The log Statistical Papers, with editorial office at the University of Dortmund rejects all manuscript submissions in the event that authors usually do not cite documents with this Springer-published log. The editors claim it is perhaps maybe perhaps not about effect factor rigging.

A request from editors to cite some random earlier papers from same journal from time to time, scientists submitting their work for publication encounter. Why? One reason: the impact is raised by it element. In reality, for several journals it really is perhaps the unofficial guideline that such journal-self-citations are anticipated, or your paper are going to be refused. Some researchers abide ahead of time, which will make editors pleased. Many other people have trouble with the idea that they find unethical. The German editor of this Springer log Statistical Papers will show you for you right right right here why this is actually the scientifically proper and way that is perfectly objective run a log.

A conversation grew up on Twitter recently, for the duration of which neither the log maybe maybe not the editor ended up being called.

Mark Hayter, teacher of nursing at University of Hull in British and a log editor himself, tweeted:

“A PhD student of mine possessed a paper accepted – one condition of acceptance ended up being that she ratings her recommendations and includes any appropriate recent documents from the journal that is accepting”

Then included the log was “Not predatory. Distinguished journal, person in COPE and from a big,international publishing house” and in addition specified her to review her references and include ‘recent, relevant’ papers from the accepting Journal that“They asked. No certain papers were suggested“. Ended up, Hayter wasn’t alone with that experience:

A reviewer ( perhaps maybe not editor) when told us to include citations from that log within my modification. a journal that is top. Very strange. I obtained within the practice of including a few cites that are journal wherever I’m submitting and very nearly forget to give some thought to the ethics. This is certainly waking me up.

More anecdotes arrived, like this 1 through the section of medication:

Certainly, an approach to falsely impact that is inflate.

There clearly was another cardiology that is international historically that insisted you cite their ethics declaration (published as being a paper).

It absolutely was cited a great deal, their impact relocated from circa 2 to over 6 in three years. #gaming #unethical

The majority of the replies had been critical, similar to this advice through the Hindawi research integrity supervisor Matt Hodgkinson:

For many we understand, the writers could have appreciated the Twitter outrage after which just did exactly just exactly what the editor said and quoted some papers that are random the log. Why making enemies, as opposed to making documents? Some boffins revealed also understanding when it comes to policy:

I’ve blended feelings about that. One argument is the fact that in the event that you choose a certain log you may be focusing on a residential district of scholars. It’s rational to check on whatever they have previously stated regarding your subject and also the rational spot to begin could be the log you’ve chosen.

Now Professor Stephen John Senn of Luxembourg Institute of wellness is just a statistician, he’ll clearly concur that the policy that is following of log Statistical Papers is okay since it is. After all, should your tasks are written in the type of a paper and it’s also about data, you sure must cite something with this journal that is particularly significant just just what aided by the title, “Statistical Papers“, right?

This is the e-mail a audience forwarded in my opinion, a recently gotten respond to their refused manuscript distribution:

Dear …., your paper has some merits. Nonetheless, provided the enormous quantity of submissions we’re getting recently we’ve chose to give attention to documents that are associated with past work posted within our log. And also this doesn’t appear to be the instance along with your paper because you aren’t citing articles of Statistical Papers. Furthermore, the guide list just isn’t of good quality: often the pages associated with log articles are missing.Thank you for providing us the chance to consider carefully your work.Yours sincerelyChristine H. MьllerEditor-in-Chief, Statistical Papers

We contacted the EiC Christine Mьller, teacher of data in engineering in the Technical University of Dortmund (TU Dortmund) in Germany. She responded, confirming the e-mail authenticity:

“Due towards the high number of submissions, we need to set strict criteria, and two of those will be the quality for the paper as well as the relationship with other documents of our log. In the event that quality is okay and just Statistical Papers just isn’t cited then we frequently require a resubmission. Nevertheless, here the product quality, suggested by the guide list, appears to be dubious.”

I happened to be unconvinced this practice had nothing at all to do with the Journal effect Factor (presently at 1.345 for analytical documents) and in addition puzzled how a editors could judge a manuscript solely on such basis as its reference formatting (“page numbers missing”). Mьller then clarified:

“we want to ensure that submissions fit to your log and a great indicator is often how good it’s linked to past operate in our log. Note that individuals generally speaking usually do not judge that solely by whether another SP-paper is cited or perhaps not because you can see from checking our published articles (the self-citation price of SP isn’t greater than compared to comparable journals and you will remember that anyhow just cites of within 36 months affect the IF). Needless to say the standard of a paper just isn’t judged because of the guide formatting. Nonetheless, we’ve the knowledge that a sloppy guide list is an indicator of the sloppy written paper. We believe that editors of other journals may have the exact same experience and can make comparable conclusions. Thus the remark regarding the guide area ended up being meant as an ongoing solution to your writer.”

That e-mail had been finalized by Christine Mьller and also the other two editors that are chief Carsten Jentsch, teacher of data in economics at exact same TU Dortmund, and Werner Mьller, teacher at Institute for Applied Statistics at University of Linz, Austria.

The journal’s writers seem to comply with these unofficial editorial guidelines. We viewed initial 3 recently posted studies in Statistical Papers (all incidentally from Asia), one recommendations 4 documents here, another sources 2, third recommendations 1 paper in exact same log. It is the range of Statistical Papers really that slim? It’s this that the journal internet site states in this respect:

“Statistical Papers offers a forum when it comes to presentation and assessment that is critical of practices. In specific, the log encourages the conversation of methodological fundamentals along with prospective applications.

This log stresses analytical techniques which have broad applications; nonetheless, it will provide attention that is special analytical techniques which can be highly relevant to the financial and social sciences. In addition to original research documents, visitors will discover study articles, quick records, reports on analytical computer pc software, issue part, and book reviews”

Nowhere it really is mentioned that the submissions must cite some random papers that are past exact exact same log to match the scope. The assigned publisher administrator from Springer decided to go with not to ever answer my e-mails, and exactly why whenever they. The editors do their finest to enhance the journal’s citation index.

But also for argument’s sake, if Statistical Papers is its very own split industry research, clearly the Editor-in-Chief would be expert when it comes to particular technology part of “Statistical Papers”? Regrettably, this woman is certainly not. a lengthy range of magazines is published by Christine Mьller on her behalf TU Dortmund website, from 1984 till now, presumably her whole research production, since maybe maybe not otherwise specified. Yet simply two of Mьller’s analytical documents showed up in her own log Statistical Papers, that will be posted since 1960 (until 1995, even yet in German). Her namesake editor colleague Werner Mьller even offers just two documents in this journal to demonstrate, while Jentsch will not record a solitary book in Statistical Papers on their site.

Fundamentally, they truly are industry outsiders associated with the obscure niche control Science of Statistical Papers, having scarcely (or otherwise not after all) published here on their own. Or possibly their very own journal’s impact element is too low and requirements boosting before Mьller, Mьller & Jentsch contemplate it being a location?

In the event that you had comparable experiences with editors imposing own-journal citation needs, please contemplate sharing these below into the remark section.

Leave a reply