New answers tagged

3

This is a classic example of what’s been dubbed the “XY problem.” You have some actual problem to which you’ve decided that emailing this professor is the solution and you’re asking about your solution. But I’m quite confident that getting a professor at another school to read a draft of an essay is not the correct solution to any problem. You should not ...


0

If you're unsure, you can double check with the editor, they should be able to clear it up quickly. Mistakes do happen with the names though, in one of my submissions, the editor switched the order of my first and last name. I wouldn't assume that your supervisor did this intentionally, just check with the editor (and then with your supervisor, depending on ...


2

This depends on how the editor finds reviewers. Some (most?) editors select reviewers the way you described: from the references, the editor's personal contacts, etc. Others search the system. Editorial Manager allows the authors to select the subfield of their paper, which in turn can be matched to reviewers' interests. An editor who's searching the ...


1

Have patience -- you're asking that many things happen within a short amount of time. Your paper needs to get through an initial administrative check whether the formatting is correct and/or whether there is any plagiarism. Then the editor-in-chief needs to assign the paper to an associate editor. And then the associate editor needs to assign reviewers. Only ...


2

8 days is nothing in academic time. Like the blink of an eye. It is not uncommon for reviews to take months. Just be patient. I know it's hard, but just move on to your next project. If there's no movement in a month or two, then maybe e-mail the editor and ask for a status.


1

I think there is no universal answer. There are fields of pure mathematics where single author papers are quite frequent (the majority?) while there are other areas of the sciences (e.g., the biomedical field) that are so broad that nobody has the requisite knowledge and time to do everything themselves. So it depends on the field you're in. But beyond that,...


0

This answer should be qualified. Do you have a contract of any kind at the place you are working? Does your work agreement have anything to say about publishing research? You should look carefully at that before submitting any paper. The questions that get asked regarding publication are things like: Is it new, at least in some aspect? Is it interesting? ...


2

I had recently been requested by my PI to help with setting up experiments and getting data for the latter part of a research that was to be submitted as a paper. I spent 3 months aggressively working on it along side my own work towards other projects. ... I had, thereafter, spoken to my PI... Oops --- you have made the rookie mistake of beginning work ...


2

My PhD adviser...realized the publication cost was $800 [for Physical Review Letters] and now instead wants to publish in a significantly worse journal...because the publication cost is free. "Physical Review Letters is perfectly OK with publishing their papers for free," source: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/139304/22768.


1

This is possible. And any journal, in theory, will accept your work. However, I think you should seek out some feedback from an economist in the related area. Also, it is an unfortunate reality that econ journals are very 'clubby'. As an aside -- i am a PhD student studying macroeconimics. If you want to try and provide some idea of what you're doing, I ...


3

My guess is the manuscript spent two years going from one potential reviewer to the next, as each sat on it a while then finally turned the review request down. There may not be much you can learn from this except that perhaps you can try harder to make the paper clearer to read so reviewers won't be as reluctant to take a look. Perhaps break things up and ...


6

You seem to mix two different aspects: Your (understandable) disappointment about the response and the long time it took to get the response. You cannot really complain about the response itself because it generally seems to be rational and the reason for the rejection is not the long time it took. Right now you can only try to use the helpful aspects in ...


1

I would use a preprint server, such as arXiv and bioRxiv, and then cite the preprint version of the paper. In my opinion, there is no purpose in citing a paper that is not available anywhere. You cannot be sure in which journal your article will be published nor if after revision it will remain with the same title you referenced. Furthermore, after the ...


2

Yes. Under review or "in review" are normal and I have used them myself when publishing several papers near simultaneously. (They were separate enough, different chemistries, that I thought made sense to cut into separate articles. But, for someone interested in the general area, they likely would want the citation.) It is to be understood that "under ...


6

Is your supervisor breaking any sort of accepted ethical code within academia? No, they are not. They are not engaging in academic dishonesty, plagiarism, bullying, or abuse of any kind. While "what is ethical" is often a matter of opinion, I would guess there are few people who could find any sort of violation of ethics in your supervisor's behaviour. ...


1

To the extent your concern is about impact on the perceived dilution of your contribution, I would not worry about it. That impact will be nil: authorship norms vary by subdiscipline, by individual lab/department in some cases, and a lot is up to the discretion of the P.I. (As an aside, these differences are a perennial headache for those of us who do ...


2

Usually, the journal's typesetters will get your manuscript into that "final form", so you don't have to do it yourself. The sentence is saying that you should have all your content finalized before submission. Once the paper is communicated, you can't make any more changes.


0

Unless you are submitting to a journal that expects "camera-ready" copy, it doesn't matter. They'll reformat it anyway. Put it where it fits in the narrative, to make life easy for reviewers.


4

I don’t see the benefit of trying a third journal with the same editor. This person already rejected your paper twice, that suggests they do not think highly of it. There are plenty of math journals, I strongly suggest finding one with a new editor who will look at your paper with fresh eyes. As for a pre-submission email, that would be going outside the ...


5

Unfortunately this depends somewhat on personalities so a definite answer is impossible. But if your communication with the editor has been helpful/cordial then it might not entail much risk, contacting that editor. But since you already have two rejections where the person was involved, you might want to try for a fresh look at your paper with a ...


2

Contact the conference chair and/or the program chair of the conference as ask how you can proceed. For some conferences this will be possible, and I suspect that IEEE will support reasonable requests. Most large conferences will have the ability to project from remote sources. To actually present, however, will require some infrastructure on your end, ...


2

There are a lot of different issues here so let me try and unpack them a bit. First of all, it is not ok for your coauthor to add others to the paper without your consent (or that of everyone involved for that matter). This is especially true if the paper has already been accepted for publication. In fact, some conferences expressly forbid this practice as ...


1

I’m not certain if there’s an official method of formatting code that’s included in the paper itself, but there’s a simple workaround: Put your code on a website like GitHub, then cite that website the same way you’d cite any other website in the APA style whenever you refer to the elements of the code you’ve posted on that site.


5

"Toolbox" is not the name of a journal but of a section of Nature itself. As far as I know, articles published there are comments about existing software. It is not possible to submit a "toolbox" article from Nature's manuscript tracking system, which most likely means that "toolbox" articles are invite-only.


4

In my view, you're overthinking all of this. Unless you've got strong mentors collaborating, your first papers are likely to be terrible. Your work might be wonderful, but writing scientific papers is a specialized skill, and you haven't really practiced that skill yet if you haven't had a paper go through scientific peer review. So if you want to publish, ...


2

Presumably you cited the earlier work. If so, I don't really understand the concern. But, if the editor/reviewer/conference would accept it, you could offer to show them the proof separately from your new paper. This would permit them to verify the result if they think it necessary. But you were correct in not including the result in the new paper. But ...


1

If the first paper has not been published yet, you may want to contact the editor who is handling it and ask him whether it would be possible to withhold publication (in case it gets accepted) and publish the two papers together as a series of papers. In this case setting up the context for the second paper should be fairly easy, as you wouldn't need to ...


Top 50 recent answers are included