Mixing
Is in the best interest of supervisors that his/her students publish their research results in Top journals?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I am a math PhD student in a foreign country. When finishing my papers, my advisor(who is a big name in the field) always proposes me to submit them to a journal. The problem is that so far none of these have been top-tier journals. On the other hand, in my mind, there is no doubt that the results are good enough to be published in really good ones, and I have also confirmed this fact after giving talks at conferences. In addition, in one of these papers, she was signed as a corresponding author, even when I did 99% of the job. Why would someone do this to his/her student?
phd mathematics advisor supervision
asked 4 hours ago
John D
30518
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I am a math PhD student in a foreign country. When finishing my papers, my advisor(who is a big name in the field) always proposes me to submit them to a journal. The problem is that so far none of these have been top-tier journals. On the other hand, in my mind, there is no doubt that the results are good enough to be published in really good ones, and I have also confirmed this fact after giving talks at conferences. In addition, in one of these papers, she was signed as a corresponding author, even when I did 99% of the job. Why would someone do this to his/her student?
phd mathematics advisor supervision
asked 4 hours ago
John D
30518
2
The first question is "Of course, yes!"; The second one is impossible to answer objectively without further details and would be too narrow for Academia.se. Did you ask to be corresponding author? Did you tell her that you would like to send the paper to a better journal? If not, you should start communicating with your supervisor and let your expectations clear. In general supervisors are open to discussion, but if you don't communicate you can't expect them to magic guess what you want.
– The Doctor
3 hours ago
I didn't ask to be the corresponding author: I didn't know this existed at the time. The second time I actually spoke and said that I wanted to submit this to a better journal. Although I agree that I should communicate more, what strikes me is the fact that the default option that I am being offered is not a good one. @The Doctor
– John D
3 hours ago
4
I don't have a huge experience in this, but I think that her being "corresponding author" only mean that she's the one submitting the article on the journal website or to the editor. It doesn't indicate any difference in contribution to the article. See also this question on the topic.
– Arnaud D.
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I am a math PhD student in a foreign country. When finishing my papers, my advisor(who is a big name in the field) always proposes me to submit them to a journal. The problem is that so far none of these have been top-tier journals. On the other hand, in my mind, there is no doubt that the results are good enough to be published in really good ones, and I have also confirmed this fact after giving talks at conferences. In addition, in one of these papers, she was signed as a corresponding author, even when I did 99% of the job. Why would someone do this to his/her student?
phd mathematics advisor supervision
asked 4 hours ago
John D
30518
I am a math PhD student in a foreign country. When finishing my papers, my advisor(who is a big name in the field) always proposes me to submit them to a journal. The problem is that so far none of these have been top-tier journals. On the other hand, in my mind, there is no doubt that the results are good enough to be published in really good ones, and I have also confirmed this fact after giving talks at conferences. In addition, in one of these papers, she was signed as a corresponding author, even when I did 99% of the job. Why would someone do this to his/her student?
phd mathematics advisor supervision
phd mathematics advisor supervision
asked 4 hours ago
John D
30518
asked 4 hours ago
John D
30518
asked 4 hours ago
John D
30518
asked 4 hours ago
John D
30518
asked 4 hours ago
John D
30518
30518
2
The first question is "Of course, yes!"; The second one is impossible to answer objectively without further details and would be too narrow for Academia.se. Did you ask to be corresponding author? Did you tell her that you would like to send the paper to a better journal? If not, you should start communicating with your supervisor and let your expectations clear. In general supervisors are open to discussion, but if you don't communicate you can't expect them to magic guess what you want.
– The Doctor
3 hours ago
I didn't ask to be the corresponding author: I didn't know this existed at the time. The second time I actually spoke and said that I wanted to submit this to a better journal. Although I agree that I should communicate more, what strikes me is the fact that the default option that I am being offered is not a good one. @The Doctor
– John D
3 hours ago
4
I don't have a huge experience in this, but I think that her being "corresponding author" only mean that she's the one submitting the article on the journal website or to the editor. It doesn't indicate any difference in contribution to the article. See also this question on the topic.
– Arnaud D.
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
2
The first question is "Of course, yes!"; The second one is impossible to answer objectively without further details and would be too narrow for Academia.se. Did you ask to be corresponding author? Did you tell her that you would like to send the paper to a better journal? If not, you should start communicating with your supervisor and let your expectations clear. In general supervisors are open to discussion, but if you don't communicate you can't expect them to magic guess what you want.
