Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: In the handbasket
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Ok ladies, I need advice:
I submitted a paper to Nature-Geoscience, and it got turned away because I cited a paper in the sentence where I stated my primary conclusion. I learned my lesson, and turned the paper around to GRL (non-geology moms: that's the major "letters" journal for our field).
I got the reviews back today. One review is great -- it pretty much says that the paper is great with a few things to make clearer, with a few technical comments.
I evidently pissed off the other reviewer. The written review is two pages long, and comes with 15 citations. : There are three major points, and a bazillion nit-picky points. The reviewer is outright wrong on one point (says it's already well-known, but what's out there is incomplete and wrong), but the other two points are kinda a matter of how you view the Earth and internal processes. I think I could respond to these comments, but the paper is rejected, and it will have to go back in under a new submission number (and submission date) and go back through re-review.
(1) There's not an obvious next-journal-down to go to for this paper. I could really expand it to send it to EPSL, but that's a lot of work, and honestly, this paper doesn't need expanding.
(2) Is there a way in the resubmission process to say that reviewer 1 is not an appropriate reviewer for the next time around? It's an anonymous review, so I don't know who it is (though I can make an educated guess based on the lengthy citation list). I'm assured to have the same AE, since he seems to handle all of the papers in my field.
What would you do with this? I've actually gotten a ton done this year, but I'm feeling frantic that I don't so much as have an accepted paper for 2007.
Am I the only one that routinely pisses off reviewers? I seem to get this every second thing I submit for review.
Hi everyone -
first of all, I am so glad this thread exists, because where else can I get this question answered?
I just found out I am expecting #2 (bkgd: I have a 2 year old, I am TT but untenured in a department where lots of my colleagues are women with young kids, and there's lots of support, but I'm the only untenured woman right now). My nature is to be very wary of telling anyone, even parents, until 12 weeks. But last time around, I was a grad student and it didn't matter. This time, it means unscheduling my classes for the fall (I'm due in July and will get an automatic 1-semester teaching release), and also scheduling a teaching visit/report for this spring, because I won't be teaching next fall when I'm up for a formal review. I'll be 12 weeks in mid-January, assuming all goes well - do you think that's too late to go public? Should I tell my chair beforehand?
Geofizz, thank you for the tip on academicladder, I checked it out and I think I will do it next semester. For how long have you been signed up with them?
|32 members and 12,292 guests|
|beedub , bluejanuary , conzy , emmy526 , girlspn , happy-mama , hillymum , Janeen0225 , LibraSun , lilmissgiggles , lisak1234 , MeanVeggie , Mirzam , Mody , NaturallyKait , oaksie68 , omarinbox1888 , Omotie , RollerCoasterMama , samaxtics , SchoolmarmDE , shantimama , Skippy918 , Socks , Springshowers , Wild Lupine , worthy , Xerxella|
|Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 01:21 PM.|