5

I have been making an integrated approach and its program on modelling the joint distribution of wind speed and direction (https://github.com/cqcn1991/Wind-Speed-Analysis). And I'm trying to publish a paper to get more attention on it.

However, my supervisor is not very familiar with the field I'm in, and I want some realistic and honest feedback on my work and whether it will be accepted by my target submitting papers. And if not, how can I improve my work to increase the chance.

One way I can think of is contacting the authors of papers I cited, and ask their feedback. But most of them are established professors and I'm afraid I can't get too much help in this aspect. Is there any other alternatives? I truly believe I have made something useful, but getting them published is a really tiring process.

  • 2
    You can select the journal by looking at most of the papers you have read and you cite in your work. Also, you can compare your work with other papers in the field and determine where to publish. You should also trust your work and aim high. Most of good journals have a relatively fast peer review(compared with other journals where it takes years to publish), so in 2-3 months you will know your chances for the paper. – Mikey Mike Jul 16 '16 at 15:54
  • @MikeyMike yes, I'm thinking about submiting the journals I cited. I think this would be a good startpoint. – cqcn1991 Jul 17 '16 at 3:37
  • If your supervisor is not very familiar with your topic, it could be nice to establish some connection to someone who is. Why not contact a couple of those professors, and perhaps you could even start collaborating with one of them? If it works out well, and you have funding, perhaps you could pay them a visit? – sigvaldm Nov 26 at 14:14
  • I don't know your field, but at least the GitHub page looks nice. Perhaps you could also consider the Journal of Open Source Software: joss.theoj.org. Others would try to run your code, so make sure to test it on varios versions of python (you could use TravisCI or CircleCI), etc. and that it is properly documented. It's not a full-fledged paper per se, but it counts as a peer-reviewed publication. – sigvaldm Nov 26 at 14:36
5

However, my supervisor is not very familiar with the field I'm in

This may not necessarily be a bad thing. Having your article read by someone who's an expert in this specific field can give you another valuable point of view.

One way I can think of is contacting the authors of papers I cited, and ask their feedback. But most of them are established professors and I'm afraid I can't get too much help in this aspect.

Wrong wrong wrong! Many PhD students suspect that established professors will not care about their work, which is a symptom of the impostor syndrome. If you work is relevant and important in the field, they would be delighted to see it. Talking to established professors is an excellent way for experts in the field to read your work and give valuable feedback. If your program really solves a problem they have, they will use, cite it, and promote your own career.

Is there any other alternatives? I truly believe I have made something useful, but getting them published is a really tiring process

Submit the work. If you think it's good enough, go for it. It will go through peer review where it will be assessed by knowledgeable people in the field, providing feedback (both positive and negative). You should have no fear that someone will steal your work because it's already out there on GitHub.

.

2

You can ask the editor. It's called a pre-submission inquiry.

  • Didn't thought of this, I'll try it later. Thanks a million! – cqcn1991 Jul 17 '16 at 3:34
0

many journals provide an acceptance rate somewhere on their website. this statistic can provide insight into how many people who submit actually make it into the journal. this one way to know how you may fair in addition to other strategies.

  • 1
    Do note that the acceptance rate will be both field and journal-type specific. Some fields (like astronomy IIRC) have very high acceptance rates. And some very prestigious journals, especially of the type "Advances in X" or "Annual Review of X" also have very high acceptance rates just because people know better than to send them mediocre or out of scope papers. – semi-extrinsic Jul 16 '16 at 21:23
  • But what would be a good accepte rate? Also, a lot of the journal I don't know where to look at the accepetance data. I know that there is journalinsights for elsevier, but for other publisher, like wiley, I don't know where to look for the data. – cqcn1991 Jul 17 '16 at 3:42

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.