• Balthazar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    41
    ·
    1 day ago

    Anecdotal only, sorry. I’m sure it varies by field, and it’s more about letters than longer papers. There are probably fields where Nature is excellent, but I know that there is at least one where the odds of a letter to Nature being accurate a few years later is about 50%.

    • archonet@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      but I know that there is at least one where the odds of a letter to Nature being accurate a few years later is about 50%.

      you know, there is a difference between “getting published in Nature” and “submitting your work to Nature”. It’s subtle, perhaps: one involves being published in the journal. For the world to see and scrutinize.

      I bet they get lots of letters that they do, indeed, find aren’t well substantiated enough to publish.

      Also, one field. Lmao.

      Also, please tell me why you made your first comment, I’m genuinely curious. Did you read about this somewhere? Where, if you recall?