hello, i'm a high school student doing some research that i think has the potential to get published.
thing is, i'm doing it basically by myself (i'm using some lab equipment at a very prestigious university, but my cell culturing is at a lab which is for student science fair projects specifically)
1) is it possible to get published just by myself, or will editors/peer reviewers look down on that and reject me? 2) do i need a professor or scientist as a coauthor to get it published? (b/c i could ask someone i know to look it over for me and thus put him as a coauthor)
3) and also for my institution...should i put my school or what?
i'm thinking of submitting to the journal of neuroinflammation, journal of neuroscience, and journal of immunology
I'll try to answer all your points with the knowledge I have. Take all information you receive on here with a grain of salt... It is the internetz.
First, you absolutely need a Primary Investigator that holds some position at an institution. while it used to be possible to publish in your basement (some famous people have done this... Check out the guy who first postulated the theory of chemosmosis and proton motive force.... He worked from his garage. What a bad ass.) There are reasons for this. Journals want to see there is some system in place in make sure there is a standard of research integrity. Thus, having a home institution does this.
Secondly, it doesn't matter who plans the experiments. For the most part in most labs that produce exceptional work the lead authors should and do plan out most of the details of the experiments. The P.I. serves as the person who pays the bills, gives the ok for spending cash on experiments, and makes sure the work that is being done is both hypothesis driven and meaningful to the field. No offense, seriously I think it is awesome a high schooler is involved in real basic science research, but someone without even a B.S. or B.A. does not have the training to set up these experiments to adhere to good scientific principles. More the most part, as it has been described to me, earning your PhD is not about doing mindless bench work (I think most grad students would laugh at that....) but is instead about learning HOW to set up experiments. In short, anyone can design an experiment. The real thing is doing it in a convincing manner that the scientific community would except and your results would add to the field.
Secondly, you will not get the peer editing stage without a P.I. The journal will not consider you. Don't think you will get to that stage.
Thirdly, who is paying for your lab equipment? Who is paying for the lab ware, the media, the upkeep of the hoods you use? That person is likely the person who MUST be the P.I. You need to talk to this person.
Fourth, and most importantly, people who actually care about their reputation do not just randomly throw their names on papers. I think some premeds have this false idea that if you do the work, sans P.I. and your stuff is good, then any P.I. will take your work no questions asked. This is totally untrue and for good reason. Putting your name on someone else's work puts your name and reputation on the line. If it turns out you fabricated your results (no one is saying you did this...) then the P.I. will be the one who takes the hit, not you. That is part of the whole integrity of science thing. There must be balances and 99% of P.I.'s are sharks about making sure the data cannot be construed at fabricated. A PI will likely not be willing to just throw his/her name on something they didn't help design.
I'm not doubting your ability, I don't know you to be honest. I'm just saying you need to talk to you P.I. before you go any further. Good luck.
