Re: Journal start-ups---and the current journal scene (fwd)

[Alan Edelson <amedelson@topnet.net>]

Reply to the comment of Norm Frankel:

It is a fact of life, often explicityly stated, often implied, that
reviewers may recommend that an article be accepted for publication "if
space permits." This need not involve lowering the standards of a peer
reviewed journal.

Such latitude may be given when an article may report valid results which
may appeal to a small segment of the journal's readership, or which may be
primarily of archival value.

The above applies more to some journals than to others, of course. And
some journals, such as Nature, seem to prefer slim issues in order to make
quick browsing possible; they might not be interested in expanding their
format.

My suggestion was offerred simply to indicate that there may be acceptable
ways partially to roll back the excessive proliferation of journals. Other
ways may also be found, and I would urge readers to try to come up with
some. Ultimately it is up to the journal's Editor to issue directions for
reviewers regarding any such changes.

Alan M. Edelson, Ph.D.

_______________________________________

Norm Frankel wrote:

> David Goodman raises some very interesting points.  I am concerned with
> his suggestion that "the differences near the top may be so small and so
> difficult to judge that it would be of almost equal quality."  This is a
> decision that should be made by the peer reviewers, i.e., physicians and
> scientists.  It is definitely not a decision to be made by librarians and
> publishers.
>
> Norm Frankel/AMA
> _____________________