Warning: fopen(/home/virtual/kcse/journal/upload/ip_log/ip_log_2024-05.txt): failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 100 Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 101 Follow the rule

Follow the rule

Article information

Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):175-177
Publication date (electronic) : 2019 July 16
doi : https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.166
Department of Anatomy, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea
Correspondence to Min Suk Chung dissect@ajou.ac.kr
Received 2019 February 26; Accepted 2019 May 9.

My emotions are sometimes reflected in my evaluations of manuscripts that were submitted to academic journals. This is particularly notable when the manuscripts do not follow the submission guidelines. In my annoyance, my evaluation is often written in a very harsh tone that can make the authors angry as well. I am not the only one who does this—renowned scientists do this as well. Rules are rules.

When writing the discussion section of an article, we should distinguish the ally from the enemy. The ally is other studies that support ours, and the enemy is other studies that are against ours. In discussion, it is important to skillfully approach both the ally and the enemy. In most cases, we compliment the ally to an adequate level and criticize the enemy to an equivalent level.

Scientists and soldiers have another thing in common. Scientists and soldiers do not participate well in democracy. Officer orders soldiers like professor orders graduate students. Of course, professor and students can debate with each other. However, the final decision is made by the professor. Democracy is good, but it is not always useful.

When you meet many people and exchange business cards, a situation like the one in the second panel may happen. This type of mistake should be avoided. Therefore, you had better sort out irrelevant business cards and put them in a place that is hard to accidentally grab, like placing dangerous reagents out of reach.

In the second panel, the wife will be under the impression that she is inferior to the other woman. What good comes from hurting the wife’s pride? In the fourth panel, the editor-in-chief will believe that his/her journal is not as good as other journal. What good comes from hurting the editor-in-chief’s pride? Pride is important for everyone.


Conflict of Interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.


This research was financially supported by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE) and Korea Institute for Advancement of Technology (KIAT) through the International Cooperative R&D program (grant no. N0002249).

Article information Continued