Ph.D. candidate @UQ_sees, Geomicrobiologist focused on sustainable mine rehab, curious about soil #livingmatrix, everlasting love for microbes of all types
Rejection of your paper or grant has NO relevance to the opinion of #research community. It is nothing but the opinion of one person.
Several examples:
1. The first paper on graphene was rejected from Nature because “it did not constitute a sufficient scientific advance”. Later, it was awarded a Nobel prize.
2. The first manuscript showing the microbiome-brain connection was published after 7 submissions that took 3 years. Today, this field has exploded. I expect it will get a Nobel prize in the future.
3. Theodore Maiman tried to publish a paper describing the first operating laser in Physical Review Letters and… got a rejection!
4. Peter Ratcliffe, who worked on cells’ response to changes in oxygen levels, got his key paper rejected from Nature (see photo). Later, he was awarded a Nobel Prize for this work.
And there are many other examples…
.
And yet I see so many young scientists stressing about rejections. For some reason, they seem to genuinely expect that the editors should know which study is truly worth it.
As a result, many rejections are met with surprise and disbelief:
“How could they reject it? They publish so much trash, and yet they think our detailed 3-year-long study is not interesting to the community! WHY?”
.
Well, the reality is:
- Most editors have very little time to delve into your study. They can easily FAIL to recognize the potential impact of your study. Proper communication in the cover letter and clear writing style can help (although only to a limited degree).
- Many reviewers have little idea about the science in your paper. But they can have a big ego. So, if they have a bad day or were rejected recently, it’s easy for them to find 1000 technical reasons to reject your paper as well.
- Most scientists genuinely don’t know if your discovery can make any impact. If we could predict the course of science, we would be living very differently!
My message is simple:
Forget about objectivity. Academia is a very subjective world. Fight for objectivity but don’t take it for granted.
A great study will be found, cited and recognized. Disregard of where it’s published.
A bad study requires a high-impact journal to be found and cited. But the long-time recognition might be a problem.
High-IF journals are simply billboards. Their rejections do NOT represent the opinion of a scientific community.
You can get rejected but don’t reject yourself!
Believe in your results.
#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter
I wanna fly high and high,
Up above the rainbows in the sky,
Away from the sadness and sighs,
Free from everybody, breaking every tie,
Let me soar to the sky.
@jemma_sun @paulxevans @aprabhu90 If it's not too late, try document recovery software. If this is your desktop, email the ithelp team. They are helpful as well
Trichoderma: a multipurpose, plant-beneficial microorganism for eco-sustainable agriculture
Woo et al. discuss the ecophysiology and diversity of Trichoderma and the complexity of its relationships in the agroecosystem environment
https://t.co/UXfnOvWxor
From 2023, NHMRC will award equal numbers of Investigator Grants to women and men in a new intervention to address gender inequities in research funding. https://t.co/45LsSsWh23 1/2
Ground breaking manuscript on Science about mapping phases of microbial diversity in microcosms.
Every microbiologist should check this out!
https://t.co/vvHAdh2VoE
I'm glad to share the first paper of my PhD. A review on how we can use microbes to improve soil and mine rehab outcomes!
"Accelerating soil aggregate formation: a review on microbial processes as the critical step in a post-mining rehabilitation context" https://t.co/lkBqaRZ0hW
Are you a QLD based PhD student/ECR? Come present a short talk at our annual MiM meeting - registration link to follow. Send abstracts direct to chair @sciency_atack or to [email protected] by 15th Oct @ASM_QLD@AUSSOCMIC. Catch up with John @BacPath this week for more info
Results from a globally replicated experiment: microbes respond to temperature in a very well known way, but termites are much more sensitive to temperature. Termites are massively understudied for how important they are globally, and warming is likely to make them more important
We have two new PhD positions available in Geomicrobiology/Biogeochemistry with a focus on studying pyrite formation. The project is a collaboration between the University of Tuebingen and the University of Bayreuth. Application deadline is November 3. @GeomicroTueb