Publication question

[futureapppsy2]

Hi,

Will it hurt my tenure file to have two or so pubs in a low tier but legit journal if I have lots of pubs in very good journals? I have some data that I think is really clinically interesting, but for some reason, it's been absolute hell to get published, and I'm just at the point where I wanted to submit it to this lower tier but legit/indexed journal just to get it out in the literature. For context, I have just over 90 pubs (50+ first-author), with a lot in top-tier journals in my areas and a high-ish h-index (mid-20s), finishing up my second year TT.

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Ollie123]

Please know that I say this with all the love in the world but...

You are being told to go up early.

Chill.



I think I know where this is coming from based on another one of your recent posts and it makes sense you'd be a bit more nervous about this than some, but it sounds like you are sooooooo far beyond expectations that things like this are irrelevant. This absolutely shouldn't matter and anyone trying to make a case that it does is going to look like a doofus to most. It matters if you have 5 publications and 4 are in journals with IF < 1 that even your close colleagues have never heard of before. This is not your situation. If they want to make a case against tenure they will find an excuse for doing so but it sounds like you have done 2-3x what anyone could reasonably expect of you.

 

[MCParent]

I’m gonna diagnose you with CV dysmorphic disorder. “I look amazing but this oooonnneee thiiing”.

i think everyone has a couple pubs in lower tier journals. Sometimes a project doesn’t work great, sometimes you draw an AE + 2 reviewers who don’t like the paper at a better journal.

it’s only a problem if your pub record says IF=1 is all you’re capable of.

 

[ClinicalABA]

Let's assume that there will be no impact on your academic progression as a result of these pubs (I'll defer to the academics above on that one). Are you proud of this work? Will it contribute to the field? Is the student- with no knowledge of IF scores- who uses these articles in their paper or project using good, quality research with sound methodology? Can you defend your results? You seem reasonably competent ( ) in your area, and probably have the same skills as at least a typical AE at decent impact journal. If you got these articles for review, would you publish them? If so, publish away.

 

[CheetahGirl]

CV dysmorphic disorder.

I have this. It's persistent.

 

[WisNeuro]

CVDD, Recurrent, Severe

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I have nothing helpful to add other than to: 1) agree with everyone above, and 2) say that if this affects your tenure decision, your review committee needs a kick in the pants.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Let's assume that there will be no impact on your academic progression as a result of these pubs (I'll defer to the academics above on that one). Are you proud of this work? Will it contribute to the field? Is the student- with no knowledge of IF scores- who uses these articles in their paper or project using good, quality research with sound methodology? Can you defend your results? You seem reasonably competent ( ) in your area, and probably have the same skills as at least a typical AE at decent impact journal. If you got these articles for review, would you publish them? If so, publish away.

See, that's what's really baffling to me about this MS--I find the data really clinically interesting, and it documents a pattern I haven't seen documented elsewhere (namely, that lifetime course of NSSI in a non-clinical sample often follows a relapsing-remitting pattern, with different forms of NSSI being relapsed into), but it's been hell trying to find a journal that is interested in it, for some reason.

 

[ClinicalABA]

See, that's what's really baffling to me about this MS--I find the data really clinically interesting, and it documents a pattern I haven't seen documented elsewhere (namely, that lifetime course of NSSI in a non-clinical sample often follows a relapsing-remitting pattern, with different forms of NSSI being relapsed into), but it's been hell trying to find a journal that is interested in it, for some reason.

It's certainly a timely topic. Are there concerns with methodology? Is it not part of the current "zeitgeist" in regards to NSSI? Add in something about online contagion and they'll be banging on your door to publish it.

 

[Ollie123]

What I still believe is the best and most ground-breaking paper I have ever been a part of got rejected from 6 (I think?) journals before we finally got it published at an open journal (JAMA Network so still legit).

Weird stuff happens. Could be the stats are too much for some depending on how you are modeling it. Could just be bad luck with reviewers. I've heard from a number of editors that the variance in review quality has gotten larger during the pandemic.

If you're annoyed and just want it out there, I really wouldn't hesitate to step down to some place you know it will get accepted. You're past the point you really need to worry about something like that.

 

[PsychPhDone]

See, that's what's really baffling to me about this MS--I find the data really clinically interesting, and it documents a pattern I haven't seen documented elsewhere (namely, that lifetime course of NSSI in a non-clinical sample often follows a relapsing-remitting pattern, with different forms of NSSI being relapsed into), but it's been hell trying to find a journal that is interested in it, for some reason.

I'm shopping around arguably my most clinically relevant paper (results from this project were recently used as part of a meeting with a major governmental agency that decided to change course on an issue) and it's been desk rejected...6? 7? times now?

 

[MCParent]

I've heard from a number of editors that the variance in review quality has gotten larger during the pandemic.

As an AE or guest editor I've had instances in which I've had to go through more than ten invites to get three reviewers on an MS. I do think it's up to the editor to tell an author that aspects of a review are not a fit to editorial needs, if the reviewer is off though. That seems to not happen a lot.

 

[Indiana_Jane]

I'm shopping around arguably my most clinically relevant paper (results from this project were recently used as part of a meeting with a major governmental agency that decided to change course on an issue) and it's been desk rejected...6? 7? times now?

I was at like 5 for one paper that included 3 studies. Reviewers - “run 12 more studies.”

 

[WisNeuro]

The paper that I had to shop the most (published on the 4th journal I submitted to) now has the 2nd most cites of all my papers. Sometimes it just comes down to place and time.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Thanks all for these responses--they also made my co-author and I feel better, so yay! We ended up submitting to the aforementioned journal, getting back really thorough, helpful reviews pretty quickly, quickly revising the MS, and getting the official word of acceptance today!

 

[WisNeuro]

Woohoo! Way to go.