What this reveals is that a field's threshold for innovation today is quite literally in the hands and mind of the field's journal editors.
So whole field can suffer with narrow minded unimaginative editors.
Top-level
What this reveals is that a field's threshold for innovation today is quite literally in the hands and mind of the field's journal editors. So whole field can suffer with narrow minded unimaginative editors. 4 comments
@impactology Not defending the journals here, but doesn't this demonstrate that ideas can succeed even if they don't get recognized by the field experts? |
@impactology Many subfields and journals have an extremely narrow scope, tightly regulated terminology, and few who make governing editorial decisions. It's extremely common to find two different fields studying the exact same thing, but it sounds completely different the way they describe it, but both insisting that they are absolutely separate. Frequently researchers dust off an old idea, give it a new name and slightly different spin, and market it as innovation.