Tom's Study and Publishing

[Dan Miller (930514.1420)]

Tom Bourbon (930513.2113):

<Thank. That makes the rejections seem even less meaningful than they
<already were. And it confinces me this work is in a better place if it is
<in the CSG archives than in any journal from social psychology or sociology.

It is truly a bizarre, inverted world we academics have constructed.
If your excellent research was published in these journals, perhaps a
handful (or two) would read them, even fewer would understand their
significance. I have trouble understanding the decision rules for
"publishable" manuscripts. If the paper "looks different" or "goes against
what we already know," then it is rejected with a sampling of the familiar
rationalizations. Clearly, the editors and readers are not controlling for
developing knowledge, understanding, and theories (models?) that work.
What are they controlling for? Status? Prestige? Their own stupidity?
I can talk to my colleagues at length about baseball, movies, TV programs,
but when I talk about competing theories, what kind of evidence is necessary
to question, qualify, modify, or discard theoretical propositions they
get glassy-eyed and flee. For whatever investment they have made in their
standard background variable theories, they do not want to be made aware
that their theories are not particularly useful (Crap!). They want to be
paid, they want the dean and the head to think they are smart, and they want
students to like them. These people are editors and readers. They want to
fit into the community and be comfortable. For us, I'm afraid, it is
Mission Impossible if we only try to convince these people, or even gain
their acceptance. We must do studies, model, write, publish whenever
possible, solve problems from robotics to neural networks to addictions
to social interaction. Our own journal would be helpful, but it will not
solve the outsider problem. If we had lots of graduate students going off
to teach waves of new students. If we promoted PCT as a new, slightly
sexy, avant garde perspective. And if I was a rich man ...

Dan Miller