purer 2021-06-30

No. The concept is misunderstood! Your Daddy said "absolutely top-tier journal" and what you said "absolutely top journal" have significant differences. "Absolutely top-tier journal" emphasizes the fact of being a top journal, while "absolutely top journal" refers to the three giants, Cell, Nature, and Science. echo1994wf, you young people shouldn't exaggerate too much, calling iScience a top journal. You should know that I hate this journal, so calling it an absolute top journal is going against me.

Your Daddy is more rigorous than you, you should learn more from him in order to grow into a great scientist.

echo1994wf 2021-06-30

Welcome to those who think they have top-notch articles to contribute. Don't compete with other sub-journals, and I thank you on behalf of everyone. By the way, the impact factor has just been released, and iScience has a score of 5+. We welcome everyone to submit their articles.

passover 2021-06-28

What's the point of arguing! Last year at this time, everyone was debating whether iScience is Sci Rep. This year, they are debating whether it is a top-tier journal. Is it meaningful? It's a beautiful spring, isn't it nice to kiss a girl? Why bother with a serious journal? It is a sub-journal of Cell, and it is developing well, that's enough. Is it meaningful to argue over a few points of impact factor more or less?

@here we are, I vote (2)

Daddy 2021-06-23

@purer, your situation is not unusual. Although iScience does not have a high threshold, it is still considered a top-tier journal. So it is normal not to have submitted it for review.

hqh113 2021-06-21

I appreciate iScience and I mentioned that currently the magazine has reached the level of being a top-tier journal in the first division of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (this is not the same as being in the first division of JCR, as only a few top journals in each field can achieve this level). It is also in a rising phase and has great potential. However, I cannot stand those who blindly praise the magazine and become negative when others engage in rational discussions. I suggest that those individuals should engrave the words "I published in Cell sub-journal" on their foreheads and debate face-to-face with those who spread baseless rumors in real life. I will delete my comments to prevent hurting your sensitive hearts, causing you sleepless nights.

purer 2021-06-20

@hqh113
So you're actually the slow-tempered type! Now I just found out that you're slowly supporting iScience, my comrade. Let's fight together!

@Here we are
I vote (2)

Here we are 2021-06-20

It seems that the internet is really full of adult content and violence, while I am being naive and foolish. At first, I genuinely thought that hqh113 was praising iScience. After Antonin Whalen's analysis, I realized that hqh113 is actually criticizing iScience. It makes sense when I think about it. Since hqh113 posted about iScience, why would they keep saying negative things about it for no reason? And they seem to be well aware of any opposing views, which indicates that they pay a lot of attention to this journal. Therefore, it is highly likely that they are causing long-term damage to iScience.

I will initiate an online poll: (1) hqh113 praises iScience, (2) hqh113 criticizes iScience, (3) hqh113 neither praises nor criticizes. I hope everyone will vote. I vote for (2).

hqh113 2021-06-18

This Antonin Whalen bro seems to be too sensitive. I also have a publication in CNS and recently got one in iScience. From my personal experience in the field of life sciences and medicine, the difficulty of submitting to iScience is significantly lower than that of CNS (including NC SA CR). I'm not sure about other fields, so I won't comment. Many people say not to focus on impact factors, so I specifically looked at the number of hot papers and highly cited papers in iScience on Web of Science. Among the over two thousand published papers, there are only a few hot papers. So, no matter how much you brag, the current level and influence of this magazine is just like this. The reason the OP was able to publish in NCB is most likely because the quality of the paper greatly improved after being rejected by JBC, not because iScience is so prestigious. Even a mediocre journal like a 5-6 impact factor one is being talked about online, and you're here defending it with a stinky attitude. This is probably the best you'll ever be in your life.

AntonioWhalen 2021-06-15

Brother or sister: Cheer up, luck plays a significant role in publishing papers, it doesn't mean that you will be accepted just because your paper is of high quality. iScience is a legitimate research journal under Cell Press, although it may be easier than Nat Cell Biol, it is not that different. Therefore, in terms of individual cases, it is entirely possible that your paper was overlooked. From a statistical point of view, if many papers rejected by iScience are ultimately accepted by Nat Cell Biol, it would be a strange phenomenon. So, your individual case cannot explain the problem.

Our boss has published many papers in iCNS sub-journals. Through comparison, our research group found that iScience actually has high requirements, although it may be slightly easier. Everyone should maintain the right mindset and be mentally prepared when submitting manuscripts.

In the past, many people who were rejected by iScience resorted to various criticisms on the internet, but they were later exposed by the forces of justice. Later, these scoundrels learned their lesson and started using more secretive ways to criticize iScience. For example, that young person hqh113, after criticizing, would add a sentence like "perhaps could become a leading figure in the interdisciplinary field" to cover up. The intentions of such people are well known by everyone.

purer 2021-06-13

What a journal! A year ago, I was tempted and submitted to iScience, but it was rejected without review. Then I transferred to JBC and it was rejected after the review. But during the revision process, I made improvements and yesterday it was accepted by Nat Cell Biol! It can be seen how unreliable iScience is. Although it was accepted after significant improvement, Nat Cell Biol is a sub-journal of Nature! Why didn't iScience even send it for review?!

hqh113 2021-06-10

After reading the comments of all the experts, I feel that it is unnecessary to tear apart a foreign journal that is still in its development stage. In my case, my paper was rejected by CR and then I submitted it to isciense. The fact that it couldn't even meet the standards of CR indicates that this journal is currently at the level of a lower-tier journal in the top tier of Chinese Academy of Sciences. There is still a significant gap between it and NC and SA. Of course, it is hard to say what it will develop into in the future, and it is possible that it may become a leading journal in the field of interdisciplinary studies.

Dragonball 2021-06-08

Foreign experts highly recognize it. Science Translational Medicine, which also received a score of 4 back then, did not receive such a strong reaction as it does now. Currently, its level is on par with PNAS or Cell Research.

Here we are 2021-05-31

The news spread so fast?! I also heard internal news saying that Cell Press will make a big move, developing this journal into a flagship.

钱石 2021-05-30

Now that interdisciplinary studies are so popular, we eagerly await to see if this magazine, born with this theme, can carry the flagship's banner. Both the editor-in-chief and the magazine's style are very nice and free. Academic work requires this kind of free and unrestrained journal. Support.

opop1961 2021-05-28

iScience, with the Chinese name "交叉科学", feels like there will be more interdisciplinary projects in the future. Haha.

THEMONSTER 2021-05-24

Soon, the results will be available, generally within a month.

詹森 2021-05-24

Cross-disciplinary science has opened up new fields. This publication is destined for success.

ICE1234567890 2021-05-20

Excuse me, is this journal fast? It has been 3 days since I submitted, but there is still no response.

Daddy 2021-05-08

This is not necessary. Some domestic high-IF journals, such as Cell Res, Bone Res, of course do not want Cell Press to do well, but they wouldn't go so far as to criticize other journals. I think one reason is that the requirements of iScience are not much lower than those of other sub-journals, but many authors think it is easy to get published there, so they start attacking iScience after being rejected. Just take a look at the constant attacks on XiaoMuChong. I carefully observed and found that the majority of the attackers have a biomedical background. It can be seen that it is still very difficult to publish in the field of biology, after all, it is a Cell sub-journal. Material science articles are relatively easier, so it is rare to see material science authors attacking it.

Here we are 2021-05-08

Apart from the addition of Ci Tou, everyone's opinions are good. Everyone has experienced the high quality of iScience. The problem is, as a sub-journal of Cell Press that develops normally, why does it often face attacks from some people? Could it be that they are sent by domestic journals?

