Getting published well requires fulfilling editors' and reviewers' needs and desires

Abstract

Publication in international scientific journals provides an unparalleled opportunity for authors to showcase their work. Where authors publish affects how the community values the work. This value directly determines the impact of the work on the field-papers must be read and cited to advance the field, and because the scientific literature is vast, only a subset of the literature is widely read and cited. Moreover, the value placed on the work also affects the authors' scientific reputation and career advancement. Consequently, it is essential that manuscripts receive the recognition they deserve by being published in one of the "best" journals that the scientific findings allow. Several factors determine where a paper is published: how well the topic of the paper fits the scope of the journal, the quality of the study and the manuscript describing it, the advance the paper makes in its field, the importance of the advance, and the extent to which the paper impacts the broader community of science. As scientists, we assume that our papers will be assessed objectively using only well defined scientific standards, but editors and reviewers also view papers subjectively, having biases of what defines a high-quality publication based on Western standards. Therefore, scientists trained in other parts of the world can be significantly disadvantaged in getting their papers published in the best journals. Here, I present concrete suggestions for improving the perception of a paper in the reader's minds, increasing the likelihood that it will get published well.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.