• tetris11@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    It’s a numbers game.

    • X submits paper to Journal 1, and peers A,B,C reject it.
    • X submits paper with minor changes to Journal 2, and only peers D and E reject it.
    • X submits paper with minor changes to Journal 3, and only peer G rejects it
    • X submits paper with minor changes to Journal 4, and no one rejects it.

    Journal 4 increments prestige, Scientist X increments prestige, but nothing true or good is actually gained.

    Science.

      • tetris11@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        66
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I believe in the scientific method. I believe in peer review.

        I just don’t like that scientific journals have become so commodified that a lesser journal would accept volumes of bad science and bad review in order to boost its rankings whilst boosting the prestige of the scientist who is measured on the quantity of their work and not the quality.

        Entire paper mills exist purely for this reason, and it’s a scourge on the scientific community.

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 months ago

      NOT science. At all. That’s publication and clout. Two things science distinctly is NOT, but needs because information must still disseminate in some way.