Discussion
Started 28 November 2023
  • Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences

Publication speed in social sciences

Academics in social sciences; what would you think about waiting more than 8 months after the acceptance of your manuscript in a well-known SSCI-indexed journal published by the Taylor & Francis Group? The answer from the journal addresses the reason due to "a large backlog of manuscripts" in the system. Then, why not consider publishing an announcement beforehand on the website about this issue? How can we talk about progress in science if we proceed at this pace?

Most recent answer

Elçin Istif Inci
Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
Update: It has now been A YEAR since acceptance. Still no progress.

All replies (6)

David L Morgan
Portland State University
Publication backlogs have been a problem for a long time, but more recently journals have published articles online before they appear officially in a specific, page-numbered issue of the journal. If the journal in question follows this practice, you can list the article on your CV as "published online," but if not you can visit as "accepted for publication."
1 Recommendation
Åsa Rejnö
University West
As long as articles are published online as "article in press" or "ahead of print" I see no real issue here. As professor Morgan points out you can list it on your CV and the article is also available for other researchers. In that way progress of science as you put it, is possible in the same way as if the article had been published in an issue of the journal.
Florentina Scârneci-Domnișoru
Transylvania University of Brașov
We definitely have a problem.
I submitted an article to a well-known journal and waited 2 years to be told that the article was not suitable. Meanwhile the relevance of the ideas becomes a problem and the bibliography becomes obsolete.
Posting articles as preprints can be a solution.
1 Recommendation
Elçin Istif Inci
Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
What most people mention here is the "online first" option. For that, the manuscript still needs to pass the production and publishing phases. In the case I highlighted, the accepted manuscript is stuck in somewhere unknown with no visibility.
Åsa Rejnö
University West
With this information, your question appears in a new light. In that case I agree that this is a truly problematic situation. Fortunately I have never been in a similar situation, and this is of course not helpful for you.
I hope that the journal soon will solve its problem and wish you good luck.
1 Recommendation
Elçin Istif Inci
Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
Update: It has now been A YEAR since acceptance. Still no progress.

Similar questions and discussions

What happens if a quantitative study (due to its limitations) cannot use the collected theories?
Question
6 answers
  • Phil Austin AngelPhil Austin Angel
Prior to drafting, I was given the chance to use either a quantitative or mixed methods approach. Due to me consulting with teachers and a former panelist before. However, as I am writing my undergraduate study it becomes apparent that I could not utilize a theory due to the limitations of my study (i.e., learning curve of learning a software or a research instrument and determining how reliable it is, financial capacity of the researcher and time frame for a simultaneous course such as mine). Also I would like to add that the 3 theories considered were rejected due to this: the first one had a variable that is beyond the scope of the study; second and third both had unclear definitions and would be a source of uncertainty; plus the third one had math topics that are too hard for me such would only exacerbate the concerns of learning curve and the time frame. Besides that (I am not sure of this) the research question that I had was exploratory in nature so even if I did use one or two theories I am hesitant if it is truly necessary.
So I am wondering if my understanding is correct, does an exploratory research not warrant a theory? If it does, is it acceptable of me not to utilize one given my limitations ?
On another note, given how quantitative study is always about theory testing should I go for a mixed methods approach and state the assumptions of my study as follows:
Qualitative assumptions:
1. The research generates meaning as he or she interacts with the study and its context.
2. Researcher finds pattern when collecting data from or for a specific problem.
3. Theory generation. (Not to be included)
Quantitative assumptions:
1. Theory testing (Not to be included)
2. Knowledge is antifoundational.
3. Data collection, know how and rational considerations create knowledge.
Would it be acceptable for me to use an exploratory sequential mixed method? Is it okay for me not to use either theory generation or testing as I find it difficult to find the middle ground between the two and just present it as a research gap?
I am quite confused at the moment. Inputs would be highly appreciated. Thank you madams and sirs.

Related Publications

Article
This article analyses Malay scientific thinking based on the contents of the Malay manuscript MSS1292 Kitab Tibb. This analysis aims to investigate whether the Malays possessed the features of scientific thinking. It also serves the purpose of determining whether the Malays had integrated scientific thinking with their spiritual faith. This study a...
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.