Updating search committees w/publications?

On Twitter, a philosopher asks:

Is it still relatively common practice/a good idea to email *every* job that you're still plausibly in contention for if you get a paper accepted that was previously listed as 'under review' in your cover letter? Is this advice at all department/program-specific, though? E.g., what Harvard might find 'desperate', a smaller state school/R2 might find appealing?

Good questions! Back when I was on the market, I seem to recall it being fairly standard to update committees with things like this. However, I don't know whether it is still something that candidates do or how well it comes off (does a new publication ever make a real difference with search committees?). What do you all think? It might be good to hear from candidates and (especially) search committee members here. Any helpful insights to share? Does the kind of school (R1, R2, SLAC, etc.) make any difference as to what to do?

Comments

[Search committee member (but not this year)]

What would make a bigger difference for me as a search committee member would be what your CV looked like before and after that acceptance. If it's your first or second publication, or in a much better venue than anything else on your CV, I'd definitely email. If it's your 5th, 6th, etc publication, and/or in a worse venue than other things on your CV, then I wouldn't email.

[Michel]

I think mostly not, unless you otherwise don't have any or you have one and this other one is in either Nous or Phil Review.

Otherwise, send an updated CV if you get an interview request.

[UK search committee member]

There's probably no harm to it. But for us one acceptance even in a prestigious venue rarely makes a difference at the longlisting stage. It may make a difference at the shortlisting stage, depending on the field of remaining candidates. Since as an applicant you cannot know what stage we're at and what the field looks like, it makes sense to update if you think it significantly improves your profile.

[Brandon Warmke]

Hiring committees at some universities, including mine, are forbidden by HR from considering new materials or information (e.g. informal notes of support for a candidate) after the application deadline. They see it as a matter of equity.

[Tim]

I think the topic of the publication is relevant as well. Suppose you claim you can teach topic X, but have not taught it and have no publications in it. Updating a committee with a note that you now have a publication in X might bolster your case.

[Jonathan Ichikawa]

I can imagine no possible downside to notifying the department. It does not strike me as remotely 'coming off as desperate'.

In many cases, it will make no difference, but I would not worry even slightly about whether it might make a department that would otherwise have hired you, not hire you.