Asking an editor for an update because you're on the market?

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

Is it unwise to sending a polite email to an editor to inquire about the status of a manuscript with minor revisions? I am going to be on the job market this year, and deadlines are coming very soon. Given the very short turnaround time that they allotted me for the revisions, I was hoping the journal would also be relatively swift with the decision. However, the paper has been sitting at "editor assigned" for a few weeks. Given the real benefit that another publication would add to my dossier (if it were to be accepted before job deadlines), should I reach out? If it's relevant, the revisions requested were indeed minor and mostly took the form of suggestions (rather than actual objections).

Hmm...while I understand the temptation to do this, my guess is that's probably best to let the process play out in the normal way, and avoid inquiring unless the journal has had it an inordinately long time (i.e., many months). Maybe the editor would be sympathetic if you explained the situation, but on the other hand, some might be irked by what they might perceive to be a request for special treatment (compared to the normal review process). But I'm pretty cautious with things.

What do other readers think?

Comments

[market stuff]

My feeling is that a lot depends on how long it's been. A few weeks doesn't feel long enough to me. Also, I think it's pretty widely understood that a request for minor revisions is a very strong sign; I don't know if it means guaranteed acceptance, but maybe 90% chance of acceptance? If so, if you list the manuscript as having received that verdict on your market materials it will look very good to hiring committees, maybe nearly as good as a forthcoming manuscript.

[recent hire]

I often check after around 6 months, and always received courteous responses. Once it happened to me that a paper had genuinely fallen under the table, as an editor left the journal and the paper didn’t get reassigned. Such cases are the only ones where inquiring has possible positive outcome, I think. A few weeks is way too early to consider this possibility, though.

I have in the past listed papers under review on my CV, and indicated R&R or conditional acceptance status, including the name of the journal. I think that’s fair, and I know that hiring committees take such information into account.

[best to wait]

I agree with market stuff above. List it in an "under review" section, clearly indicate the status as something like "received minor R&R decision, revised and resubmitted on DATE, currently back under review".

Also, the APA encourages deadlines to cluster around Nov. 1. This means there is a solid amount of time for your final decision to still come in for lots of deadlines.

[JohnBons]

I would let the process play out unless it has been a really long time (like over 6 months). Editors are busy and shouldn't be concerned with the job market, as important as that is for some people. For the record, when I started my first job it took over two years to get a paper through review and accepted by the journal and there wasn't much to do except wait unfortunately.

[Ed Itor]

An article with minor revisions should turn around fairly quickly following resubmission. It's the start of the academic year in a lot of places, so editors may be a bit busy. If the status has not changed from "editor assigned" after about a month from the initial change to that status, it would be worth contacting the editorial assistant at the journal (or the editor, if assistant isn't an option) to make sure that the editor in fact got the article. As another commentator notes, sometimes articles fall through the cracks, whether due to a missed notification or an overaggressive spam filter.

As a journal editor, I think that authors should be less afraid of contacting the editors. If it's been a few months since an update, or if the process seems to have stalled at an unusual point (e.g. editor assigned), it is worth contacting the journal to make sure that the paper is still being dealt with.

[Bill V.]

I agree with the general sentiments expressed by others. A point to add: If the status of the paper changes while your applications are being considered (a likely outcome given the description of the situation) you can email the search committees where you have applied to let them know that the paper has been accepted.

[yo]

When I was on the market, I did exactly what Bill V. mentioned (i.e., I updated a search committee as my paper's status changed) and I believe it helped them decide to invite me for a flyout.

[Brad Cokelet]

As another journal editor, I endorse this:

"I think that authors should be less afraid of contacting the editors."

A nice respectful "I realize you are busy but if you can give me any update I would appreciate it" email is not a bad idea. Not that many of these come in so far in my experience, so it is not annoying at all.

But odds are this will not speed up the process.

[academic migrant]

I had this weird experience where after a month, I emailed the editor, and the paper was with the associate editor the next day; and after another month, I emailed the associate editor, and the paper was under review the following week. So I guess people are busy, but would be reasonable when (politely) reminded.