Science Bulletin

Post on January 9, 2021, editing notice on January 15, has not been submitted for review, and then transferred to an internationally renowned journal (already accepted). Let me talk about my feelings about the submission: in response to the country's call, I decided to publish my research results on the land of my motherland. Therefore, I chose to submit my most proud scientific research achievement during my Ph.D. to the "Science Bulletin" (referred to as SciB). However, the editor did not send it for review, which is really speechless. The editor is very unprofessional. The submitted paper was rejected by several experts (including top experts in both domestic and foreign disciplines). Personally, I believe that the quality of the article is very good, but the editor's reason for not sending it for review is: the work is good but not groundbreaking enough. Then it was transferred to an internationally renowned journal and accepted. SciB has a particularly high standard and the editor is very unprofessional, but I feel good about myself. I hope that domestic journals will continue to improve, rather than just shouting slogans and hiring a group of editors who like to show off and build relationships. The road ahead is long and arduous, and I will continue to seek progress.

Recently, SciB's impact factor has been increasing rapidly. However, there is one fatal flaw, which is the low number of articles. It is indeed effective to increase the impact factor by reducing the number of articles, but the consequence is that the influence is not high.

Usually when reading literature, I rarely come across articles that cite SciB.

If they implement a membership system where only articles from influential authors are reviewed, it will lead to everyone avoiding citing them, which would not end well.

In reality, there are many good journals available now. However, there are not many highly cited authors. Currently, it's a market for authors.

SciB often promotes influential authors, but many of their articles are not highly cited. They are often used to help students graduate, and after publication, no one bothers about the citations. Metaphorically speaking, it's like "use and discard".