Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It’s time to allow researchers to submit manuscripts to multiple journals

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 126 posts

Re: It’s time to allow researchers to submit manuscripts to multiple journals

#51

Post by zarzavat »

uxp8u61q wrote: post #49
liliumregale wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's distinguish between papers and preprints, please. arXiv has contributed to a blurring of the distinction. The arXiv preprints are useful but should always be taken with a grain of salt. There is nearly no filtering done on things uploaded to arXiv. Everyone accessing someone's uncritically reviewed work is a bittersweet gift.

I'm confused. Do you accept published papers as gospel? They should be taken with a grain of salt too.

Depends on the field certainly. A paper in the Annals of Mathematics is definitely a lot more rock solid than whatever goes on the arXiv, or reviewed papers in certain fields that are particular magnets for junk science.

Re: It’s time to allow researchers to submit manuscripts to multiple journals

#52

Post by Helmut10001 »

ssivark wrote: post #6

The best way to allow multiple submissions while amortizing the review work is to make reviews (and rebuttals) public, and overlay them on submissions made public on some preprint server. This establishes priority (if credit is a concern), can be made blind / double-blind if so desired, and also makes public the reviews (which are as much a public service as writing research papers). Which editorial boards “accept” t…

I recently submitted to PLOS One. They publish the complete review alongside, after acceptance. I feel like this is already a big win for transparency. Immediate review publication would be even better.

Re: It’s time to allow researchers to submit manuscripts to multiple journals

#54

Post by YetAnotherNick »

liliumregale wrote: post #15
bo1024 wrote: post #7

Computer Science's conventions solve these problems (although CS certainly has other problems): * papers are generally posted to arxiv.org immediately on being finished, so everyone can access them * conferences have fixed deadlines and relatively short, fixed/enforced review cycles

Let's distinguish between papers and preprints, please. arXiv has contributed to a blurring of the distinction. The arXiv preprints are useful but should always be taken with a grain of salt. There is nearly no filtering done on things uploaded to arXiv. Everyone accessing someone's uncritically reviewed work is a bittersweet gift.

Arxiv paper quality is better than journals' average paper's quality. Because publishing in Arxiv doesn't count as paper in resume in many places, there are far fewer papers who publish just for resume.

Re: It’s time to allow researchers to submit manuscripts to multiple journals

#55

Post by kryptiskt »

I'd rather do away with the whole publish or perish thing.

One half-baked idea: For academic hiring, only ever judge the quality of a candidate's research based on their five best papers (as they themselves have nominated), then there is no pressure to publish anything that doesn't break into the top five.

Re: It’s time to allow researchers to submit manuscripts to multiple journals

#56

Post by mnky9800n »

liliumregale wrote: post #15
bo1024 wrote: post #7

Computer Science's conventions solve these problems (although CS certainly has other problems): * papers are generally posted to arxiv.org immediately on being finished, so everyone can access them * conferences have fixed deadlines and relatively short, fixed/enforced review cycles

Let's distinguish between papers and preprints, please. arXiv has contributed to a blurring of the distinction. The arXiv preprints are useful but should always be taken with a grain of salt. There is nearly no filtering done on things uploaded to arXiv. Everyone accessing someone's uncritically reviewed work is a bittersweet gift.

Yes. For example, here is a paper by some Cornell people where they reinvent machine learning model evaluation with the only motivation that I can tell is hubris and self service:

https://browse.arxiv.org/pdf/2310.02335.pdf

Do not trust arxiv papers. They have not been vetted.

Re: It’s time to allow researchers to submit manuscripts to multiple journals

#57

Post by mnky9800n »

mo_42 wrote: post #48
liliumregale wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's distinguish between papers and preprints, please. arXiv has contributed to a blurring of the distinction. The arXiv preprints are useful but should always be taken with a grain of salt. There is nearly no filtering done on things uploaded to arXiv. Everyone accessing someone's uncritically reviewed work is a bittersweet gift.

> Everyone accessing someone's uncritically reviewed work is a bittersweet gift. Review work is not always done by senior researcher (e.g., professors). Senior researchers often hand this down to PhDs. Having 3 to 4 reviews by nice junior reviewers doesn't sound very critical.

They have to say they did this and you are forgetting the editor's role in paper evaluation. This criticism can and is taken into account and you can send papers out for more reviews if you get conflicting ones. In my experience as an editor, junior people typically give better reviews than senior (unless they are emeritus and then have unlimited time). I suppose this has to do with confidence in the junior person who will question their review themselves.

Re: It’s time to allow researchers to submit manuscripts to multiple journals

#58

Post by ahmedsaad1977 »

If the peer reivew is turned into a properly paid work through a platform, many researchers from under-developed countries will surely join to become reveiwers. This will bridge the demand-supply gap and and make the publishing faster.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

Re: It’s time to allow researchers to submit manuscripts to multiple journals

#59

Post by mnky9800n »

mycologos wrote: post #44

I do computer science research and publish regularly (in conferences, not journals, since that's how computer science mostly works -- you write a paper, look for the soonest upcoming relevant conference deadline, submit there, and get a response 2-3 months later). I think discussions about peer review often fail to explain all of the things peer review can accomplish: 1) Verifying that work is correct, assuming that…

Also sometimes reviewers point out interesting ideas you didn't think of because you always have tunnel vision by the point you submit a paper.

Re: It’s time to allow researchers to submit manuscripts to multiple journals

#60

Post by mnky9800n »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #41

While we're talking about needed journal changes, it's worth pointing out that Nature, the journal, now allows articles submitted by authors to be open to anyone, which is great, but only if the authors pay Nature $11,690 per article. Otherwise, only institutions which subscribe to Nature can see the articles.

That's because nature is a predatory journal. Submit to society journals please.
Post reply on HN