Check this out: rejection can help your citations! This sounds a little counter intuitive but is one of the conclusions of a piece of work published in Science recently by Calcagno and colleagues. They have done this huge network based study of submission patterns within the biological sciences across some 923 journals involving some 80 thousand articles. Some of their conclusions are obvious, scientists aspire to high impact journals and resubmit successively to lower impact journals when rejected, but others are not. The paper’s particular focus is on the pattern of resubmission between journals when a manuscript is rejected. The network of resubmissions is impressive and forms clear academic clusters. Interestingly high impact journals publish proportionally more articles that had been resubmitted from another journal suggesting that even the best journals receive manuscripts rejected by others. This makes sense to me, for example my own Science paper in 2009 was first rejected by Nature. But the really interesting bit is that resubmission can actually enhance the impact of a paper post-publication in terms of citations. The question is why? Do good papers just shine through or is there something else? The authors suggest that in fact this may be a reflection of the contribution of editors and reviewers to a paper enhancing that paper even if they ultimately reject it. I like this because ambition and aspiration to the top journals, even if one fails in the attempt, gets its reward in the end! Interestingly the survey also shows that authors are often very conservative in their journal choices placing material where they are confident it will be published. In fact 75% of outputs in the survey are published where they were first submitted. One could argue, however, that in being conservative we are in fact in some cases doing our work a disservice and that by exposing our work to risk of rejection it may often end having more impact. One final parting shot from this great little paper; if you switch journal or discipline networks during the resubmission cascade your paper will do worse in terms of its post-publication impact. Any way check it out a great study!
One Response to “The power of resubmission?”
BU staff can login below:
Don’t miss a post!
Subscribe for the BU Research Digest, delivered freshly every day.
Recent posts
BU research Funding opportunities EU
SERVED research project: Supporting Evidence-based Research for Veterans Experiencing Dementia8 May 2025
Alzheimer’s Awareness Week – join us in BGB on Tuesday 20th May8 May 2025
- CWLTH Research Seminar7 May 2025
Nanocoatings to Bionanocomposites: Sustainable Solutions6 May 2025
Take part in the 2025 ESRC Festival of Social Science – Deadline for applications: Thursday 15 May 2025 6 May 2025
AI learning to read emotions from motion….6 May 2025
Horizon Europe 2025 Work Programme pre-Published28 April 2025
- This week – Konfer – an innovation and collaboration platform17 March 2025
MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships 202510 March 2025
Horizon Europe info days 20257 March 2025
- Last chance to apply for ECRN/RKEDF Funding. Closes 10th March27 February 2025
- Recruiting Participants for International Students Project26 February 2025
- European Migration Research and Impact – Invitation to a Roundtable Discussion16 April 2025
MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships 202510 March 2025
Update on UKRO services13 February 2025
European research project exploring use of ‘virtual twins’ to better manage metabolic associated fatty liver disease4 February 2025
- Horizon Europe funding – Weds 12th Feb21 January 2025
- BU research to explore how artificial intelligence can help detect and investigate crime13 January 2025
Search by Category
Search by popular post topics
AHRC
BU research
clinical research
CMMPH
CMWH
collaboration
collaborative research
conference
congratulations
Doctoral College
Dr. Pramod Regmi
Edwin-blog-post
ESRC
EU
event
Events
funding
funding opportunities
Fusion
Health
horizon 2020
HSC
impact
innovation
knowledge exchange
media
midwifery
Nepal
nhs
NIHR
open access
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Prof. Vanora Hundley
publication
public engagement
publishing
ref
research
Research Councils
research professional
RKE development framework
RKEDF
social sciences
training
widening participation
Research Information Network
- Physical Sciences Case studies: information use and discovery
- Information handling in collaborative research: an exploration of five case studies
- Information literacy monitoring and evaluation
- Data centres: their use, value and impact
- Heading for the open road: costs and benefits of transitions in scholarly communications
There may be an attribution error in your piece…..it may simply be that more considered work is better cited. It may even be that the more hassle you have had with an article the more determined you are to ‘sell it’ to others. It remind me a little of a ‘theory’ is service marketing …along the lines of …the best way to maximise customer satisfaction is to handle a complaint well = you should cause yourself to get complaints!