I remember when I chatted with the president of a SCI Journal (jointly sponsored by several domestic units) at the end of 2020, I said: "We spent more than two years writing an original article on the fault precursors and the evolution law of landmark earthquakes in the locking segment. After writing, we invited several well-known domestic experts to review it. They all felt that the article was innovative, scientific, logical and storytelling. Therefore, we were confident to submit it to nature, but it was rejected if it was not submitted for review, and later to science, but also rejected if it was not submitted for review. The opinions were: can't be cited I've read a lot of articles on earthquake mechanism published in these journals. Basically, it's an understanding of "one leaf blinding the eyes", but because the author is a foreign Daniel, it's published. "

The president replied, "I think the circle is making trouble. If you belong to the circle, it's not difficult to publish articles at the top even if your work is not innovative and scientific; otherwise, you can't even pass the level of editing."

After listening to the president's words, I was skeptical.

Yesterday afternoon, a young talent Jun came to the Institute to have an academic exchange with my team. He graduated from the University of Toronto, Canada, did post doctoral research in Los Alamos National Laboratory in the United States, and now works in a well-known university in China. When he studied abroad, he published many papers in Ni journals such as PRL, EPSL, GRL, jgr, etc. during dinner in the evening, he talked about the circle "When I was abroad, the articles were submitted to the top journal, and almost all of them were submitted for review because of the endorsement of cattle units and cattle people; but after returning home, the situation was completely different. Good articles were submitted to the top journal, and almost all of them were not submitted for review."

Now looking back, the president's words are quite reliable.

Journals shoulder the important task of disseminating new knowledge and promoting the development of science and technology. Therefore, when selecting papers to be published, they can only follow the innovation and scientificity of the papers, and should not be influenced by the circle. However, in fact, it is not the case. Many journal editors and peer review experts invited to review the papers have the problem of reading people's dishes, that is, papers written by small people who do not belong to any circle, even if there are New ideas, new understandings, and strong chains of logic and evidence are often killed, while Daniel's papers are often published, even if they are as light as water. In the long run, the credibility of the journal will be greatly reduced.

It is easy to understand why foreign top journals are reluctant to publish the original work of Chinese scholars, because after all, scientific research is competitive. If the limelight is robbed by domestic scholars despised by foreign scholars, they must be depressed. On the other hand, these jobs rejected by foreign top journals provide opportunities for domestic journals. As Cheng Lei, director of the editorial department of cell research, said "Fortunately, one thing is good for us, that is, it is almost impossible for real Chinese original things to be published in foreign top journals, which leaves us a space." In view of this, domestic journal managers and editors should take the initiative to go out, make friends with front-line scholars and understand their scientific research trends, so as to give priority to their highly innovative and even original work in domestic journals; in addition, qualified domestic journals should set up "green channel" and "fast channel" , the editor in chief with profound academic appreciation directly judges the work quality and decides whether to publish or not, without following the routine of expert review, which can also protect innovation to the greatest extent.

Finally, let's borrow a sentence from Li dangsheng, the current editor in chief of cell research, as the conclusion of this paper. He said: "innovation must be accompanied by risks. Imagine that if even our own journals are not willing to take appropriate risks, how can it provide a guarantee for Chinese scientists to compete with their international counterparts in the latest scientific research field?"