Our books

Become a Fan

« When do search committees return to long-lists? | Main | Using PhilPeople features to find referees? »



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


This might be naïve, and I am only putting together my first edited collection now, but it strikes me that the answer is simpler than it seems. Volume editors are not algorithms, they are people, they are philosophers, they are scholars who want to produce the best volume they can, given their constraints. Just write them a polite, persuasive, and very brief email. Depending on publisher and other technicalities, an editor may be able to squeeze in another short paper, they may not. They may feel like taking a risk that you will turn out to have something worth reading, they may not. In either case, a short email is worth the risk. The worst that can happen is they can ignore you, or say that the commitments they made do not allow for another essay. They will not resent your impudence and hold it against you for life. They will not blackball you from the profession. If you feel like you have something to contribute and you are not wasting anyone's time, just do it. It might cost you a week of waiting in vain for an answer. That's all.


What Karl said.

Bill Vanderburgh

To add another consideration: hiring and tenure committees almost always think of refereed journal articles as "worth" more than chapters in edited volumes. A junior scholar might be better off opting to publish in a journal anyway.


How about invited, but peer-reviewed journal articles? Where do they fit in all this?

Listen to Karl

What Karl said goes for most of the questions on this site, IMO.

Bill Vanderburgh

To anon's query, invited is generally less prestigious than non-invited, but if it is a refereed journal article it should still count significantly.

ex-PTC member

@Bill, I have to say my experience is that it depends. If a CV has lots of peer reviewed papers my sense is that a few invited pieces would make it stand out more (ah, this person is being recognised in their field!). If the CV has lots of invited pieces but few peer reviewed ones then I get suspicious, though (maybe this person can't get their papers through peer review, but is in the 'in crowd'?).

It's certainly right that generally speaking, peer reviewed pieces are worth more for junior scholars.

Also chiming in to echo Karl's very sensible sentiments.

Atypical Anon

What Karl said. I saw that an advertised Oxford handbook on X did not seem to address subtopic Y that might plausibly have been included . As an expert on Y, I wrote to the editor offering my services. He wrote back accepting my offer and saying in effect that he had been vaguely thinking go me but that his thoughts had not crystallised into action. (I put this down in part to my remote physical location. I had never met the editor in the flesh.) So now another paper in an OUP handbook. Not much help to younger folk perhaps, but I say ‘Give it a Go!’

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