Read on Twitter
Why do people appeal a decision? Two main reasons, I'd argue. (1/7)
1) Researchers are evaluated by where they publish, so they do what they can to get in the highest-rated journal possible instead of just moving on.
Unfortunately, we play by these awful rules given, and I've done the same myself (& have encourage others as well)
Unfortunately, we play by these awful rules given, and I've done the same myself (& have encourage others as well)
One could say "No, the reason I appeal is because I think the reviewers and editors are wrong". Yes, of course, I agree, but the decision to try to change their minds and still try to get in there is likely partly driven by wanting to be published *there* specifically
This brings us to reason #2: Not wanting to start the whole process elsewhere, bc pre-publication peer review is SLOW. Who knows how long that paper was there in the first place! And how much work has already been done to try to make it work there.
Journal-hoping has had such a detrimental effect on science. Which is why preprints are great, so that we can at least share the work quicker, when we think its ready, for others to read, comment on, and build upon
This "speed" factor and the sunk-cost behavior, is why many "cascade" journals work: "we won't take it, but the editors of our partner journal said they'd take it immediately if you address this". That is appealing (although it usually comes with a high price tag)
I know people who ALWAYS appeal; I also know researchers who NEVER appeal and just move on. It likely depends on many factors, including career stage, urgency, etc.
Like I've said many times, the system is awful, but we play by the rules given. Good luck! (/fin)
Like I've said many times, the system is awful, but we play by the rules given. Good luck! (/fin)
Many of you will find Rita's thread on appeals very interesting. Here you go! https://twitter.com/rita_strack/status/1273630788463013894
Another thing:full time CNS editors get a lot of criticism & their credentials are constantly questioned by some, & guess why: the stakes involved, the disproportionate reward given to publishing there."Who is this person who rejected my CNS-worthy paper.They don't know anything"
If it didn't matter where you published, this would mostly go away.
As a full time, non-CNS editor, I *never* received an appeal. Just saying.
As a full time, non-CNS editor, I *never* received an appeal. Just saying.
Just adding a clarification, in response to someone else's relevant tweet about my statement: I led a non-CNS *sound-science journal*, where the stakes are way lower. People would just try another journal in the same tier and wouldn't appeal. Imagine the appeal rate at CNS.
