Today I got reviews back for a manuscript that has been languishing in review for an absurdly long period of time: nearly a year. Fortunately, the reviews were positive, which lessens my annoyance quite a bit.
This manuscript is on a topic extremely peripheral to my usual research topics, and that also decreased my stress about it, although the fact that my co-authors and I spent considerable time on the research and writing of course means I/we have a strong interest in seeing the paper published.
The three reviews are also very helpful, which is always nice. One thing that amused me, though, is that the reviews all say things like: interesting paper, great idea, nice dataset blah blah blah, but then one says that, despite being a valuable contribution that should be published, "This paper does not represent [Professor FSP's] very best work." Well, I happen to agree with that, but if I only published my 'very best' work, would I publish anything ever? Would I ever write anything, scientific or blogific? Can I get an A for effort anyway because I worked really hard on this paper?
I'm not complaining about the reviews -- they are very constructive and will help a lot with the revisions.
I think the 'best work' comment is funny because my daughter's elementary school teachers are always telling the kids to do their 'best work', and my daughter and I have had numerous conversations about what exactly that means (neither of us is sure). I am still not sure, despite being officially told today that I didn't do my best work with this paper.
9 years ago