should you publish in PLoS One?

My response to this question on Facebook:

  1. Do not publish in PLoS if you need a status boost for the job market or promotion.
  2. Do publish if journal prestige is not a factor. My case: good result but I was in a race against other computer scientists. Simply could not wait for a four year journal process.
  3. Reviewer quality: It is run mainly by physical and life scientists. Reviews for my paper were similar in quality to what CS people gave me on a similar paper submitted to CS conferences/journals.
  4. Personally, I was satisfied. Review process fair, fast publication, high citation count. Would not try to get promoted on the paper by itself, though.
  5. A lot of people at strong programs have PLoS One pubs but usually as part of a larger portfolio of work.
  6. A typical good paper in PLoS is from a strong line of work but the paper just bounced around or too idiosyncratic.
  7. PLoS One publishes some garbage.
  8. Summary: right tool for the right job. Use wisely.

Another person noted that many elite scientists use the “Science, Nature, or PLoS One model.” In other words, you want high impact or just get it out there. No sense wasting years of time with lesser journals.

50+ chapters of grad skool advice goodness: Grad Skool Rulz ($2!!!!)/From Black Power/Party in the Street 

Written by fabiorojas

October 11, 2016 at 12:13 am

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Plos One is bullshit. It counts for nothing. It indicates that your research can’t stand up to real peer review. Yes, your bullshit will get published, and quickly, It will be unrefined, you will have no pressure to make sure that your paper is actually good, that it addresses general sociological concerns, and you will not have to deal with all of those messy problems with “methodology” “analysis” and shit like that. Go ahead. Publish in bullshit journals. And you will be a scholar who publishes in bullshit journals. Embrace your aura, Dora.



    October 11, 2016 at 12:34 am

  2. I had a good paper rejected from PLOSOne based on dumb review. Disappointed!


    Philip N. Cohen

    October 11, 2016 at 3:21 am

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: