Target Journal

[fsolt]

Jennings et al. (2017) was published in POQ. Is that a good target for this piece? If so, what do we need to do to meet the journal's requirements. If not, where should we take this?

[haofengma]

I like the idea of POQ. They didn't provide acceptance time and rate, but just from the perspective of theme, I think POQ is a good fit.

[Jeongho-Choi]

I like POQ. According to their website, the review process usually takes three months, which sounds like a reasonable length of time to me. And, the maximum word count is 6,500 words of text and notes, excluding figures, tables, references, and appendices. So, I think we are good to go on this.

[fsolt]

POQ (used to?) have a requirement on following AAPOR guidelines on describing all survey datasets used, including the n, the sampling methods, and I don't know what else—which would be a nightmare for us. I don't see that now in the Author Guidelines, so that's good. Still, I think submitting there would require as a bare minimum that we include the citations of all of the surveys we use, as @sammo3182 and I did in https://github.com/fsolt/dcpo_macrointerest/blob/main/paper/dcpo_macrointerest.pdf but we have been spotty on across projects, so adding that code and insuring all the citations needed are pasted into https://github.com/fsolt/DCPOtools/blob/master/data/surveys_data.csv would have to be added to our list of issues. Since we're in a hurry to get this out, I'll wait for consensus on POQ before assigning that work. Your thoughts, @Tyhcass @sammo3182 ?

[sammo3182]

Hi all, sorry for the late reply! On trip all the time…POQ still require AAPOR guidelines, Fred, but after the acceptance. And yea, that’ll be a nightmare…

获取 Outlook for iOShttps://aka.ms/o0ukef

---

发件人: Frederick Solt @.> 发送时间: Thursday, June 27, 2024 3:54:29 AM 收件人: fsolt/dcpo_discontent @.> 抄送: Yue Hu @.>; Mention @.> 主题: Re: [fsolt/dcpo_discontent] Target Journal (Issue #7)

POQ (used to?) have a about following AAPOR guidelines on describing all survey datasets used, including the n, the sampling methods, and I don't know what else―which would be a nightmare for us. I don't see that now in the Author Guidelineshttps://academic.oup.com/poq/pages/general_instructions, so that's good. Still, I think submitting there would require as a bare minimum that we include the citations of all of the surveys we use, as @sammo3182https://github.com/sammo3182 and I did in https://github.com/fsolt/dcpo_macrointerest/blob/main/paper/dcpo_macrointerest.pdf but we have been spotty on across projects, so adding that code and insuring all the citations needed are pasted into https://github.com/fsolt/DCPOtools/blob/master/data/surveys_data.csv would have to be added to our list of issues. Since we're in a hurry to get this out, I'll wait for consensus on POQ before assigning that work. Your thoughts, @Tyhcasshttps://github.com/Tyhcass @sammo3182https://github.com/sammo3182 ?

― Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/fsolt/dcpo_discontent/issues/7#issuecomment-2192517100, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABRJ525P6EIW3GT7C4KGTB3ZJML7LAVCNFSM6AAAAABJ6QPXO6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCOJSGUYTOMJQGA. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

[Tyhcass]

I am fine with POQ. Let's consider "the nightmare" after it has been accepted.

[fsolt]

Let's consider "the nightmare" after it has been accepted.

Oof. Right. If it was okay for Jennings et al. (2017), it should be okay for us, I guess.