pozorvlak | (no subject)

Entry tags:

(no subject)

My paper was rejected. Not enough new material, and I'd failed to cite related work.

As well as being annoying, this is worrying: the paper contained almost all the new material that's in my thesis, strongly suggesting that my thesis doesn't contain enough new material either.

Bugger.

On the upside, the reviewer suggested some possible applications and further work: if I could do that, maybe that would be enough.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Did you submit to too classy a journal? Remember the reviewer isn't saying that your paper is inadequate in an absolute sense, just when judged against one benchmark in particular. It may have a perfectly decent amount of new material for another journal.

I submitted my first paper to a very prestigious journal (accidentally, as in I didn't know the journal was that good). It was rejected on the grounds of being pointless (and this was *all* the work in my thesis). One extra paragraph and a (slightly) lesser journal, and it'll probably be accepted.

Boo! That is disappointing. *hugs* But it seems overly negative to relate the negative comments to your whole thesis - after all, it's easy to draw the wrong conclusions about stuff from out of context snapshots of the work.

Also academia is horrendously arbitrary - at least that's what it looks like from my administrative perspective.

I wouldn't play in those pirahna infested waters for all the lesbians in London.

Sorry mate - sounds like a real bitch. Once again I thank the gods that my field is such that I am able to get two papers from doing the same thing to two different stars. Then again I doubt anything like as much gets rejected from physics journals.

I'm not sure if mathematics works like this, but maybe try reviewing some of the related work which I assume the reviewer gave and then see whether there is some way that you can spin it to make it stand apart?

Doesn't even need to be too classy if it's just not the "right fit". We're doing some new work in my group that we're not sure of the right audience for. People can level all sorts of accusations of pointlessness without noticing the good stuff, if they're just not in the right space to see it.

I just saw the "tests of character" tag :)

Good call :)

Take heart! Just because the paper was rejected doesn't mean that it can't be a thesis. If your supervisor thinks that it is enough for a thesis, then it is enough for a thesis.

Oh, and: galactic destruction!... blah blah...

Indeed - one person's pointless is another person's universe...

well... that's poop.

Bad luck angel, don't let the bastards grind you down xx

Yes! Don't freak out! It's your supervisor who knows the context best in your case; and you may be misjudging the context of the journal!

Doh. Referee reports seem to me to be almost exclusively heart-rate boosting reading regardless of what they say. I remember my own annoyance at my own paper this December, when the referee said things like "The entire section 4 is well-known and should be cut down in size" - where section 4 was, basically, my own original results.

Listen to the academics already commenting here. And remember, if your advisor thinks it's good enough, and your external examiners think it's good enought, it's a thesis. The referee judged your paper in relation to that journal - it might get a completely different reception at another journal.

Or for that matter with another referee.

Go at 'em, boy-o!

Boo hiss boo.

Don't have the experience or the knowledge to offer any constructive advice sadly, but to repeat: boo hiss boo.

I'm really sorry to hear that. But, in the end, it's your board that matters in matters of graduation.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only