– The Doctor
3 hours ago
I didn't ask to be the corresponding author: I didn't know this existed at the time. The second time I actually spoke and said that I wanted to submit this to a better journal. Although I agree that I should communicate more, what strikes me is the fact that the default option that I am being offered is not a good one. @The Doctor
– John D
3 hours ago
4
I don't have a huge experience in this, but I think that her being "corresponding author" only mean that she's the one submitting the article on the journal website or to the editor. It doesn't indicate any difference in contribution to the article. See also this question on the topic.
– Arnaud D.
2 hours ago
2
2
The first question is "Of course, yes!"; The second one is impossible to answer objectively without further details and would be too narrow for Academia.se. Did you ask to be corresponding author? Did you tell her that you would like to send the paper to a better journal? If not, you should start communicating with your supervisor and let your expectations clear. In general supervisors are open to discussion, but if you don't communicate you can't expect them to magic guess what you want.
– The Doctor
3 hours ago
The first question is "Of course, yes!"; The second one is impossible to answer objectively without further details and would be too narrow for Academia.se. Did you ask to be corresponding author? Did you tell her that you would like to send the paper to a better journal? If not, you should start communicating with your supervisor and let your expectations clear. In general supervisors are open to discussion, but if you don't communicate you can't expect them to magic guess what you want.
– The Doctor
3 hours ago
I didn't ask to be the corresponding author: I didn't know this existed at the time. The second time I actually spoke and said that I wanted to submit this to a better journal. Although I agree that I should communicate more, what strikes me is the fact that the default option that I am being offered is not a good one. @The Doctor
– John D
3 hours ago
I didn't ask to be the corresponding author: I didn't know this existed at the time. The second time I actually spoke and said that I wanted to submit this to a better journal. Although I agree that I should communicate more, what strikes me is the fact that the default option that I am being offered is not a good one. @The Doctor
– John D
3 hours ago
4
4
I don't have a huge experience in this, but I think that her being "corresponding author" only mean that she's the one submitting the article on the journal website or to the editor. It doesn't indicate any difference in contribution to the article. See also this question on the topic.
– Arnaud D.
2 hours ago
I don't have a huge experience in this, but I think that her being "corresponding author" only mean that she's the one submitting the article on the journal website or to the editor. It doesn't indicate any difference in contribution to the article. See also this question on the topic.
– Arnaud D.
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
First of all, journal quality is not an objective thing (measures like acceptance rate and impact factor and so on really do not mean that much, and can be gamed). There isn't necessarily universal agreement about which journals are "top-tier". So consider the possibility that your supervisor simply has a different opinion about the reputation of these journals than you do.
The advisor does have a responsibility to give advice that they believe will be beneficial to students, including advice about where to publish. (Of course, the student also has a responsibility to educate themselves about publication options as best they can, ask questions to try to understand the advisor's suggestions, and speak up if they disagree.) I'm not sure what you mean about whether it is in the advisor's "best interest". It is not like they will get paid more if you publish in Acta, but it does generally reflect well on an advisor if their students are successful.
But there is a serious trade-off of submitting to top journals: time to acceptance. The peer review process in math is much slower than in many other fields, and top journals are very selective. Even if your paper is "good enough" for a top journal, that doesn't mean that it will be accepted by the first one you submit to, and it may be under review for several months before being rejected. Then you have to start over. As a PhD student, you really want to have papers accepted before you begin to apply for postdocs or other jobs. A paper that hasn't been accepted anywhere, even if it's an awesome paper, doesn't help your job prospects much, because there's no independent confirmation that it's awesome.
So at this particular stage of your career, it could be very sensible to submit your work to a less-than-top journal, even if you think it has a chance to be accepted somewhere better, because it's more important to get it accepted fast, without having to go through several submit/review/reject cycles with different journals. This is something your advisor ought to take into account when suggesting journals. But it's a balancing act between the considerations of "publish in the best possible place" and "get accepted on the first try", and you should of course speak up if you have a different opinion about how to balance those.
(If your advisor is a co-author, this same balancing act could apply to them as well. For instance, they might have a promotion decision coming up, and they want to have the paper accepted somewhere before that happens. Sometimes different authors may have conflicting needs in this regard, and they have to reach agreement somehow. Personally I think that the needs of more junior authors, such as PhD students, ought to be weighted more heavily, but that is just me.)
I also want to comment on the "corresponding author" question. People around the world seem to have different opinions about what it means to be corresponding author. In my part of the world (US), it's my impression that being corresponding author only means what it says: this is the author who corresponded with the journal (sent in the submission, filled out the forms, etc), and who is the best person for a reader to reach if they have questions about the paper. Around here, it doesn't carry any particular prestige, and it isn't meant to imply that "this person did most of the work". So on that basis, I wouldn't say that there was anything wrong with your advisor being corresponding author. (For one thing, your advisor probably has a more stable email address, since you are going to graduate before too long.) There may be some benefit to being corresponding author as a student, just to get practice with the journal submission process, but it's not really a reputation benefit.
(If "corresponding author" has a different connotation among people in your part of the world, or more importantly, the part of the world where you intend to apply for postdocs, then the previous paragraph may not apply to you.)
answered 2 hours ago
Nate Eldredge
99.9k31285387
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
First of all, journal quality is not an objective thing (measures like acceptance rate and impact factor and so on really do not mean that much, and can be gamed). There isn't necessarily universal agreement about which journals are "top-tier". So consider the possibility that your supervisor simply has a different opinion about the reputation of these journals than you do.
The advisor does have a responsibility to give advice that they believe will be beneficial to students, including advice about where to publish. (Of course, the student also has a responsibility to educate themselves about publication options as best they can, ask questions to try to understand the advisor's suggestions, and speak up if they disagree.) I'm not sure what you mean about whether it is in the advisor's "best interest". It is not like they will get paid more if you publish in Acta, but it does generally reflect well on an advisor if their students are successful.
But there is a serious trade-off of submitting to top journals: time to acceptance. The peer review process in math is much slower than in many other fields, and top journals are very selective. Even if your paper is "good enough" for a top journal, that doesn't mean that it will be accepted by the first one you submit to, and it may be under review for several months before being rejected. Then you have to start over. As a PhD student, you really want to have papers accepted before you begin to apply for postdocs or other jobs. A paper that hasn't been accepted anywhere, even if it's an awesome paper, doesn't help your job prospects much, because there's no independent confirmation that it's awesome.
So at this particular stage of your career, it could be very sensible to submit your work to a less-than-top journal, even if you think it has a chance to be accepted somewhere better, because it's more important to get it accepted fast, without having to go through several submit/review/reject cycles with different journals. This is something your advisor ought to take into account when suggesting journals. But it's a balancing act between the considerations of "publish in the best possible place" and "get accepted on the first try", and you should of course speak up if you have a different opinion about how to balance those.
(If your advisor is a co-author, this same balancing act could apply to them as well. For instance, they might have a promotion decision coming up, and they want to have the paper accepted somewhere before that happens. Sometimes different authors may have conflicting needs in this regard, and they have to reach agreement somehow. Personally I think that the needs of more junior authors, such as PhD students, ought to be weighted more heavily, but that is just me.)
I also want to comment on the "corresponding author" question. People around the world seem to have different opinions about what it means to be corresponding author. In my part of the world (US), it's my impression that being corresponding author only means what it says: this is the author who corresponded with the journal (sent in the submission, filled out the forms, etc), and who is the best person for a reader to reach if they have questions about the paper. Around here, it doesn't carry any particular prestige, and it isn't meant to imply that "this person did most of the work". So on that basis, I wouldn't say that there was anything wrong with your advisor being corresponding author. (For one thing, your advisor probably has a more stable email address, since you are going to graduate before too long.) There may be some benefit to being corresponding author as a student, just to get practice with the journal submission process, but it's not really a reputation benefit.
(If "corresponding author" has a different connotation among people in your part of the world, or more importantly, the part of the world where you intend to apply for postdocs, then the previous paragraph may not apply to you.)
answered 2 hours ago
Nate Eldredge
99.9k31285387
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
First of all, journal quality is not an objective thing (measures like acceptance rate and impact factor and so on really do not mean that much, and can be gamed). There isn't necessarily universal agreement about which journals are "top-tier". So consider the possibility that your supervisor simply has a different opinion about the reputation of these journals than you do.
The advisor does have a responsibility to give advice that they believe will be beneficial to students, including advice about where to publish. (Of course, the student also has a responsibility to educate themselves about publication options as best they can, ask questions to try to understand the advisor's suggestions, and speak up if they disagree.) I'm not sure what you mean about whether it is in the advisor's "best interest". It is not like they will get paid more if you publish in Acta, but it does generally reflect well on an advisor if their students are successful.
But there is a serious trade-off of submitting to top journals: time to acceptance. The peer review process in math is much slower than in many other fields, and top journals are very selective. Even if your paper is "good enough" for a top journal, that doesn't mean that it will be accepted by the first one you submit to, and it may be under review for several months before being rejected. Then you have to start over. As a PhD student, you really want to have papers accepted before you begin to apply for postdocs or other jobs. A paper that hasn't been accepted anywhere, even if it's an awesome paper, doesn't help your job prospects much, because there's no independent confirmation that it's awesome.
So at this particular stage of your career, it could be very sensible to submit your work to a less-than-top journal, even if you think it has a chance to be accepted somewhere better, because it's more important to get it accepted fast, without having to go through several submit/review/reject cycles with different journals. This is something your advisor ought to take into account when suggesting journals. But it's a balancing act between the considerations of "publish in the best possible place" and "get accepted on the first try", and you should of course speak up if you have a different opinion about how to balance those.
(If your advisor is a co-author, this same balancing act could apply to them as well. For instance, they might have a promotion decision coming up, and they want to have the paper accepted somewhere before that happens. Sometimes different authors may have conflicting needs in this regard, and they have to reach agreement somehow. Personally I think that the needs of more junior authors, such as PhD students, ought to be weighted more heavily, but that is just me.)
I also want to comment on the "corresponding author" question. People around the world seem to have different opinions about what it means to be corresponding author. In my part of the world (US), it's my impression that being corresponding author only means what it says: this is the author who corresponded with the journal (sent in the submission, filled out the forms, etc), and who is the best person for a reader to reach if they have questions about the paper. Around here, it doesn't carry any particular prestige, and it isn't meant to imply that "this person did most of the work". So on that basis, I wouldn't say that there was anything wrong with your advisor being corresponding author. (For one thing, your advisor probably has a more stable email address, since you are going to graduate before too long.) There may be some benefit to being corresponding author as a student, just to get practice with the journal submission process, but it's not really a reputation benefit.
(If "corresponding author" has a different connotation among people in your part of the world, or more importantly, the part of the world where you intend to apply for postdocs, then the previous paragraph may not apply to you.)
answered 2 hours ago
Nate Eldredge
99.9k31285387
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
First of all, journal quality is not an objective thing (measures like acceptance rate and impact factor and so on really do not mean that much, and can be gamed). There isn't necessarily universal agreement about which journals are "top-tier". So consider the possibility that your supervisor simply has a different opinion about the reputation of these journals than you do.
The advisor does have a responsibility to give advice that they believe will be beneficial to students, including advice about where to publish. (Of course, the student also has a responsibility to educate themselves about publication options as best they can, ask questions to try to understand the advisor's suggestions, and speak up if they disagree.) I'm not sure what you mean about whether it is in the advisor's "best interest". It is not like they will get paid more if you publish in Acta, but it does generally reflect well on an advisor if their students are successful.
But there is a serious trade-off of submitting to top journals: time to acceptance. The peer review process in math is much slower than in many other fields, and top journals are very selective. Even if your paper is "good enough" for a top journal, that doesn't mean that it will be accepted by the first one you submit to, and it may be under review for several months before being rejected. Then you have to start over. As a PhD student, you really want to have papers accepted before you begin to apply for postdocs or other jobs. A paper that hasn't been accepted anywhere, even if it's an awesome paper, doesn't help your job prospects much, because there's no independent confirmation that it's awesome.
So at this particular stage of your career, it could be very sensible to submit your work to a less-than-top journal, even if you think it has a chance to be accepted somewhere better, because it's more important to get it accepted fast, without having to go through several submit/review/reject cycles with different journals. This is something your advisor ought to take into account when suggesting journals. But it's a balancing act between the considerations of "publish in the best possible place" and "get accepted on the first try", and you should of course speak up if you have a different opinion about how to balance those.
(If your advisor is a co-author, this same balancing act could apply to them as well. For instance, they might have a promotion decision coming up, and they want to have the paper accepted somewhere before that happens. Sometimes different authors may have conflicting needs in this regard, and they have to reach agreement somehow. Personally I think that the needs of more junior authors, such as PhD students, ought to be weighted more heavily, but that is just me.)
I also want to comment on the "corresponding author" question. People around the world seem to have different opinions about what it means to be corresponding author. In my part of the world (US), it's my impression that being corresponding author only means what it says: this is the author who corresponded with the journal (sent in the submission, filled out the forms, etc), and who is the best person for a reader to reach if they have questions about the paper. Around here, it doesn't carry any particular prestige, and it isn't meant to imply that "this person did most of the work". So on that basis, I wouldn't say that there was anything wrong with your advisor being corresponding author. (For one thing, your advisor probably has a more stable email address, since you are going to graduate before too long.) There may be some benefit to being corresponding author as a student, just to get practice with the journal submission process, but it's not really a reputation benefit.
