13 August 2009

Something I wrote elsewhere

I am working on a paper [on academic publication] and just wrote this:
Referees know that editors need to reject many papers, so they look for defects. In the end, the editor is left with a pile of papers that are not bad enough to reject --- and those are published.
Bottom Line: It all depends on how you look at it... (and incentives matter!)

2 comments:

  1. I agree.
    In the 'lets look for defects' mode which includes:
    1. Did the author use the wrong font?
    2. Did the author not use the right buzzwords?
    3. Is the paper too difficult for our readers to understand?
    4. Does this paper fit in some other journal?

    the reviewer can reject lots of papers and not incur a cost for rejecting the paper that would have increased the prestige of the journal dramatically.

    There is a new journal, Rejecta Mathematica,whose mission is to go through the rejected papers to find the ones that have great impact but were rejected for boundedly rational reasons. The founders of this journal are Nobel Laureates whose initial Nobel Prize winning papers were rejected for inadequate reasons. There are actually a lot of such Laureates.

    ReplyDelete
  2. @Eric -- I'll send you the current draft. Everyone -- here's the old draft: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1005304

    ReplyDelete

Spammers, don't bother. I delete spam.