Misc

Having navigated the academic publishing system as an author, reviewer and occasional editor, I can confirm that there are inconsistencies at almost every turn * . From the variable quality of reviews to the procedures in place during article or chapter production, even within the same journal, authors and reviewers can have very different experiences. Previously, I was led to believe that the role of an editor was clear and consistent. Editors read manuscripts, find reviewers, and make key decisions based on reviews and their own expertise. In addition, editors can help guide authors towards what they feel are the most important points that should be addressed following review. This is particularly important when it comes to clarifying the direction of a paper when reviewers express conflicting views. However, a number of editors and associate editors, who are sometimes paid by journals, don't always act in a way that is helpful or fair to authors and reviewers. In many instan...

Published research often hides the turmoil, excitement, frustration and elation of academic enquiry. The true story behind any research career is only revealed if academics are willing to talk openly about their successes and failures. Instead, the discussion is often limited to the contents of their glowing CV which never lists rejected papers, disastrous experiments or unsuccessful grant applications. Over the last few years, I've scribbled down various quotes from academics who not only publish great research but who are also interesting people: 'Enjoy and get used to saying 'I don't know!' ' ' Never forget how small academia actually is ' ' Relationships are the key to success ' ' Pick your battles. I didn't and I wish I had ' And my personal favourite, courtesy of  James W. Pennebaker ........ ' The way forward can often appear perfectly logical, but it is rarely practical '