Extremely long in press times?

[futureapppsy2]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Maybe this is just something I'm now encountering, but it seems like longer and longer in press times are becoming the norm in a lot of journals I read/review for/publish in. Recently, I've seen a good number of journals that have wait times of 18-24 months between final proof submission and "official" publication (not counting online publication ahead of print), and I've cited articles from online first publications well over a year before their official publication date. Some faculty have remarked that this didn't use to be the case, and even a 12 month wait time was at the upper end of things.

Does anyone know the story behind these long in press times, or know if there is any evidence that they are actually increasing or not? Are journals actually publishing more articles? Conversely, are they publishing fewer issues? Does the availability of online first publication simply take the pressure off by getting the article out there in some form ?

 

[deadmau5]

Well not because I know the reason, but i agree I've seen a lot of that lately. The good thing is that your articles are being seen earlier, whereas previously when online first pubs were not available it would take a year for people to even see it.

Are you submitting to journals that have 4 issues per year? I recently got two accepted pubs in journals that have rapid publication. They went from in press to issue in about 3 months. I think it's because they had at least 12 issues/year. Last year I had one that took about 7-8 months.

I think journals ARE actually publishing more articles and there is so much going through it is difficult to get them all into issues at one time.

 

[PsyDr]

there is some "fast track"ing that is done with higher impact studies. I expect this delays the bread an butter studies.

 

[CheetahGirl]

...And archival data seems to take the longest IMO. We had archival data written up for highly-respected surgical journal, only to have them hang on to it for 18-months, then reject it. It was being submitted and followed-up by my former program director's administrator. So I also feel if you keep on top of the communication with the publication (and lessen YOUR turn-around time), you'll fare better. I'm going to actively stay involved in this article's resubmission because this has gone on too long for me (as I'm sure it has for the PI, but he's cranking out stuff all the time)...and I've signed many signature pages that all get my hopes up!

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Sometimes relatively minor things like formatting larger/more complex tables can take awhile to get right (on the journal side of the process…or so I hear).

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

...and I've signed many signature pages that all get my hopes up!

Yeah…it's like, "Ok! I can't wait for this to be awesome."

*crickets*

 

[CheetahGirl]

Yeah…it's like, "Ok! I can't wait for this to be awesome."

*crickets*

Yes...and do you know many people I've TOLD that I signed signature pages for New England Journal of Medicine and Annals of Surgery to have them never come to fruition?! Geeez. And this science is cutting-edge new standard of care for hospitalized/long-term patients, derived straight from basic science (all those poor obese mice we sacrificed)! Guess the world isn't ready for it?! But, oh, when they finally learn of our results...I see something great in the future....for my former PI (BIG sigh).

Ironic that this science may not be too cutting-edge if these publications keep them in their In-Boxes too much longer!

 

[psychRA]

I had a paper that had been revised and accepted, and then 12 months passed before the proofs were ready for approval. More senior colleauges seemed surprised by the wait, but I've been hearing from others that the process seems to be taking longer across the board.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

If I'm being completely objective about things, I haven't had anything NEJM worthy….yet. I think what I'm/we're looking at is pretty cool (and novel)…we'll have to see how things shake out as we drill down in our data.

 

[CheetahGirl]

If I'm being completely objective about things, I haven't had anything NEJM worthy….yet.

Good Luck and when you get there (& I'm sure you will), make sure you hang out with the administrators and stay on top of it!

Also, big tip for everyone (that I may have stated before in another post): Make sure what you submit...with your name on it, does not have typos! We submitted a grant (one of many) in my first years working with this PI, and there were so many errors in production of the actual application document that they actually doubted the precision of our team as researchers! From that point forward, my former PI hired people who were skilled draftsmen (draftpersons) to make sure those simple errors were never part of his package.