Our books

Become a Fan

« Defending tenure at KU | Main | How many conferences is too many? »



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


I don't know what the editors think, but as an author, I have managed to get my papers published in the journals that have rejected my previous submissions (sometimes desk-rejected).

One thing I have noticed though. I have a feeling it is a bit easier to get a paper in a journal if you have already published in that journal.

So while previous rejections might not indicate future rejections, previous acceptances might get you past the desk rejection stage somewhat easier!

Douglas W. Portmore

Many journals are triple-blind such that the editor learns of the identity of the author only if (and only after) the submission is accepted. All the journals that I've been an associate editor for have practiced triple-blind review. So, in my experience, this doesn't happen and couldn't happen.

Dan Weiskopf

My hope is that no editor would think that what the reader describes is even remotely appropriate. At BJPS submissions are triply anonymized, so I as an Associate Editor don't know who the authors are of papers that I am handling. This system removes the opportunity for editors to take out their grievances on authors. All journals should adopt similar practices.

Overseas Tenured

In my experience it's more what the first comment describes. Certain journals just seem to "like" me more than other journals of similar prestige. Perhaps it has to do with editorial taste, the referees usually being used for a topic, or something like that.

Peter Furlong

Douglas Portmore's comment makes me curious: is there any database that collects the editorial practices of journals, such as whether they are triple-blind reviewed? I have seen other information collected on journals (usually submitter-reported data on time to decision and rejection rates), but I don't recall seeing this.


Peter Furlong: there is the crowdsourced philosophy journals Google Docs spreadsheet

Joona Räsänen


I have collected such info (among other relevant things regarding journals). The file that can be read and downloaded at my academia.edu page.


I've had an editor at a leading journal make it quite explicit he could see past rejections: having "looked at your recent pattern of submissions over the last twelve months... It may be time for you to consider setting your sights lower and giving...[Journal Name Redacted] a rest."

This wasn't a particularly nice message to receive: but still useful to know!

Assistant Professor

@Andrew - that is a striking remark from an editor, and must have been disappointing to receive. It makes me wonder about the pace at which one submits to a given journal. I can't think of many instances where I have multiple polished new works to keep submitting to the same journal within any given 12 month period. It makes me wonder about a more general questions about the time it takes to get any single article ready for submission, and being responsive to the fit of an article with a journal's mission, topical interests, style, etc.

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