What to do as an author when a paper takes forever to go into print?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

What is it permissible to do in light of an accepted paper taking very long to actually reach print?

I have a paper, that was accepted in April last year, but is still "Awaiting Production Checklist". I haven't heard from the journal since it was accepted, and looking through the journal website, it seems like lots of paper take a long time from acceptance to being published online even though they have an online first publication model. (As a side note, there seems to be no pattern as to when accepted papers are published - some accepted more recently than mine have been published, others accepted even longer ago have only just been published - what is going on here?)

My problem is that I want this paper published (not just accepted) so that others might read it, and because I think the arguments could be quite important for the field. I'm also early career, and it would help with my name recognition - I'm also somewhat worried someone might scoop me even though the paper has been accepted.

I have the paper on my website, but I would like it to show up on philpapers and google scholar, so that people can find it. Is there a way of doing this? Alternatively, is it acceptable to upload the paper as a pre-print somewhere (i.e. SSRN) even though the paper has been accepted?

Good questions. I know a lot of people upload preprints to PhilPapers, and I try to do this whenever possible--but I also know that some publishing contracts allow this and others don't. Some contracts only allow one to post preprints on a personal website, for example, others allow the posting of preprints on not-for-profit archives but not for-profit sites (like academia.edu), etc. So, I guess I'd recommend reading one's publishing contract as a first-step.

On the other hand, I've heard some people say that they just ignore publishing contracts, on the grounds that they don't feel any duty to meet contractual obligations with large for-profit publishing companies and are unlikely to get in any trouble for it. Personally, I tend to think that if I sign an agreement, I should uphold it--but I will admit that it is frustrating, as it can probably prevent one's papers from being as widely read as they might if one were to post preprints.

Anyway, I'm curious to hear what other people think. Any thoughts/tips for the OP?

Comments

[Brad]

The author can add it to Philpapers ... there is no problem there ... That is they can give all the info: title, journal, etc. Even post the abstract. Interested readers will just ask for a copy. I know I do this.

[Circe]

Yep--just upload to PhilPapers. I have to say, I have increasingly bad luck with journals on this front. In my view, there is less a refereeing crisis than a production crisis. Philosophers Imprint, Thought, American Philosophical Quarterly, Ergo, and more... All of these took months and months to publish my accepted papers--in one case, well over a year from acceptance to publications!

[Joona Räsänen]

Keep asking the editor what is going on. And never submit the journal again.

[Getting pragmatic about it]

Two thoughts:

1. Put the preprint on philpapers. Do you really read the fine print? Has there _ever_ been a case where an author has gotten in trouble, beyond having to remove something?

2. The delay might be a good thing, because now you have two distinct chances to promote the paper—the acceptance and the (temporally distinct) publication!

[Only slightly ashamed]

I've never even read the publishing contract for a paper. Just post it. You're more likely to be struck by lightning than hit with a lawsuit.

[Michel]

Note that you needn't even archive a draft to list it as 'forthcoming' on PhilPapers.

[Postdoc]

To add to this: if you list your paper on PhilPapers, you can also link to it. That is, you can host a PDF on your own personal site and add a link to PhilPapers that sends people to that PDF. This might be a way of obeying the letter of your publishing contract, if it's one of the restrictive ones. (I will say, though, that unlike Marcus, I tend to think we as researchers are morally obligated *not* to respect the terms of these kinds of publishing contracts.)