Publications: Quality or quantity?

[ddong]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Hello, any help will be appreciated. I'm planning to apply this year and right now I have two first author manuscripts in the pipes, I was wondering how adcoms weigh out quality of the journal vs. quantity? I.e. Should I combine the data and try for a higher journal like EMBO or PNAS, or settle for 2 JBC (journal of biological chem). Please input.
Thanks

 

[durfen]

Hello, any help will be appreciated. I'm planning to apply this year and right now I have two first author manuscripts in the pipes, I was wondering how adcoms weigh out quality of the journal vs. quantity? I.e. Should I combine the data and try for a higher journal like EMBO or PNAS, or settle for 2 JBC (journal of biological chem). Please input.
Thanks

at your stage, quantity is better, unless it's JAMA versus college journal. If it's one Radiology paper v. two Radiographics papers, for example, go for two papers. If you're applying for an academic job, then quality matters, but as an undergraduate, publishing itself is an accomplishment.
I'm not sure about the pure bio journals.

 

[ddong]

Thanks for the input, anyone else?

 

[nosugrefneb]

I agree with Durfen. In your case, something like JBC is a respectable journal, and I think if you were to shoot for something like PNAS, you might be doing yourself a disservice in terms of having less publications. The way I see it, more is always better unless you've got really killer pubs, such as in Nature or Cell or Science or something. Go for numbers right now (esp. since you're first author! Well done.).

 

[DogFaceMedic]

Thanks for the input, anyone else?

As with all things, there are advantages to both.
At an early stage in your career, having any pubs is a good thing because it shows you can produce. But too many names with too many authors is just CV padding. It's obvious and can look bad that tells people you contribution might be limited. Many journals are now limiting the number of authors, because more than 3-4 is suspect.

What kills a lot of academics is they just can't close the deal on a pub. They always want to do one more re-write and they are emotionally attached to every word, data table, and graphic, unable to cut out or edit anything. I knew a guy who wrote a 2000 page dissertation over 15 years.

Any journal is OK if it is refereed. The adcoms and editors know each other; they all go to the same annual conferences and drink together.

 

[totalcommand]

Hello, any help will be appreciated. I'm planning to apply this year and right now I have two first author manuscripts in the pipes, I was wondering how adcoms weigh out quality of the journal vs. quantity? I.e. Should I combine the data and try for a higher journal like EMBO or PNAS, or settle for 2 JBC (journal of biological chem). Please input.
Thanks

Many applicants will have no publications at all. Adcoms will be simply glad that you have first author publications in a respectable journal (since you aren't theorizing nature/science).

IMHO, you should be making this decision based on the science and lab needs rather than the thinking of adcoms.

 

[jeniffer lopez]

I would go for quality...why settle for less when you have what it takes to go for a better pub? Sometimes really good papers get published in "lesser journals" just because people did not know that what they found was good enough for a "higher journal." However, the publication journey is a long one, taking months to even a year, so if you are about to submit now chances are the reviewers will want more experiments since there is no perfect paper. By the time you address those (and believe me, trying to finish up reviewers requests ASAP and going on interviews for MD/PhD is NOT fun), you might have already gotten interviews. So, if I were in your position, I would submit for the higher journal. The worse that can happen is that they reject it, which can be a good thing since they can point out the weaknesses of your paper and you can work on them before you resubmit. Again, this is just my opinion. Adcoms care about how you explain your research (and how excited you are about it), not in the quantity of publications. It is very rare to have first authors at all. I only knew of one girl that had a first author and it was in a "lesser journal"

 

[ddong]

Thanks for the input everyone, BTW, if I submit now, I can still put it in my AMCAS as "submitted" right? Also down the road can I update the status of my papers by contacting the schools directly?

 

[DogFaceMedic]

Thanks for the input everyone, BTW, if I submit now, I can still put it in my AMCAS as "submitted" right? Also down the road can I update the status of my papers by contacting the schools directly?

Absolutely. It shows you are working. It can take 6-18 months to get word back, so take credit for the work you have submitted.

And, the "prestige" level of journals is not that important as long as it is recognized as a refereed journal in your field.

