Manuscript review motivation

August 17, 2011

Why is it that approximately every third or fourth manuscript I review has me thinking….Christ, they submitted THAT piece of crap* to THIS journal? I mean hell, it ain’t like I’m conservative with what I submit and to where but FFS, maybe I need to lower my frigging standards even more.

*when the piece of crap is actually accepted for publication, the thought process is similar but with more floridly physioproffian flourishes.

No Responses Yet to “Manuscript review motivation”

  1. Schlupp Says:



  2. Isis the Scientist Says:

    I just got a paper with an n=2 in one group. And they actually wrote something along the lines of “We didn’t get data for half the other group because our shit didn’t work.”

    I’ll probably vote “accept.” Meh.


  3. becca Says:

    I’ve seen one paper with an n=2. They were cows, though. It would have been a very good paper with more cows, but better publish two than none.


  4. anon Says:

    I just read through a stack of n=1 papers. All case reports. Human beings. Humans are generally boring, but maybe one is better than nuthin.


  5. Don’t lower your standards for submission, be more emphatic in your rejections. I routinely tear into subpar manuscripts, especially if it’s for a good journal. It’s the only way to stay sane. What bothers me is that there is a notion gaining ground that everything could and should be published somewhere. Some research is so bad and wrong that it should never see the light of day. Publishers aren’t helping my cause though with all of these riduculous journals that are popping up.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: