You can also say that if you don't publish your research work then your findings / research ll be limited to u only.

But Yes, publication process is too difficult nd long. That is why good collaborative research is beneficial.

Yes!

I completely agree with you. Research must be published sincerely and should be ethical.

Research cannot be purchased at any cost since it is for the betterment of this world.

It's obvious that authors of papers need to be both honest (conscientious) and place their contributions in a context. I have been doing this business for 30 years and I see the survey part - in which you place your own contribution in perspective - becoming practically useless, because too little thought has gone into it: the survey style that I dislike the most is the one where there is basically a stack of papers, "see [41-67]", and no synthesis. Those who persist on writing such "surveys" should stop this practice, as it is essentially worthless. Take your time, categorize the papers you utilize, and write a scholarly survey that is actually useful!

Dear Dr. Sharangi,

You are correct.

But the condition is like "PUBLISH or PERISH" to many persons. They do it for the sake of their service!

How they can be motivated if conditions are not changed?

Brabhjot: can you specify what is bad with the practice of having a thorough screening of the manuscripts before they are published? You state that the "publication process is too difficult and long". As an author as well as an editor for several journals, I have this to say:

The peer system of checking for:

1. correctness,

2. timeliness,

3. quality aspects - such as a good writing style and disposition,

4. a thorough historical perspective relating the new work with what has been published before, and perhaps more items,

and it is absolutely essential, such that the system of publications that have been through peer reviews can be - as much as is possible - considered with a high probability to be *new* knowledge.

Plenty of open access-only journals have a system in which you pay a fee, and having done that you can essentially write whatever happens to go through your brain - or perhaps even not through your brain but directly to you hands typing - or so it seems to me. I will not endorse such *useless* outlets: we need reviewers that have correctness, relevance, novelty, and readability as guiding lights, and we need journals that only publish papers that have been through rigorous peer reviews, that relate to the history of the field, and that tries to be correct, timely, relevant, and very interesting and useful. Noting else is acceptable!

I think all reviewers should do a thorough job reviewing submitted articles and not lower the standards for accepting a paper for publication. No doubt this would pose more challenges on the part of the author who wold have to work harder in order to publish and not perish. That is part of the game. Each journal has ethics guidelines and so the authors themselves should develop and follow a list of their own ethical principles prior to submitting a paper for review and possible publication. This way everyone in the publication community including the reviewers, publishers and authors are held accountable.

Publish your paper at any cost if it is a good quality paper.

Agreed, the trend is obviously like this.

But one can't & should not do like at the cost of standards, can't compromise with quality otherwise it will affect the validity & very spirit of quality research. Be assured, confident & believe in self & publish that research only which is true, of high quality, of worth when you yourself read it in solitude then you perceive that it's my best research.

Pulls & pressures are temporary but the integrity, sincerity & credibility are permanent which give you significant recognition when you can stand & say boldly with high esteem that this is my real quality and valid research.

I think that is an element of consciousness of each person, who publishes for publishing and is not generating knowledge, is not really investigating and should not be considered a researcher, this is a serious work and a lot of commitment

Remember that the evaluation of the standard of a paper - something that has been alluded to above - is done by a whole bunch of associations, editors, referees, your colleagues, and so on. In nearly 100%, I should think, there are breaches of several principles by which an author should write, and behave. We are all sinners, remember, so here is a popular article that was written years ago by Subhash Narula, my former supervisor Torbjörn Larsson, and me. Take a look at it, use it, and if you used it, you can cite it, too.

Yes ...of course ..

Greeting

And who shall decide if it is, Abdullah?

If journals are very slow and someone needs a publication for promotion, then the process almost makes sense. Otherwise, predatory journals are precisely that, predatory. It’s a pity that this is where we have ended up... so we should do our best to do our duty to keep real journals alive and flourishing.

Hi,

I agree that publishing at any cost is not contributing quality to science. It encourages short term thinking, and the preference of quantity over quality in publishing and citing papers. It also detaches, to a large extent , the researchers from theories and emphasizes methodology that is not related to theories.

This 'principle' is corrosive and destructive. The peer reviewed journals were supposed to be about quality research. The publish or be damned mentality has led to a serious decline in quality and a more sinister trend in fraudulant research.

Yes.

No mater how we view it, it is beneficial to beginners and young researchers. It is a learning process and a motivator.

I see it as corrosive, since this publishing culture at all costs brings weak results, also it doesn't have long term. The researches are weak, because what their thought is exclusively in the large-scale production and not in the content that is created (if there's knowledge created).

I am agree that publish of at any cost is not good for a researcher. However, it is necessary to publish your work without which no one can know about your work done and it is necessary for your growing in research and if you want to rise your research in future. The tough publication procedures may be dangerous for new researchers that may change their ideas about and in research interest.

Thank you

Yes. I agree. definitely is.

with the best wishes

Mr Rezaei Ahvanooei

Agree.

Yes, of course

On the contrary, in fact I claim that there are too many "researchers" [yes, in quotes, as there are plenty of papers that are not scholarly written] in the world as it is - hence the advent of lousy open-access journals to harbour everyone.

Contrary to the posts above I claim that we should rather make it more difficult to publish - there are too many "scholars" as it is, and it's quite clear when you read open-acceess only journals issued by unknown editors and shady publishing houses.

Yes full agree.

I disagree. The author's professional integrity will guide the quality of the research product. If he/she is willing to violate their principles because of external pressure, that is a moral not a systemic problem.

I completely agree with this question because the publication of any kind of research such as papers, books, reports should not be based on the any fee/ tuition. Besides, requesting any charge for publishing can cause detrimental effect on world of science because it causes low quality publications.

I believe in Research and Publication and promote, Respect the Activity. If you donot search or workhard to Publish your work than it would be in USB Computer only. One must maintain the Quality of the Publication Journal too. Regards

I believe that Research and Publication both are necessary. However it is important that researcher should publish their paper in indexed Journals. But if do you work good and not publish your work than no one know what type of research work you do? Therefore, it is necessary that you must publish your research work if you do it with maintain the Quality of the Publication .