<p><strong>Disclaimer</strong>: I realize this could be perceived as off-topic, but wanted to get perspectives from those directly in the field. If this question gets closed, I understand.</p>
<p>I've been investigating statistics journals to submit my work to (specifically, an application paper). Many journals are specialized, others quite general.</p>
<p>However, I've noticed that top journals in the field (<em>e.g.</em>, sub-journals of the <em>Journal of the Royal Statistic Society</em> (RSS)) generally exhibit the above traits. In many cases, the impact factor is less than 2. In certain cases, the time from submission to publication is 1.5-2 years in duration. In the majority of cases, the acceptance rate is ~10% or lower. Some of the most celebrated contributions to statistics have been published in this way. This trend has been previously investigated by van Nierop (2009) for example (Title: Why do statistics journals have low impact factors?). Interestingly, the <em>Journal of the American Statistical Association</em> (JASA) currently enjoys an impact factor of 3.7, but long times between submission and publication. A similar trend exists for <em>RSS Series B: Statistical Methodology</em>.</p>
<p>Long wait times appear to explain why impact factors are so low, but the association is not causal.</p>
<p>For important work, these trends can be discouraging. A solution however exists in the form of preprints to avoid potentially being &quot;scooped&quot;.</p>
<p>Could someone weigh in on this? CV has many seasoned statisticians who've likely served on journal editorial boards at some point in their career.</p>
<p><strong>Reference</strong></p>
<p>Van Nierop, E. (2009), Why do statistics journals have low impact factors?. Statistica Neerlandica, 63: 52-62. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9574.2008.00408.x" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9574.2008.00408.x</a></p>
