How Editors Catalyze the Publication Explosion

Abstract

As seen in zoology, science editors catalyze the publication explosion of primary literature in five main ways but could refrain from doing so. (1) Because of the manuscript pressure on journals, they press for papers being brief; authors respond by producing (a) halved articles, (b) series of papers representing monographs, and (c) split-off paperlets on techniques. Theoretically this vicious circle should be broken by universities, who should measure a scientist’s achievement by quality of best publications. Practically, editors can (and some do) help, by accepting papers with extradisciplinary components and details of techniques. Authors must be encouraged to publish comprehensive papers or they will oppose the wanted revolution in appraisal methods lest they fail by its criteria. (2) Some publish shallow, redundant, book reviews, so as to earn the book. (3) Universal separation of preliminary notices from short notes would reduce the swarms of the former. (4) Prohibition to adequately cite unpublished documents sometimes begets dispensible publications. (5) Page charges paid by the author to the journal (by any formula) increase, through several mechanisms, the total number of pages and papers published; they should be replaced by direct support from funding agencies to journals. In conclusion, editors should delight in the quality rather than quantity of what they publish.

Presently Visiting Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, University of Chicago, partly supported by the National Science Foundation, USA (grant no. NSF DEB 76 18987 to Dr. R.E. Lombard).