Access
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Correspondence
Nature 439, 534 (2 February 2006) | doi:10.1038/439534d; Published online 1 February 2006
Reader-appeal should not outweigh merit of research
Emilio Artacho1
- Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EQ, UK
There is one aspect of Nature's acceptance criteria that your Editorial on peer review ("Three cheers for peers" Nature 439, 118; 2006) does not consider.The broad audience of Nature forces its editors to pre-screen papers according to how appealing they will be for its readers, even if appeal and importance do not always go hand in hand.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS
These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated.
RESEARCH
Genetic segregation of microsatellite markers in Saccharum officinarum and S. spontaneumHeredity Original Article
Research skewed by stress on highest-impact journalsNature Correspondence (23 Mar 2006)
Climate: open review may ease acceptance of reportNature Correspondence (25 May 2006)
Reform options for peer reviewNature Correspondence (15 Jul 1993)
See all 8 matches for Research