These top science journals may want to look at Encyclopedia Britannica's recent history because the article's quote from an executive editor at Science sounds suspiciously like what people at Britannica said as they saw what could have been their opportunity pass them by like they were standing still.
> Monica Bradford, executive editor at Science, said: "We have a large circulation and printing additional papers has a real economic cost … Our editorial staff is dedicated to ensuring a thorough and professional peer review upon which they determine which papers to select for inclusion in our journal. There is nothing artificial about the acceptance rate. It reflects the scope and mission of our journal."
On another note, if I were an enterprising graduate student looking for a project to work on, I'd see this as a great opportunity to work with a Nobel-prize winner on something important enough to him for promoting science that he took this stand, taking away time to work on his other passions.
Britanica could get a thousands and some millions for not producing a single issue off their old catalog! As a former Digital Librarian it is a serious racket!
> Monica Bradford, executive editor at Science, said: "We have a large circulation and printing additional papers has a real economic cost … Our editorial staff is dedicated to ensuring a thorough and professional peer review upon which they determine which papers to select for inclusion in our journal. There is nothing artificial about the acceptance rate. It reflects the scope and mission of our journal."
On another note, if I were an enterprising graduate student looking for a project to work on, I'd see this as a great opportunity to work with a Nobel-prize winner on something important enough to him for promoting science that he took this stand, taking away time to work on his other passions.