Why do journals monopolize manuscripts???

David Kristofferson kristoff at net.bio.net
Wed May 26 11:48:54 EST 1993


dfitts at carson.u.washington.edu (Douglas Fitts) writes:

>Beyond this, what happens when one submits the same article to 10 journals
>and gets accepted by 5.  The author chooses one to accept, and then has to 
>withdraw the accepted article from the other journals.  I'll bet s/he 
>would have a difficult time publishing *there* again.

This should raise a few feathers 8-) ...  Philosophically speaking,
what happens when a good student applies to ten universities and gets
accepted by nine???  The other eight activate their blacklist, right
8-)?  Just out of curiosity, why do journals get a monopoly right on
submitted manuscripts?  I realize that they have simply created this
policy, but it seems like authors are bowwing to the monopoly power of
the press.  What advantage does it give to the researcher?  It might
be interesting to put some competition in this system ... (dream on
8-).  Of course, then reviewers would actually have to review papers
promptly or risk good manuscripts going elsewhere, and, since
reviewing is mainly a volunteer effort and reviewers less susceptible
to the pressures that could be laid on a paid reviewer, perhaps the
whole system would be in chaos????

				Sincerely,

				Dave Kristofferson
				BIOSCI/bionet Manager

				kristoff at net.bio.net




More information about the Jrnlnote mailing list