0

I am currently revising a journal article ("paper 1") that came back as "major revision". I intend to submit an abstract to a conference ("paper 2"). Paper 2 presents research that builds on paper 1. Paper 1 developed a method specific to one place, paper 2 examines if the method is generalizable.

Paper 2 requires paper 1 to be published before the deadline of submitting the full conference paper 2, which I think is realistic.

The question is now if the abstract can or should mention paper 1 at all, and if, how: "paper in review", "paper in submission"? Paper 1 targets transport and network analysis, paper 2 more urban morphology and network analysis. It would be easier to avoid mentioning paper 1, but than it would appear that not much new is presented.

Would it be advisable to consult with the journal paper 1 has been submitted to?

1

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .