Would getting published as a co-author in a prestigious scientific journal (impact factor>35) be considered a hook in applications to top schools (Harvard, Yale, HPME, Stanford)? How much of a difference would it make?
Not sure it’s a hook but it’s a solid addition to your body of work
it is VERY impressive! it would make your application stand out for sure. it shows a high level of commitment, intellect, curiosity, etc that they are looking for. not too many students can say they’ve co-authored and published in a prestigious scientific journal.
I would not call it a hook (in that I don’t think it would get you into a college you are not otherwise qualified to attend), but it is a very nice accomplishment that could help you to stand out.
A hook is something you born with with the exception of being a recruited athlete (even then, you would have to be born with the right build to excel in a sport), which is only a hook for D1, D2, and a few D3 schools.
Anything you do is something that will help your chances, but it can not hook you. You either have had it since you were born, or you will never have it.
I don’t know whether it’d be a “hook” but it may get you extra attention. It’d depend on the AOs familiarity with the journal. The value may be enhanced, if your mentor (presumably a professor) were to submit a letter of recommendation, supporting your involvement in the research.
I don’t think that many HS kids have any idea how difficult it is to get published in a journal, before college applications must be submitted. I’m the first author of numerous journal publications, some of which took two years from submission of the first draft to appearance in the journal.
Here’s the process, as I know it. (I assume that it’s not peculiar to my field):
First, you obviously have to write and submit a high-quality draft of the paper to the journal.
Next, the associate editor must find qualified reviewers, who are willing to review your paper. Reviewers don’t get paid; they conduct their reviews whenever they can get around to it… IME, journals consider three reviews optimal, but editors sometimes will make do with just two, but never with only one.
Sometimes, the associate editor must wait up to six months for the reviews to come in. If they haven’t all been received by that time, the editor sends email to pester the reviewer(s) to get the work done. Sometimes, a reviewer then replies that he/she is too busy, and the editor has to go back to the drawing board and find another.
The editor then compiles the reviewer comments and sends them to you. (IME, the reviewers ALWAYS have pertinent comments and recommendations for changes. IME, no paper is ever accepted without a request by the editor for at least some revisions.) After you receive the comments, you must edit your draft to address the reviewer comments. If the reviewers strongly recommend that additional research be conducted, you have to go back and supplement what you’ve already done.
After you’ve finished editing your draft, you must send a letter to the associate editor, describing how you’ve specifically addressed each of the reviewer comments. Of course, you can reject the reviewer comments in your letter, but that may ruin your chances for publication.
The associate editor then decides if your paper has met the standards for publication. If so, it goes into the journal queue.
If you get this far, before you submit your college applications, you can at least state that your paper has been formally accepted for publication and you can state which journal. But you won’t be able to provide the journal edition number or the page numbers on which your paper appears.
Depending on the frequency of the journal editions (monthly? quarterly?) and depending on the depth of the queue of accepted papers, yours may not appear in print for many months after it has been accepted for publication.
FYI, a much faster route is to present your research paper at a conference. The review and acceptance of conference papers is generally much quicker than that for journals. IME, many conferences accept practically all papers submitted. This is because the organizers have slots that they must fill in the conference sessions and, at any rate, they need people to show up for the conference and pay the registration fee.
The downside is that you must attend the conference, which typically involves travel expenses. Alternately, your mentor can present your paper; professors have travel budget.
You can state in your college applications that your paper was presented at a conference, and you can cite the conference paper number. However, conference papers (at least in the technical community) don’t have the same cachet as journal papers, because of the higher standard for the journal peer review process.
How does it compare to being a Siemens Semifinalist/Finalist or ISEF?
^ Well, FWIW, there’s this CC thread:
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/20782743/#Comment_20782743
I forgot to qualify in #5 that all “prestigious” journals involve peer review which, as I pointed out, can be very time consuming. So, if you want to have your research paper accepted by a “prestigious” journal before RD college applications are due, you’ll probably have to have it completed NLT the first semester of your junior year.
Even though it’s not a traditional “hook” if you were first author on a paper in a journal with IF>35, I imagine that would be on par with recruited athlete. Middle author is still really impressive for a high schooler but by no means a slam dunk. There are kids doing equally, if not more rigorous research than you and won’t get to be middle author on a paper like that just because of the profs they happen to have in their area.