 

[solitude]

I knew a guy who wrote a 2000 page dissertation over 15 years.

Seriously!?

 

[DogFaceMedic]

Seriously!?

I even saw it. It almost needed its own bookshelf, compared to all the rest of our modest little tomes of knowledge.

I briefly shared study space in grad school with the guy. He even got a book contract from an academic press if he could cut it down to about 600pgs and it would be marketed as a reference. So, every library would use it. But, he just couldn't bring himself to cut any of his precious words, and the publisher went out of business before he could get it to print. I don't know if he ever tried to get another publisher.

The odd thing is, he started grad school when I was still in grade school.

 

[solitude]

I even saw it. It almost needed its own bookshelf, compared to all the rest of our modest little tomes of knowledge.

I briefly shared study space in grad school with the guy. He even got a book contract from an academic press if he could cut it down to about 600pgs and it would be marketed as a reference. So, every library would use it. But, he just couldn't bring himself to cut any of his precious words, and the publisher went out of business before he could get it to print. I don't know if he ever tried to get another publisher.

The odd thing is, he started grad school when I was still in grade school.

I'm not sure what to say other than simply Wow.

 

[tacojohn]

Quantity! Nobody reads papers but they do count the number of publications on a CV.

 

[116408]

Quantity! Nobody reads papers but they do count the number of publications on a CV.

I would say quantity too... although most other 'researchers' find us clinical researchers a strange species. In contract, it's not so much the brilliant idea you need, but a lot of time for data acquisition.

But hey, if you would ask me: a RCT in the lancet or a couple of radiology papers.... Nr.1!

Big advantage of Nature/Science/Lancet is the review speed. A friend got a reject letter back from Science 3 minutes after submission..... 😍

 

[DogFaceMedic]

I would say quantity too... although most other 'researchers' find us clinical researchers a strange species. In contract, it's not so much the brilliant idea you need, but a lot of time for data acquisition.

But hey, if you would ask me: a RCT in the lancet or a couple of radiology papers.... Nr.1!

Big advantage of Nature/Science/Lancet is the review speed. A friend got a reject letter back from Science 3 minutes after submission..... 😍

Not that I disagree, so much as suggest a different emphasis. We all need pubs, but there is a growing back-lash against CV-padding. Anything over 4 authors tends to be looked on as padding and runs the risk of damaging credibility. So, I prefer a 2-author quality study in a small refereed journal over a 10-author study in a big journal. One of my mentors now recommends against getting your name in just to get it in because it is harder to defend your role when asked in interviews. Just my two bits.

 

[116408]

One of my mentors now recommends against getting your name in just to get it in because it is harder to defend your role when asked in interviews. Just my two bits.

I agree, i would just go for a number one, two or last place. But hey, I’m a research bum doing three years of fulltime research before beginning my residency............

Seriously, a number three or somewhere else in the hammock doesn’t mean sh.t. But hey, relax.. life isn't al that serious. Time enough to become prof.

 

[ANCAdoc]

Many journals are now limiting the number of authors, because more than 3-4 is suspect.

I don't buy that. Alot of work these days are the results of colloborations, and 3-4 authors IMO doesn't mesh well with multidisciplinary work.

 

[Caribou]

I agree 100% with JenniferLopez.

Submit to the best journal you think you can get your work into.

 

[jjmack]

I'm all about quality.

 

[Myempire1]

In your case I agree that JBC is probably fine. But generally, I am all about the quality.

Low end work is generally purely descriptive. It takes a higher caliber of research to get past the descriptive and find the mechanisms and relevant pathaways. Often that's what make high impact studies... well, high impact.

If Joe Shmo is reading your CV and doesn't realize this.... then they are missing the point.

 

[qwopty99]

if i was in the middle of a career, and hadn't published much into top-end journals, then i'd obviously prefer to get into the highest-ranking journal possible.

but at the start of a career, it's about getting numbers. a sole publication can be a fluke. you'll need multiple pubs to show you have an ability to publish, and that's the whole point of this exercise. in your case, therefore, i'd choose the two JBCs. if u never get a chance to get into PNAS later in life, then honestly, your career will never be at that calibre to begin with.