The log Statistical Papers, with editorial office at the University of Dortmund rejects all manuscript submissions in the event that writers try not to cite papers out go to site of this journal that is springer-published. The editors claim its maybe maybe not about effect element rigging.
Every once in awhile, researchers publishing their work with book encounter a request from editors to cite some random early in the day documents from exact same log. Why? One reason: the impact is raised by it element. In reality, for several journals it really is perhaps the rule that is unofficial such journal-self-citations are anticipated, or your paper are going to be refused. Some researchers abide ahead of time, to produce editors pleased. Many other people have trouble with the style that they find unethical. The German editor regarding the Springer log Statistical Papers will explain to you personally right here why this is actually the scientifically correct 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 perhaps perhaps not the editor ended up being called.
Mark Hayter, teacher of medical at University of Hull in UK and a journal editor himself, tweeted:
“A PhD student of mine possessed a paper accepted – one condition of acceptance ended up being that she reviews her recommendations and includes any relevant current documents through the journal that is accepting”
Then he included the log was predatory that is“Not. Distinguished journal, person in COPE and from a sizable,international publishing house” as well as specified her to review her references and include ‘recent, relevant’ papers from the accepting Journal that“They asked. No papers that are specific suggested“. Ended up, Hayter had not been alone with that experience:
A reviewer ( maybe perhaps not editor) when told us to include citations from that log in my own revision. a top log too. Very strange. I acquired into the practice of incorporating a few journal cites to wherever I’m submitting and very nearly forget to take into account the ethics. This might be waking me up.
More anecdotes arrived, like that one through the section of medication:
Indeed, ways to falsely inflate impact facets.
There was clearly another worldwide cardiology log historically that insisted you cite their ethics declaration (posted as being a paper).
It absolutely was cited a great deal, their impact relocated from circa 2 to over 6 in 36 months. #gaming #unethical
Almost all of the replies had been critical, such as this advice through the Hindawi research integrity supervisor Matt Hodgkinson:
For several we understand, the writers may have valued the Twitter outrage after which simply did just exactly exactly what the editor said and quoted some papers that are random the log. Why making enemies, rather than making documents? Some experts revealed also understanding for the policy:
I’ve blended feelings about any of it. 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 really is rational to check on whatever they have previously stated regarding the subject and also the place that is logical start may be the log you’ve selected.
Now Professor Stephen John Senn of Luxembourg Institute of wellness is really a statistician, he’ll clearly concur that the policy that is following of journal Statistical Papers is okay because it’s. I am talking about, when your tasks are printed in the type of a paper which is about data, you sure must cite something with this especially significant journal, just exactly what aided by the title, “Statistical Papers“, right?
It was the e-mail an audience forwarded in my experience, a recently gotten respond to his refused manuscript distribution:
Dear …., your paper has many merits. But, provided the enormous quantity of submissions we have been receiving recently we now have chose to concentrate on documents that are regarding past work posted inside our log. And also this will not appear to be the full situation together with your paper as you aren’t citing articles of Statistical Papers. Moreover, the guide list just isn’t of great quality: often the pages regarding the log articles are missing.Thank you for providing us the chance to consider carefully your work.Yours sincerelyChristine H. MьllerEditor-in-Chief, Statistical Papers
The EiC was contacted by me Christine Mьller, teacher of data in engineering during the Technical University of Dortmund (TU Dortmund) in Germany. She responded, confirming the e-mail authenticity:
“Due into the high number of submissions, we must set strict requirements, as well as 2 of those would be the quality associated with the paper in addition to relationship with other documents of our log. Then we usually ask for a resubmission if the quality is ok and only Statistical Papers is not cited. But, right here the high quality, suggested by the guide list, is apparently debateable.”
I happened to be unconvinced this training had nothing at all to do with the Journal effect Factor (presently at 1.345 for analytical documents) and in addition puzzled the way the editors could solely judge a manuscript on such basis as its reference formatting (“page numbers missing”). Mьller then clarified:
“we want to ensure that submissions fit to your log and an indicator that is good frequently how good its linked to past work with our journal. Note that people generally speaking don’t judge that solely by whether another SP-paper is cited or otherwise not since you may see from checking our published articles (the self-citation price of SP just isn’t more than compared to comparable journals and you might know that anyhow just cites of within three years affect the IF). Needless to say the caliber of a paper is certainly not judged by the guide formatting. Nonetheless, we’ve the knowledge that a sloppy guide list is an indicator of a sloppy written paper. We genuinely believe that editors of other journals need the experience that is same can certainly make comparable conclusions. Ergo the remark regarding the guide area ended up being meant as being an ongoing solution into the writer.”
That e-mail ended up being finalized by Christine Mьller plus the other two editors that are chief Carsten Jentsch, teacher of data in economics at exact same TU Dortmund, and Werner Mьller, professor at Institute for Applied Statistics at University of Linz, Austria.
The journal’s writers seem to follow these unofficial editorial guidelines. We viewed the very first 3 recently posted studies in Statistical Papers (all incidentally from Asia), one sources 4 documents here, another recommendations 2, 3rd sources 1 paper in exact exact same log. It is the scope of Statistical Papers really that slim? It’s this that the log internet site states in this regard:
“Statistical Papers offers a forum for the presentation and assessment that is critical of techniques. In particular, the log encourages the discussion of methodological fundamentals along with prospective applications.
This log stresses analytical techniques which have broad applications; nevertheless, it can provide attention that is special analytical techniques which can be strongly related the financial and social sciences. Along with research that is original, visitors will see study articles, quick records, reports on analytical computer pc software, issue part, and book reviews”
Nowhere it’s mentioned that the submissions must cite some random previous papers in same log to suit the range. The assigned publisher professional from Springer decided on never to respond to my e-mails, and exactly why as long as they. The editors do their utmost to improve the journal’s citation index.
But also for argument’s sake, if Statistical Papers is a unique field that is separate, undoubtedly the Editor-in-Chief is expert for the particular technology part of “Statistical Papers”? Regrettably, she actually is certainly not. a lengthy variety of magazines is published by Christine Mьller on her behalf TU Dortmund site, from 1984 till now, presumably her whole research production, since maybe maybe not otherwise specified. Yet just two of Mьller’s papers that are statistical in her own log Statistical Papers, that is posted since 1960 (until 1995, even yet in German). Her namesake editor colleague Werner Mьller even offers just two documents in this log to demonstrate, while Jentsch doesn’t record a publication that is single Statistical Papers on their web site.
Essentially, they’ve been field outsiders associated with the niche that is obscure technology of Statistical Papers, having scarcely (or otherwise not after all) published here by themselves. Or even their very own journal’s impact element is simply too low and requirements boosting before Mьller, Mьller & Jentsch ponder over it as a location?
In the event that you had comparable experiences with editors imposing citation that is own-journal, please contemplate sharing these below within the comment part.