Scientific Journal Prestige
Discussions center on the reputation, selectivity, and quality of prestigious scientific journals like Nature and its subsidiaries such as Scientific Reports, questioning how dubious papers get published and critiquing journal prestige versus actual scientific rigor.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
what is disreputable about the journal they were published in?
Some background on this particular journal: http://www.nature.com/news/backlash-after-frontiers-journals...
It's not that uncommon for scientific journals, sadly.
Could that fact still be published in Nature?
It got published in "Scientific Reports", not in "Nature". Scientific Reports is a journal that belongs to the Nature Publishing Group, *but* it is a known low-impact journal. When you get your acceptance-for-publication confirmation in that journal you are specifically told to never refer to it as "Nature's Scientific Reports", rather only as "Scientific Reports", so even their own publishing group does not want to associate too closely with it (to a
Nature seems pretty salty about this whole thing circumventing prestigious journals like theirs :D
User @shusaku refers to MDPI as a "garbage journal". If true, this info should play a bigger part in the discussion here than it currently is
"As written, Plan S would bar researchers from publishing in 85% of journals, including influential titles such as Nature and Science." - NatureConflict of interest with this reporting much?
Nature is not a good scientific journal. The good info will be found in highly specialized journals. The amount of BS in scientific journals is related to prestige like this:x=seq(0,1,by=.01);plot(x,dbeta(x,.5,.5), xlab="Prestige", ylab="BS")
I thought Nature was one of the Big Journals that only publish high impact things. How does stuff like this slip in then?