Nature Communications is a respectable "megajournal" a tier below the subject journals. Publishing in Nature is like hitting a six (over the fence), Nature Genetics is a four (a boundary), Nature Communications is a hard run three, and Scientific Reports is the equivalent of diligently blocking and taking the occasional quick single, without losing your wicket. Other features content on this site is managed and provided by Higher Education Consulting Group.
It accepts a larger number of publications. 254. Three discipline-focused megajournals have grown rapidly in recent years: Jeffrey Brainard joined Science as an associate news editor in 2017. The former is older and more established, so it remains to be seen how things plan out in practice. The reality is that, although the editors try their best to be fair, if you are in a big lab, with a long record of contributions in the Western hemisphere your work probably is more likely to be taken seriously by the editors and sent out for peer review. Its impact factor is half of Nature Communications. “Megajournal publishers clearly have yet to persuade many researchers that their approach adds significant value to the scholarly communications ecosystem,” information scientist Stephen Pinfield of the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom and colleagues wrote But megajournals still occupy a unique and important niche in scientific publishing, some analysts say. And even if you do, limitations with respect to resources may make it harder for you to complete all the new control experiments required by the reviewers.In other words, when job committees or selection committees consider track records they should be mindful of the environments and assess achievements relative to opportunity. Publishing in In any one innings in a test match you wouldn’t expect a batter to score more than one or two sixes, and indeed few researchers publish more than ten papers in Nature during their careers. IF reflects how many times papers in the journal have been referenced or cited by other papers in the last two years. Nature Comm has a publication fee that is in a class all its own ($5700 per article! Fraud is the exception and it is not only dishonest but also foolish because the truth usually outs and catches up with people. Footnotes In a way it’s horrible – like judging people by whether they went to Eton, Harrow or the local secondary school and by which university they went to rather than by what they learnt.I do not want to defend the system, but I would say it has arisen in part from a well-intentioned attempt to generate an impartial fact-based meritocracy in science that has ended up having some good but other very unfortunate consequences. to get daily updates on what's happening in the world of Australian Higher EducationHard Facts and Insider Analysis from Stephen MatchettCampus Morning Mail is an independent newsletter written and published by Stephen Matchett, formerly a long-serving journalist at The Australian newspaper. He covers an array of topics and edits the In Brief section in the print magazine. 10s. The daily e-news column receives no undisclosed funding or other assistance from any organisation or individual. Hard Facts and Insider Analysis from Stephen MatchettThere’s an art – and cricket – in where scientists should publish From the outside the scientific process appears to entail: deciding on some experiments; doing them; writing up the results; and sending them to the most relevant peer-reviewed journal for publication.But actually researchers seek to publish their work, not in the most relevant journal, but in the most prestigious journal.Prestige is a funny thing, and is partly in the eye of the beholder, but broadly it tracks with the Journal Impact Factor (IF). At Meanwhile, the megajournals have lost one source of their appeal: rapid publication. Pp. So, in general Nature and Science are highly regarded and that is why papers in these journals count in the Academic Ranking of World Universities (once known as the Shanghai Jiao Tong League Table). Nature Communications is intended for works that. Understandably people point out that scientists can not control whether their hypothesis is right or not, and doing solid, rather than flashy, science should be the goal, or put another way, journal rankings and Impact Factors shouldn’t matter.I guess this is another triumph of popularism, a bit like the drift from test cricket to the big bash.
6d. But given the competition for resources (grants, fellowships, jobs etc) and the need to make decisions up front long before the importance of each discovery plays out, journal prestige now dominates the thinking of most scientists. Occasionally people get carried away with excitement. And when the reviewers’ comments come in people in big well-funded labs will be better placed to tackle the many, many additional control experiments that are required.If you are in a smaller lab in a non-English speaking country that has not yet produced important work then there is a greater chance you will not be able to convince the editors your work is as good as you say.
It accepts a larger number of publications. 254. Three discipline-focused megajournals have grown rapidly in recent years: Jeffrey Brainard joined Science as an associate news editor in 2017. The former is older and more established, so it remains to be seen how things plan out in practice. The reality is that, although the editors try their best to be fair, if you are in a big lab, with a long record of contributions in the Western hemisphere your work probably is more likely to be taken seriously by the editors and sent out for peer review. Its impact factor is half of Nature Communications. “Megajournal publishers clearly have yet to persuade many researchers that their approach adds significant value to the scholarly communications ecosystem,” information scientist Stephen Pinfield of the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom and colleagues wrote But megajournals still occupy a unique and important niche in scientific publishing, some analysts say. And even if you do, limitations with respect to resources may make it harder for you to complete all the new control experiments required by the reviewers.In other words, when job committees or selection committees consider track records they should be mindful of the environments and assess achievements relative to opportunity. Publishing in In any one innings in a test match you wouldn’t expect a batter to score more than one or two sixes, and indeed few researchers publish more than ten papers in Nature during their careers. IF reflects how many times papers in the journal have been referenced or cited by other papers in the last two years. Nature Comm has a publication fee that is in a class all its own ($5700 per article! Fraud is the exception and it is not only dishonest but also foolish because the truth usually outs and catches up with people. Footnotes In a way it’s horrible – like judging people by whether they went to Eton, Harrow or the local secondary school and by which university they went to rather than by what they learnt.I do not want to defend the system, but I would say it has arisen in part from a well-intentioned attempt to generate an impartial fact-based meritocracy in science that has ended up having some good but other very unfortunate consequences. to get daily updates on what's happening in the world of Australian Higher EducationHard Facts and Insider Analysis from Stephen MatchettCampus Morning Mail is an independent newsletter written and published by Stephen Matchett, formerly a long-serving journalist at The Australian newspaper. He covers an array of topics and edits the In Brief section in the print magazine. 10s. The daily e-news column receives no undisclosed funding or other assistance from any organisation or individual. Hard Facts and Insider Analysis from Stephen MatchettThere’s an art – and cricket – in where scientists should publish From the outside the scientific process appears to entail: deciding on some experiments; doing them; writing up the results; and sending them to the most relevant peer-reviewed journal for publication.But actually researchers seek to publish their work, not in the most relevant journal, but in the most prestigious journal.Prestige is a funny thing, and is partly in the eye of the beholder, but broadly it tracks with the Journal Impact Factor (IF). At Meanwhile, the megajournals have lost one source of their appeal: rapid publication. Pp. So, in general Nature and Science are highly regarded and that is why papers in these journals count in the Academic Ranking of World Universities (once known as the Shanghai Jiao Tong League Table). Nature Communications is intended for works that. Understandably people point out that scientists can not control whether their hypothesis is right or not, and doing solid, rather than flashy, science should be the goal, or put another way, journal rankings and Impact Factors shouldn’t matter.I guess this is another triumph of popularism, a bit like the drift from test cricket to the big bash.
6d. But given the competition for resources (grants, fellowships, jobs etc) and the need to make decisions up front long before the importance of each discovery plays out, journal prestige now dominates the thinking of most scientists. Occasionally people get carried away with excitement. And when the reviewers’ comments come in people in big well-funded labs will be better placed to tackle the many, many additional control experiments that are required.If you are in a smaller lab in a non-English speaking country that has not yet produced important work then there is a greater chance you will not be able to convince the editors your work is as good as you say.