I'm in a discipline where it is common to make preprints publicly available on arXiv as soon as they're ready to be submitted to a journal, so naturally I list them on my CV. Before the review comes in I would just list the paper as "Preprint" and after it's been officially accepted I would list it as "To appear in XYZ". I wonder what is the best course of action between those two states, that is, after the paper has received positive reviews but there are still corrections to be applied and it has not been officially accepted (but I'm willing to bet that it will be). Is it reasonable mention that the paper is "Submitted to XYZ" in such a case? That has the benefit of providing more complete information, and is definitely a statement that I can justify if pressed. Or is it always preferable to stick with "Preprint" until officially accepted?

  • See a related answer here
    – J. Tylka
    Dec 3 '19 at 13:51

No, do not list the journal you submitted it to. Frankly, it means nothing: anyone can submit anything to any journal.

Of course, you want to your CV to accurately reflect how much work you've been doing lately, but there's always a chance that the paper gets rejected in the in-between phase. A good enough compromise is to just post the arXiv info, when it was revised (this reflects that it's been recently reviewed), and perhaps "Accepted." Once you get the proofs, you can change to "To appear in [Journal]."

  • Sure, technically it’s true that “anyone can submit anything to any journal”, but I doubt that’s really true in practice. So I think indicating that you’ve submitted it somewhere is a little more significant than you’re making it seem. In any case, the OP states that the article has received reviews already, so the paper is not just “submitted”, but it’s “under review”, which I think is a rather significant category. Besides, to get to this point, the editor has agreed to review it since it’s a good enough fit for the journal, and reviewers have not rejected since it’s apparently decent work
    – J. Tylka
    Dec 3 '19 at 13:48
  • 1
    I've seen enough cases of people submitting crap (myself included) to good journals; there's never a reason to mention what journal you've submitted your work to until that journal is ready to publish it, otherwise you risk deception. In any case, the second part of my answer addresses the OP's specific concern.
    – user108403
    Dec 3 '19 at 14:44
  • There is a difference between "submitted" and "under review". Especially for the highest profile journals like Nature and Science the transition from the former to the latter means that an editor deemed that it looks important enough to be sent out for review. I thus disagree that this does not contain any information. The real question is whether this information is worth mentioning at the risk that someone will think of it as inappropriate. I personally think it's fine to use and many people naturally do so. Dec 3 '19 at 18:50
  • Additionally, it could be seen as trying to leech off the journal's reputation.
    – user115868
    Dec 3 '19 at 19:33

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