ABSTRACT
Publishers whose journals include both highly selective and less selective titles realise that it benefits both them and the authors if submissions rejected by one journal can be passed, along with the reviewer comments, to other journals in the group. The journal cascade offered by the publisher might be a bad strategy if the second journal in the group is much less suitable for the work than another journal from a different publisher. Journal choice is the single most important decision within the publication strategy. In a truly rational and scientific world, authors would sit down with a list of all available journals and information about all these variables and calculate the correct answer. Reputation or prestige is, by definition, a subjective judgement, of which the impact factor is an imperfect measure. Asking colleagues or people who work in the field what they think of different journals is probably more useful.
