As a new researcher, I am in the following situation in mathematics research:

I read paper X, a short paper published in a low-mid tier journal, and found a way to improve and extend the result. The technique I used to extend the result is a different approach to the problem, but not that mathematically technical. However, even though the mathematical extensions are (arguably) trivial, the extensions open the door to a much broader approach to my field. They also open the door up for interesting simple examples that were previously unable to be produced.

I am currently writing up my findings of the original extension in a paper. In this paper, I correctly reference paper X when necessary. From an ethical point of view, it is crystal clear what I did and didn’t do.

1) Is it bad to compare to one single paper often in a paper?
2) What is a good way to tell whether a result is incremental or not?
3) Some of the arguments in paper X need slight modifications under my extension. Is it okay to repeat some of their ideas in my proofs (with clear citation/credit of course)?

Another problem arising from 2): I have another, much more interesting result because of this extension that I have not published. However, this result moves in a different mathematical direction and therefore, I sort of want to write a separate paper on it. I am faced with the following dilemma. I could reasonably do one of the following:

I) Write a longer paper and work to bring the ideas together.
Pros: My separation from paper X is much more obvious and seen as less incremental.
Cons: I mix two different ideas and risk the paper telling too many stories.

II) Vaguely hint at the second result in the first paper. If I do this, the problem is that if my hint is too vague, it will make my first result seem uninteresting. If it is too specific, I risk showing someone else my idea and having them “beat me to the punch.”
Pros: Sticks to one story, but provides additional motivation.
Cons: May make the first result seem too weak.

I apologize if this post is nonspecific, but I imagine others have faced this problem in their relative fields. How did you resolve this dilemma? I realize I have to figure out the answers myself, but how did you figure out the answers to these questions when you were facing this dilemma yourself?

Thank you.

Many academics believe peer review is a black box and needs transparency. The theme of this years peer review week is transparency and is meant for getting academics opinions around issues with current peer review process.
What do you think? What would you do if the jnl you review for states it will publish your review alongside accepted paper. What will you say if the jnl asks your consent to reveal your identity? Please mention your subject area in your answer

I need to provide “doctoral level research” in order to stay in my current PhD program. Although I haven’t got an undergraduate or masters thesis from before, I have some experience with that level of research (far from publishable).

I also have a year-long exposure to literature in my chosen topic. Now I need to bring an original idea into the stream of literature from a broad area (decision making). For that I should further narrow down on a question, and I had trouble identifying an advisor.

How can I better assess my methods and self-prepare to propose a PhD level research plan? Would you suggest some steps and resources to guide my search towards a specific, targeted question?

Thanks for taking the time to read, I will have a group review my progress upon proposal but they will not guide me until I shape the proposal targeted to eventually become publishable research.

Many academics believe peer review is a black box and needs transparency. The theme of this years peer review week is transparency and is meant for getting academics opinions around issues with current peer review process.
What do you think? What would you do if the jnl you review for states it will publish your review alongside accepted paper. What will you say if the jnl asks your consent to reveal your identity? Please mention your subject area in your answer

I have several ideas for research that I believe would advance our understanding of psychological priming. It won’t involve anything extreme – just reading non-offensive words on a screen.

But I have only a bachelor’s degree. Will that preclude me in anyway from doing research of this type, and publishing?

I know I’ll have a greater challenge finding participants, and designing the experiment, and correctly formatting my paper without guidance, etc. I can work with that.

But is it even possible to get IRB approval without being affiliated with a university?

Is there any way that my current affiliation status will formally prevent me from going forward?

I am a amateur biotech enthusiast not affiliated with any university or institution. I recently wrote a Review article about animals that are (more) resistant to cancer (blind mole rats, naked mole rats, elephants, bowhead whales, etc). I want to publish it in a peer-reviewed oncology journal, but before this, where can I find someone to proofread this article for free?

I have some questions regarding developing an academic journal. We produce a comprehensive annual scientific data report once a year. We are looking for a way of making our report data more accessible through online bibliographic services. We are exploring the possibility of developing our annual report as a journal published by us and containing articles that contain the data findings of the annual report. Our annual report is already peer reviewed and the articles are written by different authors, so we see we can at least fulfil Pubmed’s journal criteria if we were to adapt it into a journal. However, we do not want to open the journal to external manuscript contributions as this would stretch us beyond capacity! Basically, we want to produce an annual journal containing articles on the annual report only. So, I was wondering if anyone could tell me if this would constitute a journal? And if you know of any journals that have developed from an annual report and are dedicated to only producing journal articles based on this content? Any advice, guidance and/or suggestions would be very much appreciated.

I have a proposal for a comparative literature paper that I hope to publish and/or include in some form in my dissertation. I’m discussing a wide variety of texts in my article, but the primary focus is on two novels. I’ve been planning to build upon the central thesis of one academic, but not especially well-known author’s argument in my own paper to an extent.

I later realized that this author has coincidentally published another article that focuses on the same two primary texts that I’m writing about. Although the author’s argument in this other paper is largely different from mine, and I’ll certainly cite them if any of our ideas sound similar, would it be in poor form to analyze the same two texts that this author has written about?

I am about to submit a 3.000 words article. It needs to be submitted soon, and I will have to submit it, but I know that I could flesh this out much more, and arrive at something with around 7.000-10.000 words, if I had more time. However, the basic idea would remain the same. It would be much more detailed, but I would not be making a completely different point.

Could I publish the 3.000 words article in journal A (if accepted), and then later this year publish the 8.000 words version in journal B?