Hi all,

I've just seen a call for journal articles on a topic that I'm really interested in, and on which I have some work done already for my thesis. So I'm thinking that I'd like to submit to them, sort of just for fun really, I think because I believe in the argument I've made in my chapter and wouldn't mind the idea of people being able to read it in article form. I've already pretty much decided that I don't want to stay in academia after my PhD, so I'm not really looking for publications for the sake of my career, and equally I'm not so anxious at the thought of publishing something as I would have been before, because I think it doesn't really matter to me if it doesn't work out. However I think I might benefit from getting more feedback on my work, and it also would give me something to distract me from my main work at the moment - in a good way, as I like to have a few things on the go at time.

The thing is, it's not a journal I think I've ever heard of before, possibly because its title and its website are in a language I don't speak. The call for papers was in English, and came through a reputable mailing list in my field (although I don't know if that really means much as they probably don't filter for standard?) and previous editions seem to have articles in a variety of languages - not something I come across often, but perhaps not that bizarre given the general focus seems to be comparative literature/ language studies.

So I suppose I'm asking whether people think I should bother with submitting to a journal I've never heard of before, and whether anyone has any thoughts or advice on things I might consider when making my decision? What, if anything, do you think should motivate an article submission from someone like me? Is there any particular reason to worry about a journal's standing, and if so how might I establish this? It's not carried by my university's library, but a google search shows several prestigious universities do carry it (though beyond the library search engines, the other google results are for websites I can't understand). Of course I could ask my supervisor, but he's fairly hands-off and I prefer to be independent really where I can.

Sorry if this reads as a very silly question! But I'd be very interested to hear anybody's thoughts, thanks in advance!

Maccle

Hi,

I am not sure if it applies to your research area too, but in life sciences we have something called "impact factor" which gives you generally at least an idea of the quality of the journal. Its reflecting the average number of citations to recent articles published in the journal. It clearly varies between large fields with many journals/citations and small fields, but its useful for first assessment.

======= Date Modified 20 Nov 2012 11:02:43 =======
Impact factors are much beloved but deeply flawed. To be honest if you don't want to stay in academia I wouldn't get too hung up about those. That said, they are a sort of measure of self-fulfilling prestige. If the journal has the lowest impact factor in your field then you might consider whether it's really worth the effort! It's good that you've identified universities that do carry it, as otherwise you would basically be speaking into a vacuum.

I don't think it compromises your independence to ask your supervisor for advice, but if that's still not appealing then what about other colleagues? I'm guessing you're probably not a science student, as generally science PhD papers carry the name of the supervisor too, so you'd have to seek his approval anyway if that were the case.

Really, if your primary goal is to get feedback on your work then the the main determinant should be what the journal's turnaround time is. If you submit and they take 6 months to get back to you with reviewer's comments, which are unhelpful because they didn't get good quality reviewers, then will that help you? The other thing to consider, depending on your subject area and future plans, is whether you'd be better off retaining the material to publish in a book later on.