Quote From MeaninginLife:
There are at least two more differences:
1. Money versus free
For Conference papers (proceeding), you usually need to register and pay certain amount of money. For journal papers, it can be free of charge, and receive free pre-prints.
However, there are open access journals which require “money”! These journals have been criticized on quality grounds, as the need to obtain *extra* publication fees could result in these journals to relax the standard of peer review. I was told to avoid these journals.
2. Open versus close
You can be openly praised for your research, but I have also seen postgraduate students look very *pale* after their presentations. Why? Some professors enjoy attending the presentations and attacking students' work publicly; your supervisor’s reputation may also be affected. Your work could be known useless openly!
However, reviewers’ comments from journals may hint that your papers are worthless; but only the editor, reviewers and you know this outcome. It could be kept as a secret. :-)
Thank you!
1.
I didn't know that submitting to a journal can be free. Hurmm... how could it be free? Even the top ones?
Additionally, would the process of acceptance for a peer-reviewed journal be longer than a peer-reviewed conference?
2.
Wait, if a peer-reviewed (conference) paper has been accepted, why would it be considered worthless after the presentation? If the professors consider it worthless, then surely that's that fault of the reviewer.
I assume for journal publications, unlike conference proceedings, there are no presentations?