Why is it so hard to publish a paper in a peer revived journal?

6 Answers

Relevance
  • 6 months ago
    Favorite Answer

    The peer review process takes time.

    And it serves to screen out papers of lesser quality (for example, if there are errors during the experiment or data-gathering stage).

    Someone who is also a specialist in the field of your paper must review what you propose. If your paper contains calculations concerning a whole bunch of data, they must verify the calculations. They must also check if the data itself makes sense (they must repeat the experiment or, at least, some critical parts of it).

    Just finding the proper specialists can take time. If you are well known, then they will scramble faster to find the right people, but that is because the journal knows it will gain glory from publishing your article. Otherwise, the process takes whatever time the process takes - months, years.

    The paper must make a contribution to the field for which the journal publishes (translation = you must have discovered something new, or a new way to look at things, for example).

    The paper must also be about something important for the readership AND be of quality (some journals receive hundreds of proposed papers every month, but only have room for twenty).

    • Login to reply the answers
  • alan P
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    To some extent isn't that the point. The paper has to pass rigorous tests before being accepted.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Tom
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    No one wil take you seriously without a DEGREE and a body of previously published work.

  • Rowan
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    There's always been a bunch of people who like to silence opinions that aren't their own, particularly in this area of science. The largest example of that was the Christian church silencing anyone who said anything that didn't back up Christianity. The inquisition was six hundred years of torturing fifty million people who didn't agree with everything they said, including scientists.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 6 months ago

    Twenty years or more years ago it used to take 2 to 3 years to get something published in an analog peer reviewed journal. With the internet, that's speeded up somewhat, but the actual research and writing and coordinating as many as 20 to 30 contributors still takes 2 years or more, and the publication costs are outrageous. With Trump's efforts to censor or silence goverment scientists and research and education funding constantly being reduced by an anti science Congress, it's becoming more difficult to publish.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 months ago

    It's not hard -- you just need to be accurate in your descriptions and statements.

    But it can take longer to get through the process if you are not well-known in the field

    • ...Show all comments
    • L. E. Gant
      Lv 7
      6 months agoReport

      Sharon: A few accptances. Rejections as well. Rejections are part of the learning process.And, like oikoa, some were too long even though acceptable according to the reviews. Editing is always the hard part.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.