Philosophers Available To Referee
Some people are asked to referee papers for philosophy journals way too much. Others are asked less frequently.
And among those who are asked less frequently are some who would referee more, if asked.
(For some data on how much refereeing philosophers do, see this post.)
Since the dearth of available referees is one factor that clogs up journal publication in philosophy, I thought I’d do what I can to put the underutilized in touch with the undersupplied.

So below, and also here, is a color-coded spreadsheet, “Philosophers Available to Referee” to which philosophers can add their names.
If you would like to make it known that you’re generally available to referee, and you have a PhD in philosophy (or in another field yet some of your research has been published in philosophy journals) or you’re a current PhD student who has completed all of their coursework, please add yourself to it. (On the topic of whether graduate students should referee, see this.)
INSTRUCTIONS:
- Make sure you have a PhD in philosophy (or, if your PhD is in another discipline, that some of your writing has appeared in philosophy journals) or that you’re a current PhD student who has completed all of their coursework. (If not, please do not add your name to the spreadsheet.)
- On the next available dark gray row, overwriting the existing labels, type your name, areas of specialization, website (if you have one), and email address in the appropriate columns. There’s also a “keywords” column if you want to add specific topics within your areas of specialization.
- Click the row number at the left of the row in which you’ve just entered your information to select it, and then click the “fill color” button. From the row of “standard colors,” select green if you’re currently available to complete a referee report and can get it done within three weeks, or select red if you are temporarily unavailable (for whatever reason). It will be your responsibility to update your availability.

I’m not asking for any further organization of the spreadsheet (such as alphabetization, or groupings by areas of specialization); people can simply use the search function (Ctrl-F/Command-F) to find things on it.
OK, let’s see if this works.
UPDATE: Google has notified me that the spreadsheet is no longer publicly accessible as it was reported for some reason. I’ve appealed the complaint, and with luck it will be back up soon.
Here’s the spreadsheet:
Hi Justin,
I was just thinking about a similar problem earlier today, but with a slight difference. I enjoy reading & providing feedback on early drafts of papers in my AOSes, but I don’t get asked very often at a department where nobody really works on adjoining areas. And, on the other hand, I wanted feedback on a paper in what for me is somewhat of a new area, but haven’t spoken to anyone who worked on it since a conference a few years ago. What do you think of the idea of adding a column to note those who are happy to give general feedback on draft papers in their area, regardless as to whether it’s a formal referee request?
Have you considered making it possible for people in closely adjacent fields to philosophy–or certain AOS’s–to sign up? Maybe by adding a new column to list what people’s PhDs are in, for those whose PhD is not specifically in philosophy?
What if a PhD student is still in the midst of their coursework at their current program but has a master’s degree in philosophy from another institution (and so has already completed the coursework required of PhD students at that other institution)? Asking for a friend.
Good idea! Hope it helps.
I find it odd to encourage people who have not completed their PhD to sign up for this. A referee is supposed to be an expert on the topic. I think the best indicator of this is that the person has published a paper (or a few) on the topic. Referees are not just enthusiastic people who want to enter the profession. They are supposed to be well-positioned to evaluate a manuscript for its argument, originality, etc. Of course, someone who has not completed a PhD may have published. But the salient feature is the fact that they have published. So, perhaps you should ask people to only “sign up” for areas in which they have published.
It would be fantastic if PhilPeople could add an “available to review” property for each individual, with their existing search augmented by this in combination with AoS’s. This spreadsheet is a great first step and I hope we end up with a community-wide solution like PhilPapers is for manuscripts.
This is a great idea. My rule is that for every referee report I receive, I owe one back to the community. I owe a few back, so I’m happy to have a place to share my availability ~
I have said this before, and I should develop the chops to do it myself. But with access to the PhilPapers data, it should be possible to take a manuscript draft, generate some keywords, and then generate a list of potential referees from the PhilPapers data and those keywords. That would not unearth really new to the discussion people. But it would help unearth _some_ people.
The downside is that I am already being contacted by people who want me to review papers–I only want journal referrals.
What are journal referrals?
It may also be helpful to have a database one can use to indicate in a central place one is temporarily not available for review. I am about to start an 8-9 month parental leave. I don’t intend to check my work email during that time, but feel bad for all the review processes that will be delayed by non-response (as I don’t think out-of-office notes are usually registered)
Rather than helping to ease or remove the structural problems in philosophy, this initiative functions merely as a sticking plaster, helping to entrench the neoliberal grip in academia. What is needed is a rethink of the influence of market forces in academia and in philosophy.
I am available for refereeing, but the form does not work.
What happened to the link?