faming Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 Cool. Thank you for your clarification :-) But the problem of "fast publishing journals" , is that they do not have a great impact factor, and my supervisors usually don't go for them, still it could be a nice strategy to try both canot say they have the highest impact factor, they are still in top ranking. we had a highly ranked journal, the peer review takes about only 27 days, but this journal asks for publication fee and submission fee. The rejection rate is also very high, which is above 73%.
vivaldi Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 yeah could be. some other people use an another strategy a friend told me about. In some labs, for every publication, everybody writes down their name as an author, but the position of their names depends on their respective contributions. So at the end of the day, they end up with a huge number of publications :-)
seebee Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 Quick question for everyone who's heard- did the mail arrive to your "current mailing address" or your 'permanent' address? I put my university mailbox for the former and my home for the latter- so I need to figure out which mail room I should camp out by today!
faming Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 yeah could be. some other people use an another strategy a friend told me about. In some labs, for every publication, everybody writes down their name as an author, but the position of their names depends on their respective contributions. So at the end of the day, they end up with a huge number of publications :-) ok, the group should have quite a lot people. Otherwise, it is still difficult to raise the number. We have only four people in our group and the professor seldom write articles due to the retirement.
Sylvat Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 Authorship is field specific, so this comment only refers to ecology/evolution. I think reviewers know what is going on if they see a pub list with 6+ authors on every pub and you are only the 1st author on one or two. Being the 3rd or 4th author on a pub with 8 authors doesn't count as much as second author on the 3 author pub. Not that total pub count matters anyway, two pubs in top ranked journals means a lot more than four in low ranked journals. It is a balence between number and quality.
sbaldwin Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 yeah could be. some other people use an another strategy a friend told me about. In some labs, for every publication, everybody writes down their name as an author, but the position of their names depends on their respective contributions. So at the end of the day, they end up with a huge number of publications :-) This makes me uncomfortable, but I may be misunderstanding. I don't think that someone should have authorship on a paper unless they have contributed significantly to multiple components of a publication. I have several lab members, and I enjoy problem solving with them about their work and helping them in the lab or field occasionally. However, unless I have taken significant responsibility for an aspect of the project, I would not be comfortable with authorship. So, I hope that people are not adding themselves onto other peoples publications. I have applied for PGS-D and I am just finishing my MSc. I have 1 first authorship in a high impact journal, 1 co-authorship in a peer-reviewed special issue, 1 book chapter (international collaboration), and about five conferences. I have NO idea what to expect.
faming Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 Authorship is field specific, so this comment only refers to ecology/evolution. I think reviewers know what is going on if they see a pub list with 6+ authors on every pub and you are only the 1st author on one or two. Being the 3rd or 4th author on a pub with 8 authors doesn't count as much as second author on the 3 author pub. Not that total pub count matters anyway, two pubs in top ranked journals means a lot more than four in low ranked journals. It is a balence between number and quality. cannot agree more, one article on Science is enough, much better than 10 articles with low impact factors.
vivaldi Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 This makes me uncomfortable, but I may be misunderstanding. I don't think that someone should have authorship on a paper unless they have contributed significantly to multiple components of a publication. I have several lab members, and I enjoy problem solving with them about their work and helping them in the lab or field occasionally. However, unless I have taken significant responsibility for an aspect of the project, I would not be comfortable with authorship. So, I hope that people are not adding themselves onto other peoples publications. I have applied for PGS-D and I am just finishing my MSc. I have 1 first authorship in a high impact journal, 1 co-authorship in a peer-reviewed special issue, 1 book chapter (international collaboration), and about five conferences. I have NO idea what to expect. Do not worry, you will get it :-)
snowshoes Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 This makes me uncomfortable, but I may be misunderstanding. I don't think that someone should have authorship on a paper unless they have contributed significantly to multiple components of a publication. I have several lab members, and I enjoy problem solving with them about their work and helping them in the lab or field occasionally. However, unless I have taken significant responsibility for an aspect of the project, I would not be comfortable with authorship. So, I hope that people are not adding themselves onto other peoples publications. These practices are endemic to the research field, especially in bigger labs. It is an abhorrent mentality, but what do you expect when people need to pump up their annual review to keep funding or stroke their ego? I know of many “respectable” labs where the head researcher tacks his name on literally every paper that comes out. Obviously people know what the game is, but they bring in the money so people aspire to do the same thing. The very concept of “high impact journal” is a joke and doesn’t belong in science in my opinion. I refuse to buy into that. What is wrong with publishing in a respectable (preferably open source) journal that is relevant to your field? The idea that one Science journal equals 10 “Impact Factor X” journals is quite simply the wrong attitude in my opinion. And yes, I have a publication in PNAS so it isn’t a case of sour grapes with me. I just feel this attitude detracts from what a researcher should be pursuing. seebee and faming 2
Bubu Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 The thing is that the reviewers might not be familiar with the journal impact factors. Especially if your filed is so specific and not many ppl work in that area in Canada, then it is highly possible that the reviewers have no idea about it.
