We just got word through the grapevine that our recently rejected paper has some competition. A similar finding is under review at another journal.
So now it's a frenzy to try to get some data nuggets of sufficient interest to warrant resubmitting our manuscript, an option the editor left open. We have a couple of these nuggets already, but the key one that should vault this paper to (some) security is missing, and we don't know if we can get it or not.
Meanwhile, it's unclear whether Competitor MS is going to be accepted at this other journal or not. We don't have a lot of details from our mole. Thus I am going to be ear-deep in GradLab research for the next week or so, digging to find out if we can get the clincher experiment and revising the manuscript as I go.
Of course, my co-authors are going full-tilt to help out, and my current Advisor has offered good advice about approaching the editor, so I guess it's nice to have some other people in science.
Just not the pathetic losers who are unaccountably doing MY experiments.
14 years ago
7 comments:
Oh, ick! But at least your mole told you where your competitors are in the process. All I know for my project is that a competitor has the same results I do. No clue whether they've written it up, submitted a manuscript, are in press, etc., and it's driving me nuts! Good luck with your experiments and resubmission.
good luck and I hope the "key" nugget comes very quickly to you.
Good luck getting your data, I hope it comes quickly.
All I know for my project is that a competitor has the same results I do. No clue whether they've written it up, submitted a manuscript, are in press, etc., and it's driving me nuts!
If what you are doing is interesting and worthwhile you will have competitors working towards the same or very similar goals. And you generally have no idea where they are in the process, and often even who they are. Such is the nature of science. Don't let it get to you. A small level of paranoia is good for keeping you invested in your research. A large amount can paralyze you.
Some advice about worrying about "the competition": DON'T.
If you are working on something truly original (or even not-so-original), it's unlikely the competition will come up with exactly the same findings.
What you've been told (either by the competitors themselves or by a second party) may not be accurate.
If I had a dollar for every time I've been informed (usually by a male competitor) that "we're working on that and have a paper ready to go..", I'd..well...at least have enough to go out to dinner.
9 times out of 10, the people who say this to me never publish this "phantom paper". Reasons may include:
1. Their work was not publishable in the first place, and they were trying to save face when confronted by a competitor (or news of one).
2. They consider this to be their territory (even if they've never actually published anything substantive and never will) and are trying to keep others from publishing so they can continue their fantasy of being "an expert on topic X".
3. Any number of things may happen to derail their work...premature departure of a post-doc, too many projects to complete, insufficient funding, laziness, illness,...
In the end, it's usually the competitors you never hear about who will scoop you (they know better than to blab about any really great finding until it's in press).
If the competition really has a paper "ready to go" or actually in review, then there's not much you can do about it.
So, I try to focus on my work and not worry (too much) about what Dr. Hotshot might be doing.
Another consideration: It's not always best to be first in print, especially if you rush so much that you overlook important things or make errors (that others will gleefully point out in their rebuttals).
I don't mean you should dilly-dally, just don't get stampeded into doing a less-than-stellar job.
Good luck in getting your data and resubmitting...
good luck with that. I had a paper recently in a similar position. Had to go done to Plos1 to get it published.
My first publication though, so I'm not complaining too hard.
Well, I agree with Dr.Doyenne, but I also wonder if you shouldn't contact that same journal and see if they'd like to publish your papers back-to-back?
Sometimes it's the best way to get a paper into print. I recently witnessed not two but three of these incidents at top-tier journals, where none of the papers could have or would have gotten accepted alone, but in each case the pair of back-to-backs did end up getting in.
At least your co-authors are helping! Hang in there. My thoughts are with you- good luck.
Post a Comment