Our books

Become a Fan

« Midweek Melodies | Main | Sunday Sounds »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Here's a hypothesis: Phil Studies publishes "better" papers (as measured by impact), on average, than the other four journals mentioned here precisely because it publishes *more* papers.

Corollary: Trying to keep a journal's acceptance rate low tends to lead to the publication of "worse" papers, on average.

The moral: journals should publish more papers.

Sam Duncan

I wonder how publishing in open access journals like Ergo or Philosophers' Imprint will affect citation rates? I know we don't have data going back too far since such journals haven't existed for too long, but I'd be very interested to see what the data looks like going forward. For a lot of us working at SLACs or community colleges we might not have access to that many journals and so if getting something involves an interlibrary loan or finding a way to jump a pay wall we might not read it unless we absolutely have to or it seems incredibly interesting (I'm speaking from personal experience here). People should remember that not every philosopher works at an R1 with enough money to get access to every journal. For that reason I think the field needs more open access journals.

Pendaran Roberts

The top 5 journals to my knowledge have excessive rejection rates (a few percent accepted). What kinds of papers make it through that over the top process? I'd suspect papers that don't do much original or don't do much anyone can complain about. In my experience referees are seldom charitable and only look for reasons to reject. They don't want the hassle of dealing with an R&R.

Philosophical Studies publishes far more and so must have loser standards. That very well may result in more interesting and contentious papers making it through. Any paper in philosophy worth reading, I suspect, must use contentious assumptions and set certain contentious aspects of what it is doing aside. The only way not to do this is to have a very narrow paper that few will care about and fewer will read.

So, I guess I'm basically agreeing with NK.

However, it's just a guess!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Job-market reporting thread

Current Job-Market Discussion Thread

Job ads crowdsourcing thread

Philosophers in Industry Directory