But there are very few standards for judging someone else’s ideas.
It’s easy to subconsciously revert to subjective opinion and critique conceptual papers based on personal views/experience on the topic.
~ Rudy Hirschheim (2008) By definition, a conceptual paper doesn’t present original data…but it must present an original concept.
It synthesises knowledge from previous work on a particular topic, and presents it in a new context to provide a springboard for new research that will fill knowledge gaps.
Even though we’d submitted our paper under one of the journal’s specific conceptual categories (see above), not under the Review category.
Other times, we submitted to a journal using the journal’s proposal system for conceptual papers.As the flow chart to the right indicates, research begins with curiosity.Academic research involves a special methodology that is not the same as that used by a journalist or the casual inquirer.Nevertheless, as the diagram shows, a variety of forces can stimulate one's curiosity: something read in a newspaper or heard on the news, material covered in classes, personal experience....We will begin the research process with a Concept Paper.All have been more difficult to get through peer review than any of the data papers I’ve published.“Pollinators, pests, and predators: Recognizing ecological trade-offs in agroecosystems”: 6 journals; 12 months before acceptance.As scientists, we’re trained not to have opinions and to control context out of experiments.For peer review, we’re trained to identify standards of study design, statistical analyses, presentation and formatting etc.The editor that read the proposal liked our idea and invited us to submit the full paper.A different editor then handled our full submission and rejected it without review.