I think it would be bad for science and for the quality of the journals to have double standards for accepting manuscripts. If a journals accepts papers that doesn't follow the criteria of quality of the data and novelty of the content it will dilute the quality of the journal and it will eventually be outcompeted.

I think there is no doubt that in some countries that provides little funding for science it is difficult for academics to just make similar papers to the work that originate from well funded laboratories. As a reviewer, I mostly see that academics from low income countries try anyway to make their research similar to the research from the well funded laboratories and end up with low quality data, while they ought to focus on novelty of ideas and simplifying them to focus on experiments that fits to the available methods. 

I think in most experimental fields it is possible to be creative and make novel research with inexpensive methods. In my own research group less than 5% of the budgets go to laboratory expenses and most to go salaries for PhDs and PDs.

So aim for novelty, clarity and well controlled experiments and spend a lot of time on the language in the manuscript.

Hi Ammar, have you already got the book, Employer and worker collective action by Andrew Lawrence (2014)? That could be relevant to you. Cheers, Leanne

I think it would be bad for science and for the quality of the journals to have double standards for accepting manuscripts. If a journals accepts papers that doesn't follow the criteria of quality of the data and novelty of the content it will dilute the quality of the journal and it will eventually be outcompeted.

I think there is no doubt that in some countries that provides little funding for science it is difficult for academics to just make similar papers to the work that originate from well funded laboratories. As a reviewer, I mostly see that academics from low income countries try anyway to make their research similar to the research from the well funded laboratories and end up with low quality data, while they ought to focus on novelty of ideas and simplifying them to focus on experiments that fits to the available methods. 

I think in most experimental fields it is possible to be creative and make novel research with inexpensive methods. In my own research group less than 5% of the budgets go to laboratory expenses and most to go salaries for PhDs and PDs.

So aim for novelty, clarity and well controlled experiments and spend a lot of time on the language in the manuscript.

Salam,

I think it would be good for sciences and for the quality of the Arabic journals to have flexible standards for accepting manuscripts. If a journal is 100% Arabic, it will accept papers that follow the international criteria of quality of the data and novelty of the content it will encourage the Arabic researchers in goal to get quality of the Arabic journals and it will eventually be very Sexy to publish without paying any fee. So the Authors and the arabic countries will save money and precious time.

But our Arabic Governments should take first the Sciences as priority and principal goal...before bilateral conflicts and dance of sexy Women (Arabic Talents and ..Bad movies)

Loool

Dear Bader

It's like F1 racing, the teams having the largest budget ever win the grand prix. Unfortunately the small teams are to make up the numbers and pretend that race area exists, while only two or three teams make the show it's the same case in the publication in the renowned journal. A team like Manor, Sauber or Hass will never win a race before Mecedes or Ferrari or Red Bull, the budget is huge.

It is the same case of articles coming from developing countries.

Regarding the originality of ideas, it was full of new ideas but the problem is the lack of experimental materials. In my case it's been over 10 months since I try to buy a rheometer, but unfortunately I have no budget, my idea can be realized in 3 weeks if I had such material, and after all this time I can not do anything to achieve that original idea.

When applying for a scientific internship in a foreign laboratory, we ask you all the details of your ideas without any insurance to welcome you to conduct experiments.

I will be very happy to make a scientific cooperation with KSA university.

Best regards

Dear Djeddou,

Do you propose that F1 teams with small budgets should get a head start in the F1-races to make up for their lower budgets for fast cars.

I propose it will be better for the teams with insufficient budgets to focus on another type of race with less costly cars. There they can compete on and prove their driving, mechanical optimization and strategic skills. The team that stand out in skills will likely get recognised (and eventually get better sponsors). 

Dear Anderson, Dear Bader

Think about a race with only few team (3 or 4), it kill the show, there are no competition, the team with huge budget will be the best always and always.

In incoming country we just try to benefit from this race of huge science team to apply genereted idea and methods on our realy problems.

Concerning the proportionality of teams:

• In developed countries especially in Germany, they are talking and working about micro-pollutions (we must have a very huge budget to buy equipements).
• On the other hand, in incoming countries the problem and issue is how to reuse treated water (millions of gallons) for agriculture in arid areas with respect for the health of population, and protect water resources.

I agree with Mr. Anderson, but standards for accepting manuscripts in journals with high IF are always made by the members of huge team, and we must comply with them to have the possibility to acess in the arena. 

We have an obligation to try and try until we reach a level with very good  research quality.

"it's always very interesting to debate with Mr. Anderson, (from discussion comes light)".

Best regards

So sorry! My answer on here was meant for another question! However your question is really interesting. It's something I come up against as well although I am in a totally different field in social science. I work for a small NGO and we do some great research but don't have the resources to use it to its full extent eg with statistical modelling. For that reason we struggle to publish anywhere apart from in 'practitioner's perspectives' sections that many social services/development journals have. Maybe a similar section in scientific journals could be useful to showcase the work of people who may not have access to resources required for full inclusion in the main part of the journal?