They Don't Call it Peerless Review

I received an Email advertising the new journal __Autophagy__ today. In a list of features about the journal, the Email adds: ?We also point out that we have an expedited review process if your paper was rejected from a ?flashy? journal; we all know that even solid papers do not always get accepted into the top general audience journals.? The policy is expanded on a bit in their linkurl:submission guidelines here;http://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/autophagy/guidelines.php?PHPSESSID=85d

Brendan Maher
Jan 12, 2006
I received an Email advertising the new journal __Autophagy__ today. In a list of features about the journal, the Email adds: ?We also point out that we have an expedited review process if your paper was rejected from a ?flashy? journal; we all know that even solid papers do not always get accepted into the top general audience journals.? The policy is expanded on a bit in their linkurl:submission guidelines here;http://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/autophagy/guidelines.php?PHPSESSID=85d0345c9faf0c6ba96b32c4a2d8f7ca, leaving no doubt as to what they regard as ?flashy.? Is this bit of editorializing in their marketing campaign an indictment of the journals, the peer review process, or just an attempt to capitalize on scientists? frustration? Peer review is on everyone?s lips, and the natives are getting restless. The fallout from the Hwang Woo-Suk debacle has news pundits linkurl:taking pot shots;http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10791811/site/newsweek/ at top journals and the editors from the same journals linkurl:sniping at each other;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/22934/. At the same...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member?