Some members of our profession are referee superstars, being asked multiple times a week to referee papers for journals (and often saying ‘yes’), while others are well-qualified but unnoticed, and are almost never asked to referee. The result is that some philosophers have become unfairly overburdened, journal editors have been having increased difficulty finding referees in a timely fashion, desk rejections have gone up, and authors continue to wait and wait and wait.
One thing that might be helpful is to get some more prospective referees on the radar of busy editors. So, if you feel like you are not asked often enough to referee papers, enter your name and areas of specialization in a comment below (no need to include contact information if it is easy to find online elsewhere).
What is “often enough”? For the purposes of this post, we’ll leave that up to those deciding whether to add their names.
(Adding your name is not tantamount to saying ‘yes’ to any refereeing request that comes your way, of course.)
*Crickets* 🙂
That’s a fairly narrow specialization, though…would you consider other areas within the philosophy of entomology?
Is this a joke? I really can’t tell.
No, this is not a joke. I get Dale’s reaction, above, and it is certainly a possibility that that’s all we’ll get. But I do know people who believe they could be doing more refereeing but aren’t asked as frequently as they think they ought to, and I thought I’d try to open a space to get their names out there.
Editors have their go-to people and go-to methods but do, despite their best efforts, miss well-qualified possible referees, especially junior people in the profession. And editors don’t often have time to scroll through departmental webpages and PhilPapers and the like looking for additional names. I thought a list here could be a good start.
So, I get that. And I think I’m on board with what you’re trying to do. One issue is that those who believe they could be doing more reviewing might be hesitant to publically (or even privately) declare their desire to review. I feel a little dirty saying “Hey! I want to have more influence over what gets published!” But maybe I shouldn’t project my own discomfort onto everyone else.
As a new editor, I do appreciate the thought. It seems to me that one thing that would help is a change in the way that the ScholarOne website works. Right now, as far as I can tell, when I look for people with an interest in topic X, I only see people who have had some contact with Utilitas previously. If you have an interest in X, and you’ve already indicated this in the profiles that you have with multiple other journals but have no profile with Utilitas, then you’re not going to come up in my search. If I could do a search that would include the profiles of other journals, that would help me cast a much wider net. Maybe this capability is there and I just haven’t found it yet.
Even without the feature mentioned by David Chalmers below being functional yet, I’d think that searching Phil Papers would be a good idea here. It has a fairly good search system that would let you find people who have published on pretty much any topic you’re interested in.
Happy to help. AOS: PhilMind
Well after 15 years in the profession, I’ve probably sent out more papers than I’ve reviewed. So I’m in. (Areas: punishment, collective obligation and collective action, emotion, folk psychology/theory of theory of mind.)
philpapers will shortly be releasing a new service (philpeople, a database of philosophers), which will include special functionality for editors to search for referees in a certain area and for philosophers to declare themselves (in a way accessible only to editors) able and willing to referee papers in certain areas.
Are grad students qualified to be referees? I would love to do so in my area if I could – the more exposure and experience the better (or so I assume). That said, I assume the answer to my question is a big fat “No.”
In my experienced, if you’ve published in the area, being a grad student won’t deter people from asking.
Yes, plenty of grad students referee. If you send a paper to a journal, you’re not unlikely to be asked to referee for it in the future (even if the journal rejected your paper!). Also, plenty of referees are completely unqualified, as anyone who’s ever received referee reports can tell you.
Also happy to help. AOS: History of Analytic (esp. Logical Empiricism) and Phil Math.
I could also be doing more. Areas of particular interest: autonomy/action theory; human rights; group rights; dignity
Sure. AOS: Early Modern, esp. Descartes.
I love it.
I’m posting because I get asked a lot to referee by certain journals, and not at all by others. I’d be happy to ref for those other journals. I’m sure they could use the help as well. AOS: Metaphysics.
I’ll help out. AOS: 19th Century Philosophy, esp. Nietzsche
Quick, thorough reviews at bargain-basement prices!
AOS: Kant and German Idealism, Hermeneutics, Philosophy of Mind.
Put me in, coach. AOS: metaethics, moral psychology, classical Confucianism.
I’ve received far more referee reports than I’ve provided, so I would certainly be willing to do more. AOS: Applied Ethics (especially environmental ethics), Epistemology
I’m in, too… Some journals ask me two or three times a year, but I’d be happy to referee for others. AOS: Metaphysics & Philosophy of Language, esp. debates in philosophy of action; nature of truth.
I’ve written something about guidelines for referees – some advice from my 10 years as founding editor of the Journal of Moral Philosophy and reviewing for over 50 journals:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1719043
Great service, guys. I’m in.
AOS: 19th century philosophy, esp. Hegel and Kierkegaard.
Paul Henne: metaphysics (causation, fiction, nothingness) and moral psychology
AOS: Religion and nature; civil religion in America; philosophical theology
I am happy to (and probably should) do more. AOS: Philosophy of law, social political philosophy (both informed by critical theory)
Happy to help too. AOS: Philosophy of Law, Political Philosophy, and Applied Ethics.
I’d like the chance to review more. AOS: Ethical Theory, especially virtue ethics; practical reason and moral psychology
I get asked to review fairly regularly so I don’t feel like I’m being unfairly ignored but I really do enjoy getting the opportunity to read new work and see what folks with interests similar to mine are working on.
The above being the case, if any editors are getting articles about food systems, environmental justice, or consultation with marginalized communities (in instances relevant to development or the environment), please feel free to send a review request my way.
Still working the PhD, but fwiw: Ethics, esp. animal rights, political philosophy, and consciousness–esp. the weird panpsychism mess.