In the past four years, 12 papers have been published as the first / corresponding authors, of which only 3 are in Chinese. The reason why I choose to contribute to English journals is that the current assessment values SCI, but also because the contribution experience of Chinese journals is generally worse, and better Chinese journals are more difficult to publish than SCI.

First of all, the long wait made me impatient with Chinese journals. After submission, the first step is the preliminary examination of the editorial department, and the first examination of some Chinese journals will take one month or more. You know, some OA English journals have received articles for one month. After passing the first pass, the article was sent for external review, which is likely to be a long wait. For my last Chinese article, the first round of external review took more than three months, the second round took more than three months, and finally it took more than seven months to receive. The article received smoothly, also don't be happy too early, from the article may still have a long time. Because the number of papers published in each issue is limited, and the previous received articles have not yet been published, so the articles just received have to queue up, which is called "press draft". It's not uncommon to press for one year or more. There is an article led by a classmate who was hired in April 2017 and proofread in April 2019 and paid for the layout fee, but I heard that the article has not been published so far. English journals published by Elsevier and other publishers will receive DOI number and publish online within a few days after receiving the articles. The gap is too big. I don't know if there are any achievements in Chinese journal articles. For this reason, others have robbed the right to publish.

The poor contribution experience is also due to the need to consider the criteria for extracting reviewers. When selecting reviewers, Chinese journals pay more attention to the title and academic title of scholars, while the publication record of scholars is not the first. A lot of Chinese journals in the requirements of self recommendation reviewers on the website clearly stated that they must have the title of deputy high school or above. Some scientists with senior professional titles are relatively busy, and there are not a few who have a few words to deal with the manuscript review, or have their own graduate students directly review the manuscript. The objectivity of the evaluation and the help to the manuscript will be discounted by such comments. I have been waiting for more than three months for the external review of my last Chinese article, but I haven't got a few valuable comments. As we all know, senior doctoral students with good publishing records or just graduated doctoral students are actually very suitable potential reviewers. As a young teacher, I have received dozens of requests for review of English articles, but at present I have only received a few requests for review of Chinese journals. Ironically, I have also helped leaders and tutors to review more than ten Chinese articles.

In addition, the "layout fee" of most domestic Chinese Journals (including some English journals) also makes me confused. I should have published more than ten articles in Chinese journals, but I still don't know what the layout fee is. If the authors choose to publish articles in journals owned by Elsevier and other publishers without OA, and the paper version does not need color pictures, they do not need to pay a cent; If readers want to read this article, they need to pay for a subscription. Only when OA publishing is selected, APC (article processing charge) should be paid. Although the cost is very high, but after the payment, readers do not need to subscribe to read for free. However, the vast majority of Chinese journals will charge the author a high fee. But the cost is different from that of APC published by OA, because if readers want to read articles, they also need to pay for subscription - if the school does not purchase HowNet resources, many articles can not be downloaded. It's a bit like buying a member of a video website, but it still depends on the advertisement. Isn't it a bit strange.

To praise Chinese journals, reviewers are paid, though not high. This may have something to do with the relatively sufficient funds after the fee for the layout has been charged.

In fact, as Ma Jun's blog "tired academic editors and reviewers" says, some English journals also have problems such as long submission cycle. But generally speaking, compared with English journals, the standardization and development speed of domestic Chinese journals have great room for improvement. In addition, good Chinese journals are relatively few, and the amount of articles published is also small. Among them, some academic giants are regular residents, and in recent years, the number of soliciting contributions and special issues is also increasing, so sometimes Chinese journals are more difficult to publish than good SCI. In addition to the current assessment more recognized SCI papers, so, choose to contribute to English journals, it has become a natural thing.

Although Chinese journals are also making progress, for example, many journals also have a "pre publishing" mode, but on the whole, there is a lack of high-level talents, and the pace of progress is slow. For example, OA publishing mode, data journals and other aspects have been far behind. The development of Chinese journals is facing great pressure, especially the strong impact of OA journals and some super giant journals with more and more papers in recent years.