|
Post by drbearjew on Sept 28, 2012 9:14:57 GMT -5
I haven't submitted to this journal in over five years, but is this new?:
"Papers accepted for publication are subject to a fee of $100, which is waived for members of SSSP."
That's in addition to the $25 submission fee (also waived for graduate students, though).
Seems unreasonable.
|
|
|
Post by guest163456 on Sept 28, 2012 13:53:32 GMT -5
Yeah, seems expensive.
If anyone is interested in turn around time, I submitted a manuscript in early May and got a decision in mid September. Reviews were thorough.
|
|
|
Post by drbearjew on Sept 28, 2012 14:51:44 GMT -5
I remember them being thorough years ago. It's a solid journal in terms of the quality of work published there. Just unreasonable that they ask for that amount of money if a work is accepted.
It may be a waste of time, and I'm not a member of SSSP, but I would love to see their books and understand how their money is spent (they only accept something like 5% of all submissions for publication).
|
|
Considering submission
Guest
|
Post by Considering submission on Apr 8, 2013 9:43:07 GMT -5
Any others who have positive/negative experiences with social problems?
|
|
|
Post by worth it on Apr 8, 2013 10:09:01 GMT -5
One thing to consider is the comparatively high percentage of bench rejections at SP. An editorial assistant there told me that only about 50% of manuscripts make it to peer-review. In my experience, it takes them about a month the determine wither a manuscript should be sent out. If you are on a tight timeline, this can be very useful as you'll get a rejection quite a bit faster.
|
|
anon
New Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by anon on Apr 8, 2013 13:00:05 GMT -5
One thing to consider is the comparatively high percentage of bench rejections at SP. An editorial assistant there told me that only about 50% of manuscripts make it to peer-review. In my experience, it takes them about a month the determine wither a manuscript should be sent out. If you are on a tight timeline, this can be very useful as you'll get a rejection quite a bit faster. Yeah that timeline seems fine, until it takes another 6 months to hear back with Reviewers' comments.
|
|
|
Post by fees on Apr 8, 2013 14:46:06 GMT -5
I think submission fees are perfectly fine and should be higher for most journals if that money would be put to good use by speeding up the review process (maybe rewarding reviewers) and good editing work for accepted papers. Just waive the fees for students and ask for everyone else for a $200 submission fee. Also reduces the crap submissions...
|
|
|
Post by karmapoints on Apr 8, 2013 16:13:28 GMT -5
I think submission fees are perfectly fine and should be higher for most journals if that money would be put to good use by speeding up the review process (maybe rewarding reviewers) and good editing work for accepted papers. Just waive the fees for students and ask for everyone else for a $200 submission fee. Also reduces the crap submissions... How can charging experienced researchers $200 per submission, but letting inexperienced researchers submit for free, reduce crap submissions? I think you may be letting your superficial material interest determine your position. If students want to play with the non-students, they should have to pay to play. (And I agree submission cost should go up dramatically in general). And given that student submissions are, ON AVERAGE, of lower quality than faculty submissions, actually students demand more of the process (in terms of angering reviewers who feel the reviewer is wasting their time on crap and thus making faculty increasingly refuse to review) and should be charged more. If we want to charge according to ability to pay, that should be done regardless of student status. There are some non-grad students with pretty low real earnings (e.g., think any Assistant Professor living in NY or on the west coast); why should they be treated like they're rolling in dough at the very time they have to submit lots of stuff into the process? Alternatively, we could just bar student submissions (de facto with high submission cost, or de jure). I know this seems "unfair" but, really, the publishing rat-race, with its long response times, crazy reviewer behavior, and general randomness, is no way to run a job market and, in fact, a pretty problematic way to run the tenure process, too. And, if no (or few) student(s) could publish, personnel committees would just have to go back to reading the (1-3--it could be limited) papers students submit as part of their application to find who is the best fit/most promising. The horror! Fat chance such an obvious correction will ever be adopted.
|
|
|
Post by submission on Apr 8, 2013 18:46:28 GMT -5
Submission fees of any sort are a bad idea. If you work at a research university and have money for that sort of thing, no biggie.
But, if you work at a underfunded, lower-tier state school or a very small non-elite SLAC, where will you get the funds to submit your article? You can pay out of pocket, but your salary is probably already lower than it should be.
The higher the submission fee, the fewer submissions from non-R1 universities you're going to get. That's especially problematic if it means particular ideas or perspectives are never published (i.e., those coming from people at non-elite institutions).
One might say "well, they should get grant money then." But, if you work at a place without a research/grants office, it's tough to get grants.
That's my concern with open-access journals. It's nice they're open-access, but journals have to pay the bills somehow. So, they charge submission fees. (PLoS One is more than $1,000 and even journals like Sociology Mind are still at least a couple hundred dollars). Only those with money will be able to publish in such venues.
|
|
|
Post by hrrrmm on Apr 10, 2013 22:43:30 GMT -5
^^ please.... bar students? That's hardly service to the profession, especially when there's an easy solution, which is to send student papers to slightly more advanced students to review. That's what AJS does and it's a learning experience all around. Students learn to write, students learn to review, win win.
As for submission fees, I don't think higher fees are going to fix the reviewer turnaround times. It is my feeling that some journals could do better to have regular rounds of finding additional reviewers. For example, students. And thus we square the cycle.
|
|
|
Post by student on Apr 11, 2013 7:42:28 GMT -5
What is this fetishization of "status" for? This is non-sense... Professor vs student!... I have seen many many professors who are duds and producing the most banal work, cogs in the academic production factory doing the most conservative nonsense that goes nowhere except for adding a line to their boring as hell CVs... and students doing path breaking work. If AJS really has this student vs non-student review process, that only reflects how deeply this dominant journal is imbued in the dominant values of a very heirarchical and status-conscious society. These are silly prejudices; get off this high horse! And yes, publishing is important for everyone in this line... it is the only blind (hopefully) option that exists for putting your ideas and work out for social recognition.
As far as differential submission costs are concerned... I can't think of how $20-25 for a submission can be an issue for ANY assistant professor. If you are unemployed or a graduate student... that's a very different issue. $100 for an accepted paper is kind of high, but don't we all pay those kind of costs for conference registrations etc. Publishing an article is much more valuable than many of these conferences...
|
|
|
Post by anonms on Jun 3, 2013 14:20:51 GMT -5
Ooh I like the bench reject idea, my paper says it's "under external review" so at least I made the top 50%! Somehow this makes me feel like I'm awesome even though I'm still expecting a reject in the end (because I always expect a reject in the top journals, it hurts less that way when I'm almost always right).
|
|
|
Post by not a fan on Dec 9, 2013 12:19:42 GMT -5
I got a desk rejection because my theory was "not sufficiently innovative". If I have to pay $25 to get a review, I would think you should come up with a better reason to reject.
|
|
|
Post by boom on Dec 9, 2013 17:03:40 GMT -5
I got a desk rejection because my theory was "not sufficiently innovative". If I have to pay $25 to get a review, I would think you should come up with a better reason to reject. $25 doesn't entitle you to anything. Next time, write a better paper that can survive desk review at a mid-level journal like Social Problems.
|
|
|
Post by also on Dec 9, 2013 17:14:58 GMT -5
You might be better off getting a quick decision on your paper rather than having to wait more than 6 months for a rejection based on superficial reviews done by folks who are upset because either you didn't cite them or you cited one of their multiple archenemies...
|
|