During our research journey, our work is always under evaluation from different journals to get published. I believe we as researchers should also evaluate journals and benefit from others' bad/good experiences with journals in terms of time of publication comparing to what stated in the journal site, editors responses to authors inquires, transperancy in acceptance / rejection of the submitted manuscript,....etc
So please share you positive / negative experiences with different journals.
It's a great suggestion! And I can see it's attraction. There are, however, a number of concerns.
1/ Ihave to say that I never had a problem with a journal. On reflection, I usually understood their decisions even in the case of rejections (which have been few). At the time, however, you can get very upset by rejections. They need to be digested for a significant period before you comment on them publicly! Some times, a few years!
2/ People tend to think that journals that accept their work are just wonderful. But they might be rubbish. The author of an accepted article is not the best judge in the matter, nor are rejected ones.
3/ Rejectees tend to go elsewhere next time, so their ability to judge rests on one bad experience. Not the best basis.
I'd be in favour of a log of the processes used by journals. As you suggest, for example, are they speedy? Is their refereeing process as transparent as it might be? Does the editor suggest amendments and resubmission enough? Does the editor ignore obviously wrong or biased referees comments?
Such a log would have be kept, and maintained. It would have to be readily accessible. Who would maintain it? How would it be financed?
How are we to judge journals that charge fees? Some researchers are happy with this, I certainly am not. What of journals that don't use referees directly? Many French journals use a "scientific committee" instead. Can these be judged in the same way?
A list of a journals referees would allow some judgement on quality. But would they give you that--or other--information? Probably not.
Nice idea, but difficult to establish.
Christopher NOCK
Christopher Nock Thank you for your reply. You are right in your concerns.
However, I found a website that show authors' review to the scientific review process :) some of authors evaluate the review process in the journal as very good despite their articles had been rejected due to the useful feedback they get from the reviewers that improve the quality of their manuscripts.
Here is the link
https://scirev.org/reviews/
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publisher