I've always thought of journals like Perceptual and Motor Skills, which is a peer-reviewed and yet pay-per-page journal (actually, you pay for reprints, but you must buy them in some quantity), as an "archive" journal and thus containing papers that are not completely ready (in many or most cases) for publication in a front-line journal. (Note: I've got a paper in it.) Sometimes the paper will have data that are (or might potentially be) interesting, or will use some different method for looking at something, but the paper itself might not hang together into a solid case.
At least, that's my impression. Anyone else? m ------ "There is no power for change greater than a community discovering what it cares about." -- Margaret Wheatley -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 10:34 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: RE:[tips] Are you a left-wing brain or a right-wing brain? Mike P raises an interesting point: > >So, does PNAS have peer review prior to publication or is it simply pay >per page journal ? > Are all pay per page journals to be considered of equal bad or mixed quality? Psych Reports and Psych Record are both pay-per-page journals that have peer review. Is the peer review less good? Is the "quality" more suspect? Does the "simply", above, imply, that it is "less than"? Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 619-260-4006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ---
