My question is about including reference writer information in the CV as an applicant.

If a particular reference has lots of illustrious titles (ex: Fellow of the Royal Society), should those be included to add weight?

The is particularly important because the person is not in my exact sub-field and hence many in my sub-field may not recognize him by name.


1 Answer 1


What's typical for CVs I've seen (in math, mostly in the US) is:

  1. Not listing references

  2. Listing names and affiliations, and possibly some basic professional information (contact info, job title/rank)

Honestly I don't remember much about what people exactly listed in 2 because 1 is much more common nowadays and I don't really pay attention to that section anyway.

Even if someone is not in my exact sub-field, if they're a big shot in a nearby area I've probably heard of them. Or if I see they're at a top university or have some sort of distinguished professor demarcation on their letter, I'll guess that they are a top researcher. Conversely, if no one reading your letters has heard of your letter writers, it's not going to make a difference if one of your references is a Fellow of Hoity-Toity Toithoiters.

So my suggestion is don't include such titles as (1) it's not standard (at least in my experience), and (2) it will start to look silly listing loads of titles for references.

You must log in to answer this question.

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