Daddy 2021-05-07

Regarding the difference between sister journals and subsidiary journals, it should be like this. Considering Cell's dominant position, Cell Press hopes to cultivate several flagship journals like Cell. As a result, Chem, Joule, and Matter were created. These three are sister journals of Cell. The rest of the Cell Press journals are subsidiary journals, except for Heliyon, which competes with Scientific Reports. Therefore, iScience is a subsidiary journal of Cell, not a sister journal.

It can be seen that +and+ this person has malicious intentions, so everyone must keep their distance and be respectful towards him/her.

科研小生ac 2021-05-07

I have never submitted, but I have previously read some journal introductions from Cell Press. Although some journals explicitly state that they are sister journals in four major academic fields, in various occasions (such as WeChat and online presentations), editors seem to refer to all journals under Cell Press as sister journals. So, it is uncertain whether there is an actual classification within the organization or if it is just a misconception caused by some journals' "unintentional" statements.

BillGates 2021-05-07

I have read a few articles with good quality, and they are basically no different from other journals with a ranking of 10-20. The impact factor can be controlled, and we can refer specifically to the journals "Bone Research" and "Cell Research". The most important thing is whether we can attract high-quality submissions. It would be better if future articles lean towards being included in "Journal of Lightwave Technology" (JoLE), "Chemistry" and other materials-related journals. This way, we can at least have a benchmark against "Biomaterials" and "ACS Nano". Biomedical articles can be mainly submitted to "Cell Reports" and its sub-journals, and it was a good strategy to transfer from "Cell Reports" to "iScience" in the early stages to attract some submissions. In the later stages, it is estimated that the focus will mainly shift to materials physics and chemistry, and "iScience" will be the main journal for submission.

opoo 2021-05-07

Support it. Currently, NS monopolizes the market for 10-20 point magazines in comprehensive categories. Cell also urgently wants to enter this market and get a share. However, Cell reports only focuses on biology journals, which means that it can't receive articles with scores of 10-20 points in other subjects such as materials or chemistry. Therefore, Cell urgently needs to expand its market and catch the Cell publishing journals that fall from 20-40 points to prevent them from flowing to NS subsidiary journals. The purpose of launching iscience is very clear.

+和+ 2021-05-06

This [Here we are] seems a bit dog-like. It provokes everyone on its own... Stay away from it... In contrast to normal communication, welcome, but in contrast to those who harm others, it will definitely return twice as much harm to you with a treasure-covered head...

Here we are 2021-05-06

This 【+and+】 seems a little abnormal. Everyone, don't provoke it.

+和+ 2021-05-06

Are you a real B, a real fool, or a real J? How does the official website's description of "sister" correspond to what everyone usually says about "sub-magazine"? First, find an example where the official website writes "son," then I'll believe it; second, go and see how "sub-magazine" is defined; and as for "son" and "sister," I can see that you're almost clueless about how to differentiate them, so please stop showing your ignorance, seriously, it's embarrassing.

+和+ 2021-05-06

In the journal description, there is only mention of "sister," but you should give an example (just one) as the official website uses "son." It's really illiterate, not even knowing the origin of the term "sub-journal." Oh, still repeatedly saying "sub-journal," oh, poor thing... Furthermore, you don't even understand the growth rate pattern of the journal's instant impact factor, and you just randomly give a range of 7-8... Learn more. First, after December, it can only be multiplied by 1.05-1.1; second, after 2-3 months, it will basically not increase. Next time, learn the mathematical patterns in elementary school before making predictions, don't embarrass yourself... Furthermore, the final value will be lower than the instant one, look at the pattern from last year...

+和+ 2021-05-04

This AntonioWhalen is indeed very uncivilized. We are all low-level researchers, so why are you pretending to be a big shot? Not only that, why are you even here? Not only that, why don't you post your own NS (whatever that means)...

AntonioWhalen 2021-05-04

This person indeed has a problem with IQ. He is the spokesperson for the theory of the only influential factor.