Submission to multiple journals to reduce publication timesBMJ 2005; 330 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.330.7491.603-b (Published 10 March 2005) Cite this as: BMJ 2005;330:603
All rapid responses
I read the discussion on the matter of submission to multiple journas (ref. 1) with much interest. It is indeed an important subject in the scientific publishing in general. As we know, there are strict rules for most of the journals (one paper one journal- or else...).
However, it was not less interesting to read the very many examples of the subjuntive mood constructions among the responses. For example: "Journals should keep authors informed", "...replies should be clear and..." "journal should send it back", "should also be more rigorous", "Multiple submission would serve" and many, many others. Clearly, something's going on there, isn't it? Else there 'would' not be so many statements that, in accordance with OED, typically refer to subjective, doubtful or hypothetical statements...
Apparently, there are always lots of our wishes and the harsh realitites of the actual academic publishing. Apart from the point that not all of the academic journals follow honest and decent policies of an objective "peer review", some takes months and even years to return a review that is not worth reading at all. And I refer here not to some "low profile" journals but to those with citation index of over 6000 and higher.
Consequently, the matter raised in the discussion (ref. 1) is always the question and the matter of a particular journal. In my opinion, allowing for multiple journal submissions will only benefit the image and the status of any journal as an honest and an an objective publishing entity.
REFERENCES 1. Birte Twisselmann. Submission to multiple journals to reduce publication times: Summary of responses BMJ 2005; 330: 603-b
Competing interests: None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests