Mahdi -

Yes, when you mentioned "lobbies," I think that you struck upon a big part of the problem.  People form cliques, and want to control their field.  I believe I've seen that happen, both because there is a mindset as to what methods are to be used, and perhaps because a clique wants to control who represents it.  Unfortunately, one of the most undesirable features of human nature seems to be the inclination to take control.  (Relatedly, I've noticed that for virtually any organization, those in authority appear to almost universally have arrived at such a position for all the wrong reasons, and are frequently incompetent for such positions.)  I have seen colleagues become victims of such a problem, internally and externally to a given organization, and I have as well.

This, of course, causes a dreadful stifling of creativity.  Progress can be greatly slowed.  For example, I have had what was an unpopular understanding of hypothesis testing for many years.  I was fortunate to get a letter to the editor of The American Statistician published on this in 1987.  Now, however, so many years later, it appears that the mainstream has finally come around much more toward my thinking on the issue.  Also, for about a quarter of a century, I ran a successful model-based sampling and estimation methodology for official energy statistics, verified by testing, that made possible a huge program, with thousands of published aggregate numbers made, yet other statisticians have been slow to accept it.  Some from among them are just beginning now to learn the basics.

So what can you do?  Well, I was far too busy to argue with referees who would not listen.  (As a referee myself, I tried to be more open minded.)  So I suggest that you publish in friendlier journals and/or in conference proceedings, if you cannot publish where you want.  Do not give up too soon, however.  A friend and his coauthor were rejected by one prestigious journal, only to then be accepted by a more prestigious journal.

At a conference, you have more freedom to present your ideas.  However, it can be annoying when someone in the audience has a knee-jerk reaction and may interrupt with nonsense which they have not thought through.  I eventually got tired of that and did poster sessions where you can have your paper published without someone using your presentation slot to try to impress their friends. 

Funding for going to a conference can be a problem, however.  I once was told by my supervisor that I could not go to a conference, because it was in a desirable location, and he and a friend wanted to write a paper so they could go.  I would have gone virtually anywhere to present and publish.  So I took some vacation time, and personally paid for the conference.  Funny thing:  My supervisor and his friend could not manage to write a paper and did not go. 

So it can be annoying, and there may be monetary issues, but presenting at a conference to publish in a proceedings may be an alternative.

Also, ResearchGate and perhaps Academia.edu or other alternatives, may give you an outlet.  I have written a few unpublished/research-type papers and put them on ResearchGate. 

Of course this means that the high "impact" journals may be out of reach.  But there isn't anything you can really do about that.  In my country, the most prestigious journal in my field has long seemed to me to publish largely useless work, and I suppose it is to be expected.  Cliques do take over virtually every organization.

But I think that today, with so much access to the internet, and search engines to find what you want, if you have a problem publishing a new idea, or any kind of paper, then I suggest that before you give up, you consider publishing it somewhere (but not a "predatory" journal), even if not ideal.  Of course, for those at universities where you must "publish or perish" and it must be in "prestigious" journals, you still have a problem.  But as a former US Government employee, papers were not considered by the management to be important. 

Best wishes - Jim 

Mahdi -

Yes, when you mentioned "lobbies," I think that you struck upon a big part of the problem.  People form cliques, and want to control their field.  I believe I've seen that happen, both because there is a mindset as to what methods are to be used, and perhaps because a clique wants to control who represents it.  Unfortunately, one of the most undesirable features of human nature seems to be the inclination to take control.  (Relatedly, I've noticed that for virtually any organization, those in authority appear to almost universally have arrived at such a position for all the wrong reasons, and are frequently incompetent for such positions.)  I have seen colleagues become victims of such a problem, internally and externally to a given organization, and I have as well.

This, of course, causes a dreadful stifling of creativity.  Progress can be greatly slowed.  For example, I have had what was an unpopular understanding of hypothesis testing for many years.  I was fortunate to get a letter to the editor of The American Statistician published on this in 1987.  Now, however, so many years later, it appears that the mainstream has finally come around much more toward my thinking on the issue.  Also, for about a quarter of a century, I ran a successful model-based sampling and estimation methodology for official energy statistics, verified by testing, that made possible a huge program, with thousands of published aggregate numbers made, yet other statisticians have been slow to accept it.  Some from among them are just beginning now to learn the basics.

So what can you do?  Well, I was far too busy to argue with referees who would not listen.  (As a referee myself, I tried to be more open minded.)  So I suggest that you publish in friendlier journals and/or in conference proceedings, if you cannot publish where you want.  Do not give up too soon, however.  A friend and his coauthor were rejected by one prestigious journal, only to then be accepted by a more prestigious journal.

At a conference, you have more freedom to present your ideas.  However, it can be annoying when someone in the audience has a knee-jerk reaction and may interrupt with nonsense which they have not thought through.  I eventually got tired of that and did poster sessions where you can have your paper published without someone using your presentation slot to try to impress their friends. 

Funding for going to a conference can be a problem, however.  I once was told by my supervisor that I could not go to a conference, because it was in a desirable location, and he and a friend wanted to write a paper so they could go.  I would have gone virtually anywhere to present and publish.  So I took some vacation time, and personally paid for the conference.  Funny thing:  My supervisor and his friend could not manage to write a paper and did not go. 

So it can be annoying, and there may be monetary issues, but presenting at a conference to publish in a proceedings may be an alternative.

Also, ResearchGate and perhaps Academia.edu or other alternatives, may give you an outlet.  I have written a few unpublished/research-type papers and put them on ResearchGate. 

Of course this means that the high "impact" journals may be out of reach.  But there isn't anything you can really do about that.  In my country, the most prestigious journal in my field has long seemed to me to publish largely useless work, and I suppose it is to be expected.  Cliques do take over virtually every organization.

But I think that today, with so much access to the internet, and search engines to find what you want, if you have a problem publishing a new idea, or any kind of paper, then I suggest that before you give up, you consider publishing it somewhere (but not a "predatory" journal), even if not ideal.  Of course, for those at universities where you must "publish or perish" and it must be in "prestigious" journals, you still have a problem.  But as a former US Government employee, papers were not considered by the management to be important. 

Best wishes - Jim 

Thank you very much Mr. James, for taking time to write such a long detailed answer. which was very helpful for me and I guess it will be for all other researchers who will read it. 

Best luck and warm regards.

Dear All,

First and foremost, thank you for these inseights. Honestly, I have not been aware about such practice in scientific research.

Smail.