(If "corresponding author" has a different connotation among people in your part of the world, or more importantly, the part of the world where you intend to apply for postdocs, then the previous paragraph may not apply to you.)
answered 2 hours ago
Nate Eldredge
99.9k31285387
First of all, journal quality is not an objective thing (measures like acceptance rate and impact factor and so on really do not mean that much, and can be gamed). There isn't necessarily universal agreement about which journals are "top-tier". So consider the possibility that your supervisor simply has a different opinion about the reputation of these journals than you do.
The advisor does have a responsibility to give advice that they believe will be beneficial to students, including advice about where to publish. (Of course, the student also has a responsibility to educate themselves about publication options as best they can, ask questions to try to understand the advisor's suggestions, and speak up if they disagree.) I'm not sure what you mean about whether it is in the advisor's "best interest". It is not like they will get paid more if you publish in Acta, but it does generally reflect well on an advisor if their students are successful.
But there is a serious trade-off of submitting to top journals: time to acceptance. The peer review process in math is much slower than in many other fields, and top journals are very selective. Even if your paper is "good enough" for a top journal, that doesn't mean that it will be accepted by the first one you submit to, and it may be under review for several months before being rejected. Then you have to start over. As a PhD student, you really want to have papers accepted before you begin to apply for postdocs or other jobs. A paper that hasn't been accepted anywhere, even if it's an awesome paper, doesn't help your job prospects much, because there's no independent confirmation that it's awesome.
So at this particular stage of your career, it could be very sensible to submit your work to a less-than-top journal, even if you think it has a chance to be accepted somewhere better, because it's more important to get it accepted fast, without having to go through several submit/review/reject cycles with different journals. This is something your advisor ought to take into account when suggesting journals. But it's a balancing act between the considerations of "publish in the best possible place" and "get accepted on the first try", and you should of course speak up if you have a different opinion about how to balance those.
(If your advisor is a co-author, this same balancing act could apply to them as well. For instance, they might have a promotion decision coming up, and they want to have the paper accepted somewhere before that happens. Sometimes different authors may have conflicting needs in this regard, and they have to reach agreement somehow. Personally I think that the needs of more junior authors, such as PhD students, ought to be weighted more heavily, but that is just me.)
I also want to comment on the "corresponding author" question. People around the world seem to have different opinions about what it means to be corresponding author. In my part of the world (US), it's my impression that being corresponding author only means what it says: this is the author who corresponded with the journal (sent in the submission, filled out the forms, etc), and who is the best person for a reader to reach if they have questions about the paper. Around here, it doesn't carry any particular prestige, and it isn't meant to imply that "this person did most of the work". So on that basis, I wouldn't say that there was anything wrong with your advisor being corresponding author. (For one thing, your advisor probably has a more stable email address, since you are going to graduate before too long.) There may be some benefit to being corresponding author as a student, just to get practice with the journal submission process, but it's not really a reputation benefit.
(If "corresponding author" has a different connotation among people in your part of the world, or more importantly, the part of the world where you intend to apply for postdocs, then the previous paragraph may not apply to you.)
answered 2 hours ago
Nate Eldredge
99.9k31285387
edited 2 hours ago
answered 2 hours ago
Nate Eldredge
99.9k31285387
answered 2 hours ago
Nate Eldredge
99.9k31285387
answered 2 hours ago
Nate Eldredge
99.9k31285387
99.9k31285387
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f119099%2fis-in-the-best-interest-of-supervisors-that-his-her-students-publish-their-resea%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
2
The first question is "Of course, yes!"; The second one is impossible to answer objectively without further details and would be too narrow for Academia.se. Did you ask to be corresponding author? Did you tell her that you would like to send the paper to a better journal? If not, you should start communicating with your supervisor and let your expectations clear. In general supervisors are open to discussion, but if you don't communicate you can't expect them to magic guess what you want.
– The Doctor
3 hours ago
I didn't ask to be the corresponding author: I didn't know this existed at the time. The second time I actually spoke and said that I wanted to submit this to a better journal. Although I agree that I should communicate more, what strikes me is the fact that the default option that I am being offered is not a good one. @The Doctor
– John D
3 hours ago
4
I don't have a huge experience in this, but I think that her being "corresponding author" only mean that she's the one submitting the article on the journal website or to the editor. It doesn't indicate any difference in contribution to the article. See also this question on the topic.
– Arnaud D.
2 hours ago