vivaldi Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 The thing is that the reviewers might not be familiar with the journal impact factors. Especially if your filed is so specific and not many ppl work in that area in Canada, then it is highly possible that the reviewers have no idea about it. There is an invention called the internet, and a friend called Google that the reviewers can retrieve relevant information from.
stanvx Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 Mailman just came by... nothing today from NSERC. (I'm just outside of the GTA.)
tingting_far Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 I live in Ottawa. I have not heard anything about my NSERC PDF application yet. I do not think that I will get one, but I still want to have the results.
Bubu Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 I doubt that they take thier time and do that. I am skeptical. A few might, but not all. I am of the opinin that some do it to put it on thier resume. It is a pitty that such persons have the power to decide on someone's future. I remembers someone writing that although he was from engineering area his application went to a reviwer with mathematical background.
vivaldi Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 Mailman just came by... nothing today from NSERC. (I'm just outside of the GTA.) If you don't receive the letter today it means that you got a rejection ?
Bubu Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 If you don't receive the letter today it means that you got a rejection ? not really. somebody siad that they got letter of rejection yesterday
mattboud Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 No, post #229 says that 2 people in Ottawa received rejection letters yesterday. Pretty sure they're sending out positive and negative results at the same time, they might just increase the amount of waitlists (i.e. "you'll see in june") letters ahead of the budget, to be cautious.
silicon Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 If we are talking about "Nature" / "Science" / "PNAS" then I will agree about the importance of impact factor because these journals publish the very new research results in every field. However, impact factor of a field specific journals can not be compared with the journals of other fields. Like, carbon nanotube / nanotechnology related research papers are frequently published in nano letters / advanced materials which have impact factor ~ 10. These research areas are new and other peoples from these area cite these works frequently. On the other hand, Physics / Applied physics / Chemistry related journals are frequently published in the journals under American Inst. of Phys / Chem. like Apllied Physics Letters, Journal of Applied Physics etc. etc. which has impact factor ~ 4 or lower. But these journals are top ranked in their area although impact factor is lower. So, impact factor carries some value but not a general standard. We have to be cautious to talk about impact factor. Regarding the Journal count / number of conference papers / repeating presentations are also rational matter. It can not be evaluated based on a general standard. It will take several hours for me to discuss the philosophy/some politics behind it. I think the reviewers are wise enough to consider all the factors. I wish good luck with all of your NSERC application.
stud007 Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 This makes me uncomfortable, but I may be misunderstanding. I don't think that someone should have authorship on a paper unless they have contributed significantly to multiple components of a publication. I have several lab members, and I enjoy problem solving with them about their work and helping them in the lab or field occasionally. However, unless I have taken significant responsibility for an aspect of the project, I would not be comfortable with authorship. So, I hope that people are not adding themselves onto other peoples publications. I have applied for PGS-D and I am just finishing my MSc. I have 1 first authorship in a high impact journal, 1 co-authorship in a peer-reviewed special issue, 1 book chapter (international collaboration), and about five conferences. I have NO idea what to expect. Thats a pretty decent number of publns (exactly similar to my total publications i.e. 8)... I think even the awards u won is important along with the inpact of ur research...I was very positive abt my appln until few days.. The standard of appln, I guess has enhanced a lot. People r having soo many publn even when they r abt to start PhD... I m just a bit nervous but still hopeful of getting CGS-D!
sbaldwin Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 Do not worry, you will get it :-) Who knows. I hope you are successful too ! I am in Hamilton and I didn't get a letter today.
sbaldwin Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) Thats a pretty decent number of publns (exactly similar to my total publications i.e. 8)... I think even the awards u won is important along with the inpact of ur research...I was very positive abt my appln until few days.. The standard of appln, I guess has enhanced a lot. People r having soo many publn even when they r abt to start PhD... I m just a bit nervous but still hopeful of getting CGS-D! It is amazing hearing about the records that some students have. I am hopeful that it is a sign that science in Canada is competing well at the international level (for now). It's tough when we're all fighting for the same money. There are so many well trained, intelligent students. I hope that our level of accomplishment is good enough! Edited March 27, 2012 by sbaldwin ktel 1
Bubu Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 PhD students in Canda produce more publication as compared to thier peers in Europe. That is for sure.
snowshoes Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 PhD students in Canda produce more publication as compared to thier peers in Europe. That is for sure. My supervisor told me the opposite, but who knows. European grad studies are typically less course-based and more thesis-based, similiar to Canada. As a result, we probably come out of our MSc./PhD. with more publications than our American peers. But, of course, American schools are considered to be number one around the world, so they have that going for them.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now