7

In my field (economics), I see lots of scholars (some of them are famous in their field) putting their papers with the information (R&R at Journal X.).

I understand the fact that they try to transfer the signal that the paper in question has an academic quality but what happens if the paper gets a rejection after the third round of revision? Can it be worse for the reputation? So, what are the pros and cons to give the information like R&R or "conditionally accepted" for a paper in publication process?

  • 1
    I do it simply to track the status of my papers. If it gets rejected, then it goes back to 'Submitted'. If it progresses, then R&R followed by Accepted. – Prof. Santa Claus Apr 24 '18 at 6:15
6

In economics, the publication process takes a long time. The slow review process largely results form a slow review and a slow resubmission process. Because editors know that reviews are slow, they only send items to review or give an R&R if they think they have a good shot of being published in the journal. The fact that a paper was sent for review or given an R&R a particular journal means that it passes some bar of quality. This signal is important on a junior researcher’s CV. Noting a paper is under review also allows the CV reader to understand that the paper is fully written ( although of course there are other ways to note this).

There are few downsides to the researcher to noting that a paper is under review or has an R&R because It is such an established norm in the field. I would not hesitate to follow this norm if you are preparing your CV.

2

In essence, they're trying to get "credit" for the paper that's currently in the pipeline, by essentially asserting that in between the time when you read the CV and take action on it (i.e. when they show up if hired, etc.) the paper will be in the published literature.

Especially for things like revise and resubmit, there's a pretty strong chance that that's true.

The pros...should be obvious given that reasoning. You're essentially giving a preview of your upcoming academic productivity, for work that's already been done, but hasn't yet hit the presses. Especially for junior people, this can be very influential - the number of papers and your publication record can change drastically depending on whether or not you include papers currently in the pipeline.

The cons...are primarily rooted in "I don't believe you." For an R&R at Journal Name there's a degree of credibility, but occasionally across people who give a journal name for papers that are in submission, and often they pick very fancy journals. The fact that you know how to work the submission system for Nature doesn't tell me anything, and can put off an aura of either trying to goose your stats in a way that rings false, or just that you're hopelessly naive about the quality of your work and where it belongs.

  • I mostly see people, when the put "In submission" or "In review," they do it without giving a journal name - does that give you the same aura? – Azor Ahai Apr 23 '18 at 22:51
  • @AzorAhai No - it just tells me it’s started to make the rounds. That I generally have little objection to. – Fomite Apr 24 '18 at 0:10

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.