I've been working in a lab for more than 3 years and during this time I have worked on several projects. I have collaboration works too. Most of my projects have been submitted recently. For example, I have finished a project a year ago but it got so many corrections from the supervisor that it took a year to be submitted. Side by side I finished another project. Now, while upgrading my CV, I see so many 'submitted' projects. Will it make a negative impact on the Ph.D. admission committee thinking that my work might be substandard? Or is it ok to include all the projects that I have worked on and still working? (almost 6/7)

P.S. All my published works have been published in good journals till now.

  • 3
    Of course submitted papers are not counted the same a published papers. But as long as you have enough published papers, do not worry about having too may submitted papers. – GEdgar Jan 8 at 18:59
  • About how many manuscripts are we talking? I can imagine that an excessive listing of submitted papers could appear a little off. – lighthouse keeper Jan 9 at 13:30

I have been on tons of search committees for faculty members, and I would never look at this in a negative light.

A submitted manuscript doesn't mean it is substandard work. Conversely, I believe, it means you are an active researcher and have the ability to build a substantial research agenda.

I wouldn't worry about this in the least.

| improve this answer | |

It's pretty hard to imagine that it would be a problem. More is generally better. And the time to publication for a submission can be long. It seems better that you keep working and submitting rather than waiting for one to complete the process.

It shows you are active. Always a good thing.

| improve this answer | |
  • I have heard people getting rejected because they were too good. Mentality here is, even if we make an offer to this person, he/she will most likely have a better option and decline us. Instead, lets make a faster offer to "lesser" candidates and not risk losing them on time. – Boaty Mcboatface Jan 8 at 20:59
  • 1
    Hmmm. You have heard from very stupid people, I think. "Mentality" is questionable. "Lack of" maybe better. There is little cost of making an offer except time, and you can control that pretty well. – Buffy Jan 8 at 21:05
  • I previously recieved a good offer but I was asked to reply in a short time (around a week). Meanwhile, I was waitlisted for another program. The first offer extended only an additional 3 days which was not sufficent. I have contacted both parties but find a working compromise. In short, I was strongarmed into making a decision without knowing all the options which I did not appreciate. I don't think anyone would like to be treated that way. – Boaty Mcboatface Jan 8 at 21:23
  • @BoatyMcboatface, True enough. But not making you an offer at all would probably have been worse. – Buffy Jan 8 at 21:26
  • I am not too good nor never will be :). I am just saying the time element is not very easy to control. Allegedly my department gets a lot of very good post-doc applications. Then they almost always refuse the offer. Hence, I believe the department has a policy of making some offers to candidates more likely to come. I have heard a similar mindset was in use in an "almost top tier" school for phd applications. – Boaty Mcboatface Jan 8 at 21:42

"Submitted manuscripts" count less, but are still viewed favorably. Uploading these to a preprint server and stating the preprint number is a plus.

The only thing that could look strange are too many "manuscripts in preparation": a committee might wonder if you finish in time what you started.

| improve this answer | |

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.