|
|
|
|
|
|
by scaphandre
2401 days ago
|
|
|
Nature's 'Scientific Reports' journal does indeed have a different editorial priority than other journals. The peer reviewers are instructed to evaluate scientific validity, not their own idea of importance. This is seen as advantageous by many scientists, who perhaps want to avoid getting stuck in the dice-roll crapshoot of peer review politics. It seems like an incorrect mischaracterization to say they are all fatally flawed throwaway papers, no? It's a commonly used journal, and a reasonable impact factor of 4. It's not like this is a predatory journal or a complete bullshit journal. Do you have more information on why you don't like SR? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Reports |
|
|