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
- Café Scientifique Tuesday 7 May 2024 – Showcasing tomorrow’s researchersMarch 28, 2024
- RKEDF April digest – training opportunities for YOU!March 27, 2024
- RKEDF Workshop: Impress the Press: How to talk to Journalists – Wednesday 24 April 2-4pmMarch 27, 2024
- RKEDF Workshop: Engaging with Schools & young people – Tuesday 16 April 10-11amMarch 27, 2024
- BU ECRN Funding call NOW OPENMarch 27, 2024
- BU Professor gives keynote address on authorial careers at Milan ConferenceMarch 27, 2024
- BU ECRN Funding call NOW OPENMarch 27, 2024
- Q&A event: applying for the ESRC Festival of Social ScienceMarch 20, 2024
- New seed fund for public engagement with research: apply nowMarch 14, 2024
- Open Call for HEIF Knowledge Exchange Project Applications 2024February 23, 2024
- Leverhulme Research Centres – Internal Expressions of Interest February 2024February 20, 2024
- New seed fund for public engagement with research: open for applicationsFebruary 20, 2024
- International midwifery collaboration on early labourMarch 26, 2024
- HE policy update 22nd January 2024January 22, 2024
- HE policy update: outlook for 2024January 8, 2024
- Horizon Europe News – December 2023December 22, 2023
- Reminder – MSCA Staff Exchanges 2023 Call Info SessionDecember 7, 2023
- Horizon Europe News – November 2023November 24, 2023
Search by Category
Search by popular post topics
AHRC
Brexit
BRIAN
BU research
clinical research
CMMPH
collaboration
collaborative research
conference
congratulations
Dr. Pramod Regmi
Edwin-blog-post
ESRC
EU
event
Events
funding
funding opportunities
Fusion
Fusion Investment Fund
Health
horizon 2020
HSC
impact
innovation
knowledge exchange
media
midwifery
Nepal
nhs
NIHR
open access
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
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!