Commented Jan 3, 2022 at 17:31

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .