How the F*ck Do Research Journals Work? Part 1
Understanding the Knowledge Production Industry for Regular People
We all face a problem in evaluating whether the information we believe to be true actually is true. Right now, between what AI can create and the corruption that has taken over our knowledge centers, it’s hard to know what to trust. We are going to tackle that.
Over the next several weeks, we are going on a deep dive into the knowledge industrial complex, what it is, and what has been going wrong. That will include universities, research centers, and whatever other major factors we find along the way that help us suss out where things have gone wrong, and what might help them go right, because the next two years may be a prime opportunity to fix some long-standing issues.
Readers who are on the front lines in universities are encouraged to reach out with insights.
We will begin with academic or research journals.
What are Academic/Research Journals?
Academic journals are specialized periodicals with the primary purpose of disseminating new knowledge. They publish articles showcasing original research, review articles that summarize the current understanding of a topic, and book reviews. They are a format where researchers can show off their new findings, or verbally duke it out over a scholarly point of contention.
The Royal Society, specifically Henry Oldenburg, began the world’s oldest research publication, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, in 1665, during the reign of Charles II. That year also saw the Great Plague of London. The journal was published monthly and sold at the cost of a shilling. Whether this time of turmoil aided or impaired its success is unclear, but the journal was widely appreciated, and the Royal Society continued to produce it after Oldenburg’s death in 1677.
Since that time, the number of journals tailored to research and academic pursuits has mushroomed to an estimated 30,000+ as of 2021, with the number increasing by 5%-7% annually.
These journals are now broken down into the finest of subject matter, splitting the narrowest of hairs. This is a sampling of quirky niches:
Rangifer–Research, Management and Husbandry of Reinbeer and other Northern Ungulates
Weed Research–An International Journal of Weed Biology, Ecology, and Vegetation Management
How Do They Work?
According to Promarket, this tragically humorous video is correct. Academic publishing is a multibillion dollar industry, that often leaves the knowledge producers out in the cold. Just like professional athletes before Bobby Hull signed with Winnipeg.
While there is some variety, in general, academic publishing works thusly:
A scientist/researcher (or team) has an idea.
They are approved to work on this idea. (More on that in a future post.)
They apply for and get public funding to proceed. (Yay taxpayers!)
The study produces new knowledge.
A Scientist/Researcher writes an article about the study and submits it to journals.
Eventually one picks it up. New researchers need this to happen fast, to build their careers.
Other researchers/scientists provide editing and input for free! (peer review)
Researchers/scientists, depending on the journal, may pay large submission fees with some of those public funds to the journal to get published. (Yay taxpayers!)
Universities pay subscriptions to access the journal. (State Universities? Yay taxpayers!)
With 30,000+ and counting journals out there, separating out the high-quality publications from the questionable multitude is its own can of worms. As you may expect, well-respected journals capture most of the attention and can afford to release their publications openly without charging a subscription fee. This means that they will be easier to cite, which helps them maintain their high status.
In their recent study on Academic Journal Pricing and Research Dissemination, Yonghong An, Michael Williams, and Mo Xiao found that the more expensive the Journal subscription, the less often the Journal research is cited. This is especially hard on low-ranking academic institutions and developing countries for whom the fees quickly become exclusionary.
That isn’t the only problem. A researcher or scientist’s reputation is built on how many papers they can get published in well-respected journals, known as “publish or perish.” This ends up incentivizing all kinds of bad behavior.
Why is This Important?
Publishing in academic journals is the engine of knowledge production, and like any fundamental process, when it is poorly tuned, it will start to misfire. If all this research aims to advance knowledge and society along with it, then poorly organized science will accomplish neither and will begin to harm society. Arguably that is where we are now.
For at least 20 years now, there has been a replication crisis in psychology and other fields of research. Studies have been tainted by poor practices and fraud, filling many of these journals with false information. Foundational texts have been exposed to non-repeatable.
There are also branches of study that are not founded in reality and don’t follow the scientific method, namely all Critical Theories. This Social Justice ideology has infected universities and research centers across the board. The journal system has enabled this rather than correcting it.
Medicine based on false information is as dangerous as engineering built around incorrect math. This must be fixed, but it is going to take considerable effort to figure out how to do that reliably.
What Can We Do to Protect Ourselves?
While we work on ways to reform this process, there are some things that people can do right now to mitigate the impact of bad science. Here are some steps to make sure that you are working with the best possible information.
Start with humility. Do you remember that power pose study and the TED talk with 70,000,000 views that had everyone trying to make confident stances? Yeah, that was rubbish. With as many as two-thirds of studies failing to replicate, there are many more things you think are true, that are outright BS. Be open to that possibility. It doesn't make you a bad person to have been taken in by bad information. Questioning what you think you know makes you smart.
Take new studies with a grain of salt. Science has always been an iterative process. As we learn more, it can upend things that we long thought were true, too. However, allow time for science to prove itself before you buy in.
Reexamine the science periodically. Things change. Brush up on what you think you know and see if it still seems to be true. And if it doesn’t try to figure out why. There may have been real discoveries, or there may be a dangerous new ideology afoot.
Look for conflicts of interest. Was it a drug company-funded study that discovered cholesterol was a problem? Or sugar manufacturers that said fat caused weight gain? Ask questions, and don’t take information at face value.
Don’t have time to dig through studies? Support independent groups like ConsumerLab that will do the leg work for you, then support other groups that check their work.
Notice your own assumptions. We are best at fooling ourselves into believing what we already want to be true. Do you assume that if a scientist says it, it must be true? Well, even PhDs can lie and be dumb like the rest of us. Some PhD studies are embarrassingly bad or unhinged. Somebody got this garbage published.
What about independent labs like Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)? While I believe that independent labs are part of the answer going forward, they are not perfect. Look at HHMIs diversity commitment. There’s a shortage of critical thinking and courage there.
Get Comfortable being uncomfortable. There is no perfect solution. Some people will always have a motive for manipulating information to favor their personal self-interest. Be vigilant, skeptical, and support things that earn your trust. Verify your beliefs periodically.
Further Reading
Enago Academy - High Impact Journals 2024 –Key to Deciding the Right Journal
Understanding Scientific Journals and Articles
Help Keep This Conversation Going!
Share this post on social media–it costs nothing but helps a lot.
Want more perks? Subscribe to get full access to the article archive.
Pledge to get video and chatroom access starting in November 2024.
Support from readers like you keeps this project alive!
Diogenes in Exile is reader-supported. If you find value in this work, please consider becoming a pledging/paid subscriber, donating to my GiveSendgo, or buying Thought Criminal merch. I’m putting everything on the line to bring this to you because I think it is just that important, but if you can, I need your help to keep this mission alive.
Already a Premium subscriber? Share your thoughts in the chat room.
About
Diogenes in Exile began after I returned to grad school to pursue a Clinical Mental Health Counseling master’s degree at the University of Tennessee. What I encountered, however, was a program deeply entrenched in Critical Theories ideology. During my time there, I experienced significant resistance, particularly for my Buddhist practice, which was labeled as invalidating to other identities. After careful reflection, I chose to leave the program, believing the curriculum being taught would ultimately harm clients and lead to unethical practices in the field.
Since then, I’ve dedicated myself to investigating, writing, and speaking out about the troubling direction of psychology, higher education, and other institutions that seem to have lost their way. When I’m not working on these issues, you’ll find me in the garden, creating art, walking my dog, or guiding my kids toward adulthood.
You can also find my work at Minding the Campus