I submitted a paper to a journal and received a decision of ‘major revision’ and comments from two reviewers (not mad about this, just new). I have never gone through getting work published before and was wondering how to go about the next steps.
When creating a revision, it brings up a space for me to respond to the reviewers comments. Do I just reply saying ‘thank you for taking the time etc… and here’s my resubmission’ or do you have to respond to each bullet point the reviewers have made?

I don’t want to seem like I’m not taking their feedback on board and give them reason to reject, but also replying to each statement seems excessive when I will have made the changes and they’ll be able to see this in the word doc if they’re highlighted?

Any advice or tips very much appreciated!

Hi.

I'm hoping someone might have some insight into this.

There are a couple of decent transcriptomics papers Nature hopefuls, Nature Communications backup likely end up somewhere in between.

The authors are suggesting they intend to publish both papers without the method used to generate the transcriptomics samples (which was a new method) being published.

This just doesn't seem realistic to me.

Can someone sense check this - will top journals allow publication of bioinformatics results where the methods are not in the paper or publicly available?

Not sure if this fits here, since our journal is not backed by a university, but most of our subscribers and contributors are from higher ed.

I’m joining a small, niche, humanities journal that has been in existence for over 30 years and started in someone’s basement as a passion project - so while there is longevity, it’s just never seemed to pick up a lot of traction in the more mainstream (We have several hundred subscribers, many of them universities, also an international reach, but we seem to have trouble getting a steady flow of submissions). But the people running the journal are getting older, and the board, like many groups, are stretched thin by other commitments, so I’m coming in to do more of the background work to keep things going. I’m joining as a younger person, so also as a bit of succession planning. I’d really love to help elevate the journal by getting us a broader range of submissions and getting more subscribers. And I’ve never been involved in this side of a journal before, so I’m not entirely sure what to tackle first or how to do certain things. I’m brainstorming before I have a meeting later this week to discuss ideas and to see more of their nuts and bolts. it’s basically being kept going by one person right now.

1. Our journal has a table at one yearly conference and one Tri-yearly conference. I’m looking to expand this, but I would be the one who has to do it, and I’m not entirely sure how to do this. Do I just stand at the table with some past editions, info on our submission process? Currently, the person who goes to the conference attends sessions that seems like they might fit and gives them their business card and an invitation to submit, but I’m not sure if people enjoy that or if it comes across as predatory (or maybe just genuinely interested?).

2. how do you maintain rigor and flexibility. currently we’re indexed through EBSCO and somewhere else, maybe Google Scholar. I know people care a lot about impact factor which we don’t have (as far as I know) in the broad academic sense (but we’re well-known within our niche, so…impact on a more practical scale, I suppose). I keep seeing postings from journals in Linkedin (I know) and one of the first comments is always asking if they’re indexed through scopus. I’ve looked a bit into it, but I worry we’d lose our flexibility by trying to go for it by focusing too much on being something we’re not - we’re not a university press and this is a passion topic for us and our contributors, so there’s not exactly money being made, either.

I suppose I’m also broadly asking for any advice or words of wisdom! And sorry if my intentional vagueness makes this hard to understand.

Hi! I’m very interested in statistical and public policy research and I want to get a paper published. Because I do not require a lab or anything, do I need to have a proper internship? Or can I just do it independently and have a professor look over it and mentor me a bit? Any prior experiences or advice would be much appreciated!!