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

| 1 min read

Register for free to listen to this article
Listen with Speechify
0:00
1:00
Share
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 time, they?re doing their best to remind researchers in the trenches that publishing in __Science__ and __Nature__ isn?t all that difficult. A funny story about competing seminars set to elucidate peer review at the two leading journals appears on linkurl:Alan Packer?s Free Association;http://blogs.nature.com/ng/freeassociation/2006/01/merchandise_7x_and_other_secrets.html blog. But the push to make peer review transparent isn?t new and although it may be more visible because of Hwang, the major reason is to assuage that nagging feeling that the big journals don?t just cater to elite science, but to an elitist clique of scientists, eschewing good science for hefty names or lofty claims. In two weeks, we?re going to press with an investigative look at peer review process at big journals. News editor Alison McCook spent months talking with editors and scientists to get at the root of an increasing number of rejections and lingering suspicion that the peer review process just isn?t working.
Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

The Scientist Logo
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? Login Here

Meet the Author

  • Brendan Maher

    This person does not yet have a bio.
Share
A greyscale image of cells dividing.
March 2025, Issue 1

How Do Embryos Know How Fast to Develop

In mammals, intracellular clocks begin to tick within days of fertilization.

View this Issue
iStock: Ifongdesign

The Advent of Automated and AI-Driven Benchwork

sampled
Discover the history, mechanics, and potential of PCR.

Become a PCR Pro

Integra Logo
3D rendered cross section of influenza viruses, showing surface proteins on the outside and single stranded RNA inside the virus

Genetic Insights Break Infectious Pathogen Barriers

Thermo Fisher Logo
A photo of sample storage boxes in an ultra-low temperature freezer.

Navigating Cold Storage Solutions

PHCbi logo 

Products

Sapio Sciences

Sapio Sciences Makes AI-Native Drug Discovery Seamless with NVIDIA BioNeMo

DeNovix Logo

New DeNovix Helium Nano Volume Spectrophotometer

Olink Logo

Olink® Reveal: Accessible NGS-based proteomics for every lab

Olink logo
Zymo Logo

Zymo Research Launches the Quick-16S™ Full-Length Library Prep Kit