Thursday, February 10, 2011

Just Asking...

Do people think it's above board to list a 500 word book notice in a journal as a publication?

A slightly different question: Let's say you wrote by invitation a "book note" for Ethics (do they still run them?). Would that provide grounds for asserting in conversation that you'd "published a piece in Ethics?" I wouldn't think so-- it seems deceptive in the conversational context. But what do I know? Any views?

22 comments:

PO said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
PA said...

1. As long as you list it as a publication on your cv under the "review" subheading, it's fine.

2. It depends on the conversation. If you follow the assertion that you'd published a piece in Ethics with the admission that it was a book note -- or if you are disposed to do so -- then it's not deceptive at all. And if you make the assertion in response to someone else's arrogant bragging about where they've published, it is deceptive but wholly appropriate deception.

Anonymous said...

It is not. It's akin to, but slightly worse than, saying you gave an APA presentation when you gave a paper at the Society for the Study of Process Philosophies group meeting at the APA.

Andrew said...

I think PA is clearly right: list it under a "review" heading. Doing otherwise will likely raise eyebrows.

Anonymous said...

What if you published a discussion piece in Ethics? Discussion pieces often have titles that do not indicate they are discussion pieces. They are also often the length of a (short) paper. But the review process is slightly different (although not necessarily less demanding).

Can you just list it as a pub in Ethics?

Anonymous said...

I can't list 500-word book notes as "Articles"? That's my whole CV!

Anonymous said...

I just published a [rather short] piece in [a blog thread about] Ethics myself.

Anonymous said...

1. Yes

2. No.

English Jerk said...

1) Review-essays can certainly be substantive articles (e.g., Chomsky's review of Skinner's Verbal Behavior), but it's hard to imagine that a 500-word "book notice" would fit that description. So I'd second (or third) PA's judgment on that, unless it was a world-crushingly dense and original 500 words.

2) Someone who talks about how long something is or and about the venue in which it is published, rather than talking about the argument, either has nothing of value to say or would rather talk about frivolities than matters of consequence. Either way, conversing with such a person wouldn't be a good use of any finite being's time.

Ben said...

I'm happy to list anything vaguely academic on my CV, so I'd give a yes to the first question.

That said though, rather than simply splitting publications into 'research articles' and 'reviews, etc' I decided that there was enough difference between a 2,000 word critical review and a 500 word note to justify a further subdivision in the latter. Thus I effectively have 'research articles,' 'long reviews' and 'short notes.'

I sometimes wonder if that's over the top, given that reviews generally don't count for anything publication-wise. Is it really worth distinguishing between worthless publications? This line of reasoning leads me to think that, if both 2,000 word and 500 word reviews are worthless, then it's still worth including the latter if it's worth including the former.

As for the second, I guess it's true, though you should be honest of course about the nature of the piece.

Jamie said...

Ben, I don't agree -- I assigned a critical review essay to a student just the other day. (I'm afraid it wasn't yours though.) So, they count for something in my accounting. And for that matter, ordinary book reviews and book notes count as a kind of service, I'd say.

2:08, yes, I think a discussion piece counts as a "publication in Ethics". I agree about the review process -- different but not straightforwardly less tough.

WV: insist.
I didn't realize they used real words!

Anonymous said...

Should anyone care? Maybe this guy just doesn't have much going on in his career or life, and perhaps he's just a little insecure about that in the moment. Perhaps if philosophers quit comparing CV sizes, there'd be less temptation to do this sort of thing if the first place. Can you imagine Michael Jordan caring much about whether some high school kid brags about dunking the ball while concealing the fact that he was only playing on the low goal? Just laugh and remind yourself that there's more to life. Or help the guy out.

Frank O'File said...

Interesting. I've had a 2,500 word book review published in Ethics. I wouldn't dream of telling anyone that I had 'published in Ethics'. although I would list it (under book reviews) in my CV.

I've been told by several people that *as far as the UK job marketis concerned* it's a publication of no value at all. I wonder whether things are different in the USA, and whether that might account for the difference between Ben's view and Jamie's here. (Ben - you're in the UK, right?)

I can easily imagine a conversation of the sort English Jerk derides legitimately going on in the context of deciding whether or not to ofer someone a job (either because one was talking about the likely intellectual weight of the publication in question, or because on e was discussing whether someone was illegitimately inflating their CV)

Jamie said...

Frank,
I don't know the answer to your question (and I'm not entirely sure I understand the question). The critical review essay I was talking about is 20 pp. in Noûs. It's this one. These sorts of papers are not really refereed, so certainly shouldn't count for the same as a paper in Noûs that goes through the full refereeing process, but on the other hand its philosophical content is more like a regular paper than like a book review.

I suppose it would be good practice to be more clear about what these things are supposed to count for. Hiring? Tenure? Your final ranking win that Great Leiter Report in the Sky? I was imagining someone reading the CV wondering what sort of impact its biographee has had in the field; many tenure reviews have this question as an element.

Mark Murphy said...

I think that a book review in Ethics is about the best thing that one can have on one's vita. One should wait by one's e-mailbox for an invitation to write one, and should immediately accept, should the philosophy gods smile on one and grant one this grace.

Anonymous said...

'The frightening thing about Roxanne is not that she does not care if it is wrong. It is that she does not care if it is RIGHT.'

-from 'You Don't Have To: Sting and Prostitution,' in Sting and Philosophy, H. Douche (ed.), Open Court Publishing.

Can I put this on my CV?

729 said...

I'm kind of puzzled by the question (first one), because I can't figure out of by "publication" you mean a CV that merely has one category, Publication, and listed underneath there's a bunch of stuff without any further classifications, or if you mean listing as a publication at all (even if the CV has some fined grained categories under Publications).

If it's the first case, it sounds like this person has a really very poorly organized CV. If it's the latter case, I would say that reviews and book notes have a place on a well-organized CV--under Reviews.

If someone in conversation fails to say, "I published a book note in Ethics," the person seems to me to either lack the good sense that knowledgeable interlocutors would know that it was really a nice thing to have been *invited* by Ethics to do this (and this would be understood) or has mistakenly treated his or her knowledgeable interlocutors like his or her Mom in an attempt to impress.

Anonymous said...

substantive question. what's the general take on articles published by grad students with profs, where it's fairly obvious that the prof got invited to write something and included the student? usually this happens in edited collections, but it happens in some journals too.

this is a nice exercise for students, and some profs are big-hearted enough to do this. but how does it look for the students when they hit the market?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous with a substantive question: the grad student should do it (in part because it looks like a vote of confidence in the student) but should be expected to have the paper given a discounted weight forever. In fact, if grad student a drives the paper from beginning to end, is first author and the paper is properly refereed (not invited at all), everyone will still assume that prof was being nice to a. This is not speculation: I've seen it.

CTS said...

I think 'OK, if properly identified' and 'Yes, if properly qualified.'

That said, I wonder about this comment:
"It's akin to, but slightly worse than, saying you gave an APA presentation when you gave a paper at the Society for the Study of Process Philosophies group meeting at the APA."

Is it the process metaphysics, the group meeting, or both that is objectionable?

PA said...

I've published a piece in Ethics, ;)

anonymouse said...

An example in an article in Ethics bore a very close resemblance to something I did once. Can I mention this on my CV?