|
Post by i share ur pain on Nov 9, 2011 22:26:07 GMT -5
si! this week has sucked. tgif, am I right?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Paterno on Nov 9, 2011 23:42:53 GMT -5
You can say that again, brotha. Anyone know of any VAC (Visiting Assistant Coach) jobs floating around that are looking for someone with decades of R1 experience?
|
|
|
Post by bob b on Nov 10, 2011 15:56:55 GMT -5
You can say that again, brotha. Anyone know of any VAC (Visiting Assistant Coach) jobs floating around that are looking for someone with decades of R1 experience? www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ytCEuuW2_A
|
|
|
Post by JoePa on Nov 10, 2011 17:43:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by taco tuesday on Nov 11, 2011 18:36:54 GMT -5
Cheer up! Keep writing! I got an acceptance on a paper today!
|
|
|
Post by ouch on Nov 11, 2011 22:52:43 GMT -5
I waited 13 weeks to get another r&r on a paper that I had already previously revised and resubmitted
|
|
|
Post by good on Nov 12, 2011 0:28:37 GMT -5
Another R & R is sort of a good thing... at least it isn't an outright rejection. One time I got an R & R, the criticisms were pretty easy to address (at least, I thought they were), but sadly I got a rejection letter after (new issues were raised the second time around)
|
|
|
Post by taken aback on Nov 12, 2011 10:48:22 GMT -5
That's probably a topic for another thread - "It could be worse..." crazy review stories. I'll start:
It could be worse...I once had 3 R&Rs on a paper. One of those R&Rs asked me to use a different dataset. Seriously! But it was a top specialty journal, so I did it.
|
|
|
Post by oohoohme on Nov 12, 2011 11:31:37 GMT -5
Oh, here's one- Once when I got a rejection, the most negative of the reviews was really hung up on how I didn't cite these 2 particular pieces and how important they were to the area. I did, of course, cite them. Both of them. Twice.
|
|
rrr
Full Member
Posts: 113
|
Post by rrr on Nov 12, 2011 12:40:19 GMT -5
^ Clearly you weren't citing your reviewer's work strongly enough.
|
|
|
Post by my turn on Nov 12, 2011 14:05:42 GMT -5
I had a paper rejected. The two reviews I got were positive and clearly recommended an R+R (and the editor's email supported that conclusion of mine). The third reviewer had "serious problems" with the paper.
apparently, those problems were so serious, s/he could even deign to put them on paper. yep, my paper got rejected because of one reviewer who didn't have the courage to even tell me why.
classy.
|
|
|
Post by why on Nov 12, 2011 14:25:57 GMT -5
^Why would your paper be rejected if the other two reviewers and the editor agree that it should be an R&R?
I am new to publishing and would like to understand the decision-making process.
|
|
|
Post by i was unclear on Nov 12, 2011 15:06:07 GMT -5
The editor was swayed by the third reviewer. The editor's email to me informing me of the rejection made it clear that the other two reviewers almost certainly recommended an R+R. yet the editor told me nothing (not even after contacting him/her) other than that the third reviewer had "serious problems" with the paper.
on the other hand, now it's under review at a more prestigious journal because we had others read it and they recommended that course...so maybe it'll all work out (DOUBT IT).
|
|
|
Post by always hope on Nov 12, 2011 15:47:50 GMT -5
Keep up the hope, "i was unclear," I sent an article to Social Problems and the editor rejected it outright, without even sending it out for review. I immediately sent it back out--to A**--and am now working on an R&R .
|
|
rrr
Full Member
Posts: 113
|
Post by rrr on Nov 12, 2011 16:07:05 GMT -5
To the point above - a rejection based on two positive reviews and one negative review could arise from the editor considering the position of the reviewers. For example, #3 as a senior professor in the area vs. two others who are either more junior or less well connected to the topic. But reviewers can also be a lottery, so you should always revise from the good suggestions and submit to a different journal.
|
|