is it not possible for a research work/proposed paper for publication and data loss validity or relevance if not published on time; i.e if review goes endless.
What could be suggested life span of scientific data/ proposed research report/paper between completion and publication and post publication?
Dear Olusola,
You are thinking in the right direction. A few years back I submitted some new combinations in a plant genus called Phanera in Japanese Journal of Botany. The MS was accepted for publication after the usual review process. The said journal takes about one year to publish papers. In the mean time another group of authors submitted the same combinations in Phytotaxa and got their paper published very quickly. I had no option but to withdraw my MS with reason. Thus publication should be as quick as possible but definitely after good review.
The value of the published paper might gradually change with time but they always have historical value.
With best wishes,
Subir.
Yes,
The value of the published paper might gradually change with time ... but they always have historical value. OK, and can be used for révision of taxonomie
The general 'rule of thumb' is data should have been collected and published within 5-years - but this varies depending on different reviewer and journal editor values. Within five years works for me (and I review for more than 40 international journals) - especially as the submitted manuscript may have been submitted to several other journals previously and has been better crafted during this time from the reviewer responses. Many journals will take two or more years from initial submission to eventual hard copy publication - although the 'in press/online early' version may appear a lot sooner. It depends on the amount of back-copy manuscripts the journal has.
Overall, it has to be said that many authors do not stet the year/month range of data collection/analysis - and so it is often unknown. However, effective reviewers will know if the collected data is 'out-of-date' or not from the existing recent studies on similar topics.
I totally agree with Dr. Dean, 5 years is a suitable shelf-life for data publication, but if valuable, rare and unique data, can be published after 5 years.
Everything depends on the nature of data. Meteorological data of a region, however old it might be, remains of considerable importance for finding the changes by comparing with the present ones.
Thank you all for these contributions.
If we can determine the shelf -life of research work/data and publication, may be the appropriate time span for a journal response may be determined and the choice of journal to get the work published.
Imagine a research work conducted for about 6 months, 1,2 or 3 years, data analysed in about 3-6months, report /paper prepared within 2-6 months and the submissions, review process, acceptances or rejections is now between 1 and 3 years, A process very discouraging to a researcher!
The relevance of the data collected and reported may be losing relevance within it time space compared with quickly published similar research work on almost the same subject matter but privileged with a thorough and quality review process.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publisher