When an author gets all fairly positive referee reports (acceptance, conditional acceptance) on a manuscript, but the editors decide not to accept it, what kind of explanation, if any, is it reasonable for the author to expect? (more…)
What’s involved in converting a journal’s editorial practices from single- or double-anonymous review to triple-anonymous review? (more…)
“We argue that when an author’s work is published, the author should thank the reviewers whose comments improved the paper regardless of whether those reviewers’ journals rejected or accepted the work.” (more…)
By request, here is a post for people to share their journal “horror stories.” (more…)
“How to self-cite without giving away your identity? I’ve seen two ways of doing it over the years. One is great, and one is really frustrating. We should all stop doing the frustrating one.” (more…)
How should you respond to requests to referee papers that are mainly about your own work? (more…)
About four years ago in a post about getting credit for refereeing articles, I mentioned Publons, a site that allows you to “track your publications, citation metrics, peer reviews, and journal editing work in a single, easy-to-maintain profile.” (more…)
In the following guest post*, Felix Bender (CEU / Amsterdam) surveys some proposed solutions to our current time-consuming, backed-up, overcrowded system of publishing academic articles, as well as some problems with them, before offering up an interesting solution of his own. (more…)
A graduate student in philosophy writes in with the following query:
The following is a guest post* by John Greco, who is currently Leonard and Elizabeth Eslick Chair in Philosophy at Saint Louis University, but will soon be taking up the McDevitt Chair in Philosophy at Georgetown University. It first appeared at The Philosopher’s Cocoon.
A philosopher wrote in to share a lesson she learned recently. (more…)
I appreciate the responses, here and elsewhere, to my idea of using stakeholder refereeing as an alternative to the pseudonymous authorship policy planned by the Journal of Controversial Ideas. (more…)
“If philosophers are serious about improving the way their journals function, they need to consider not only how to improve the mechanics of the reviewing process, but also how to improve the way they criticize one another.”
Should graduate students be called upon to serve as referees for journals? I was stunned a few years back to learn of the growing use of graduate students to serve as referees—stunned until I remembered the (arguably) over-publishing practice of our profession. But now the practice of enlisting grad-student referees—to my limited and aging eyes—appears to be g..
The Blog of the APA is launching a new project to collect and share data on the experiences philosophers have had with academic journals, including information about each journal’s “average review time, time to publication, acceptance rates, comments per submission” and related qualities. (more…)
Jonathan Weisberg, associate professor of philosophy at the University of Toronto and managing editor of Ergo, notes that by the time a paper is published in one journal, it has likely made the rounds at a few others, and hence has been reviewed by several people whose opinions on it are not publicly available. These people have already “thought about strengths and..
Here is something that happens in the world of academic philosophy publishing: (more…)
The refereeing of academic papers in philosophy has its share of problems. Is one of them ideological policing? That is an allegation made by Dan Demetriou (University of Minnesota, Morris) in regards to an article he co-authored with a student, Michael Prideaux. (more…)
Is there a burgeoning movement in philosophy to avoid for-profit journals?
A professor of philosophy writes:
I’ve now met over twenty-five junior and/or rising senior (e.g., assistant to early associate) faculty around the globe who are adopting a new policy towards journal refereeing. I don’t know whether there’s some sort of “movement” along these lines, but..
The following is a guest post* by Aaron Garrett, associate professor of philosophy at Boston University. Professor Garrett recently became editor of the History of Philosophy Quarterly and asked if we could open up a discussion about reforming various aspects of article refereeing. I encourage people to contribute to the discussion and share their experiences and co..
Three professors have published a brief guide to refereeing papers. Though based in business schools, Jonathan Berk (Stanford), Campbell Harvey (Duke), and David Hirshleifer (UC Irvine) have produced a document that provides good general advice for referees across the disciplines.
The main job of the referee is not:
1) To help write the paper ..
The reason your paper is listed as ‘editor assigned’ is that I’m going to review it myself.
In the wake of the recent discussion here about the editorial practices at philosophy journals, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa (UBC) recounts a story, set about five years ago, in which he submitted a paper to a journal with a policy of double-anonymous reviewing—Philosophic..