I am a mathematician and am updating my CV for this hiring season. I am wondering if there is any upside, or downside, to listing the journals of submitted papers on a CV. I have heard advice given in both directions on this issue.

  • I don't understand. Do you mean attaching a list of journals that have published your paper on top of your own bibliography? Oct 30, 2013 at 22:55
  • 1
    I assume Anonymous is talking about papers that are submitted, but not yet accepted.
    – gerrit
    Oct 30, 2013 at 23:06
  • In my field we don't tend to use preprint archives like ArXiv so there is no way to let people know about articles that are currently under review. For fields that use ArXiv I don't see why you wouldn't just list the preprint.
    – StrongBad
    Oct 31, 2013 at 9:19

1 Answer 1


Opinions differ on this issue. The advantage of listing where you have submitted the paper is that it gives a clue as to how good you think the paper is. If you submit to the Annals of Mathematics, then you are suggesting it's a wonderful paper. If you submit to Advances in Pure Mathematics (not to be confused with the reputable journal Advances in Mathematics), then you might as well have generated your paper using random text. Listing this information gives you a tactful way to indicate what you consider to be your best work even before it is published, and this may be helpful to someone who wants to take a look at your papers but has only a little time.

On the other hand, submission is not nearly as meaningful as acceptance, because you are a biased judge of your own work. Furthermore, you could deliberately submit to an unrealistically prestigious journal just for the purpose of writing "submitted to the Annals".

Listing the journals can also come across as presumptuous, like you believe the papers will obviously be accepted and you are already bragging about the presumed outcome.

I'd recommend against it. I think the benefits are small, and it's not worth the risk of looking arrogant or manipulative. On the other hand, it's something people sometimes do, and it doesn't seem to do them much (if any) harm, so if you like the idea I don't think it would be a big mistake.

  • 1
    It depends. In theoretical computer science, it happens that full versions of a few papers that received high review scores at a conference are invited for submission to a (special issue of a) journal. In that case, it seems common practice to list such invitations before the outcome of the journal submission is known. (In all likelihood, an invited paper will be accepted anyway...) Oct 31, 2013 at 1:45
  • 1
    @somewhere_over_the_rainbow: Good point. In those cases perhaps one should highlight the external validation by writing "invited to the Conference Name special issue of..." rather than just "submitted to...". Oct 31, 2013 at 1:55
  • I would also make a difference between submitted papers and papers under review. For the first category, the journal is (almost) completely irrelevant, while it may be interesting in the second case (the journal has at least expressed some amount of interest). However, in general I do not think it is a good idea, for the reasons you list. Oct 31, 2013 at 12:05
  • @AnonymousMathematician I would (and do) write "Invited and submitted to..." or "Submitted by invitation to...", since "invited" does not imply that you actually submitted.
    – JeffE
    Nov 1, 2013 at 7:12

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .