Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the assumptions made by academic journals regarding the titles of authors upon submission of articles. Participants share their experiences and opinions on how journals address authors, particularly when titles such as "Professor" or "Dr." are used without prior indication of the author's actual title or rank.
Discussion Character
- Debate/contested
- Meta-discussion
Main Points Raised
- One participant expresses confusion over being addressed as "Professor" by a journal despite not holding that title, questioning the journal's assumptions.
- Another participant shares a similar experience with the NSF, highlighting the arbitrary nature of title assignments.
- A different viewpoint suggests that journals make these assumptions to avoid offending authors, as addressing someone incorrectly can be problematic.
- One participant references a historical example involving Kary Mullis and Nature, discussing how the journal inaccurately credited him with a title and the implications of that error.
- Another participant expresses excitement about their own submission and hopes for a title change upon acceptance, indicating a belief that reputable journals are less likely to make such errors.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants generally agree that journals make assumptions about titles to avoid potential offense, but there is disagreement regarding the appropriateness and implications of these assumptions, as well as the specific experiences shared.
Contextual Notes
Some participants note that journals do not receive information about an author's title or rank upon submission, leading to reliance on assumptions. There is also mention of the potential risks involved in guessing titles, including gender misidentification.
