Message 00391 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00387 Message: 4/4 L3 [In date index] [In thread index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: Action September [was: Re: [jox] elsevier]

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Yes, the cost (for authors) of having something published with a qualification is intended to widen their range of options beyond publish-reject as well as to protect the journal's reputation... all virtual so far, practice will follow.


----- Original Message -----
From: graham <graham>
Date: Thursday, September 9, 2010 2:51 pm
Subject: Re: Action September [was: Re: [jox] elsevier]
To: journal

On 08/29/10 21:35, Mathieu ONeil wrote:

As for your question: essentially we will publish anything, as 
long as the author accepts that the published paper 
is accompanied by 'signals' regarding relevance, quality etc: 
said previously the cost of publication or rejection 
is intended to be borne by the author. 

Having trouble understanding this: how does 'cost of rejection' 
fit with
'we will publish anything'? And is the 'cost' here meant to mean
the reputational cost of having bad work published with negative 
reviewsrather than just being rejected, or is there some other 
kind of cost

I'm not trying to reopen old debates, just having trouble 
finding the
conclusions looking through the list archives.



Dr Mathieu O'Neil
Adjunct Research Fellow
Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute
College of Arts and Social Science
The Australian National University
email: mathieu.oneil[at]

[2 text/html]

Thread: joxT00387 Message: 4/4 L3 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00391 [Homepage] [Navigation]