Practices for listing "online first"/forthcoming papers on a CV?

A reader writes in,

Has PC done anything, or have you heard much, on citation practices on a CV for forthcoming work? For instance, does one cite a current-year paper that doesn’t yet have a volume and page numbers assigned always as “forthcoming,” or as the year (without page #s/volume), or whichever they wish? Wondering if there is something like a consensus in the profession, or some indication from the APA or Chicago Manual of Style, etc. People I’ve asked leave it as "forthcoming.” Thank you!

I think we may have discussed this before, but frankly I've always found it terribly confusing myself. For example, I've had papers "published Online First" with journals several years before they are assigned to an issue. In one sense, the paper has already been published (there it is on the journal's website, formatted and everything!), but in another sense it's still "forthcoming." So, how should one list it on a CV for the job-market, tenure and promotion, or in an annual performance review? 

Is there any consensus on this?

Comments

[UK Grad Student]

I use APA formatting, and I've read that APA advise adding the phrase "Advance online publication" at the end of the citation (i.e., in lieu of the volume and page numbers). So this is what I do. But I'm happy to be corrected.

[Assistant Professor]

I think the CV is the most straightforward place to handle this - You can include the year it went "online" first as the year and in the space of the volume/page number can do what UK Grad Student says and indicate it is online ahead of print.

The harder place to figure out what to do (in my view) is in citing the work. If you are citing it online/ahead of print then you clearly only have one option. But once it is out there getting citations with this year attached to it, do you keep citing it with this year or do you update it to the "print" year once it is in print?

Maybe the answer is that it is not simply that big a deal. But it also seems like if your work gets uptake and is being cited in the literature then it can be odd to have to date the publication *after* other publications have come out citing to the work.

[facts]

It is fine to list Online first papers as Forthcoming, and then just include the link to the website on your c.v. There are contexts where you should not mislead about the on-line first status. For example, my university does annual publication counts, and on-line first does not cut it. The librarians who check this information will remove from the list of publications until it is in a print issue. Similarly, at some schools, you cannot expect to list it in a document where you request a merit raise if it is not IN PRINT.

[Caligula's Goat]

In my view, and practice, if it's officially published then it's officially published. I also always fill my CV with hyperlinks that take people to each article's location (or to the edited collection's website for chapters in those volumes).

I say this as a tenured professor who's been on many search committees. What I don't want is to be fooled (i.e., people making book reviews look like articles or people making articles under submission to X journal look like publications in X journal). We're late into 2023, there isn't any distinction, in my view, between online and volume(issue) publishing in the same journal. Most people are going to access the online version in either case.

[Bill Vanderburgh]

I interpret "online first" as "published". It is available for readers to download, it is in its final format, etc. Sticklers about "in print" are living in the past, IMO. Something like (published online DATE; expected in print DATE) is sufficient for a CV. For citation, use whatever the journal has available, or simply the DOI reference.

[Curious]

Do y'all think there is anything wrong with just saying "Forthcoming" until it is assigned an actual issue?

[doesn't matter much but include DOI if you can]

@Curious
No, but definitely include the DOI if available.