Rejected for publication: What now?

So, your manuscript was rejected? Before you start firebombing the editor’s place of work and writing screeds on your blog, consider the following. Put yourself in the reviewer’s shoes. It may be hard to do so, but it is often the best way to understand what the reviewer is trying to communicate. If the reviewer … read more

Even the University President gets rejected

From the weekly update by University of Manchester President and Vice Chancellor Dame Nancy J. Rothwell, DBE, FRS: I had some bad news on the research publication front, my research group had a great paper rejected by completely unreasonable referees – they were obviously biased – or at least we think so. More work to … read more

Please don’t write multiple-part papers!

I’ve talked about this topic of writing multiple-part papers before. Earlier this year, I published an article about what the data show from Monthly Weather Review. Schultz, D. M., 2011: Rejection rates for multiple-part manuscripts. Scientometrics, 86, 251-259. [PDF] I found that although the rejection rates for multiple-part manuscripts were not that different from the … read more

For better outcomes in the review process, send your editor some food and drink

If the results from a recently published article on the factors affecting judges making parole decisions are analogous to that of a journal editor making accept/revise/reject decisions on manuscripts, then send your editor some food and encourage them to take a break. Danziger, S., J. Levav, and L. Avnaim-Pesso, 2011: Extraneous factors in judicial decisions. … read more

The most prestigious journal in the world

Caleb Emmons, Professor of Mathematics at Pacific University, is the Editor in Chief of the Journal of Universal Rejection. The Web site of the journal promotes the advantages of the journal. You can send your manuscript here without suffering waves of anxiety regarding the eventual fate of your submission. You know with 100% certainty that … read more

How to Fail in Grant Writing

Curtis Wood (Univ of Reading) sends this article from The Chronicle of Higher Education. How to Fail in Grant Writing Another in the series of “How Not To…” papers… Fourteen Ways to Say Nothing with Scientific Visualization. How to Make a Scientific Lecture Unbearable. How to Get Your Paper Rejected. How to Write Consistently Boring … read more

The range of reviewer recommendations from crocs to pigeons

Explains the evolutionary line of Rejectosaurus. From the A(frican) Blog of Ecology by Raf Aerts: “I’ve just spotted a Revisosaurus major on one of my manuscripts, even though the field characteristics were very close to those of a Rejectosaurus resubmittens (see Fig. 1, blue line).”