Wednesday, March 25, 2009

A "forthcoming" question

Ok. Possibly stupid, rookie question. Suppose you get some journal to agree to publish a paper, on the condition that you fix some typos. At what point are you entitled to put the publication on your CV? When you get the conditional acceptance (note: not a revise and resubmit; a clear acceptance, however conditional). Once you fix the typos, thereby satisfying the conditions of acceptance? Or do you have to wait for the editor to get back to you with a confirmation that the typos have been fixed to her satisfaction?

--Mr. Zero

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

I've seen people list conditional acceptances on their CV. Could you do that, then update when you get the official green light from the editor?

Gabriele Contessa said...

I think it is safe to say "accepted for publication by [name of journal] subject to minor revisions".

Doug Portmore said...

If you're absolutely certain that you can and will meet the condition (as where it's accepted on the condition that you merely correct a couple typos), then it seems to me that you can, in good conscience, list it on your CV as forthcoming. If you're not absolutely certain that you can and will meet the condition in question, then I would list it on your CV (under publications) but as conditionally accepted.

Anonymous said...

I was in this position, and the editor suggested that I list the piece as forthcoming on my CV. I did so, but it made me nervous. In the end, all went smoothly, as I suppose the editor knew it would.

If I had it do over again, I might have listed it as Gabriele Contessa suggests. I would have slept better. On the other hand, the "forthcoming" label may have helped me land my job, and I did have the editor's blessing. So I'll be wishy-washy here. Maybe a brief query to the editor for her or his suggestion on how to list the piece would be appropriate. (You can always save the response for proof later, if any questions arise.)

Incidentally, I never got "official" notification that my piece had finally moved into "fully" accepted status -- proofs just arrived in email one day.

Dr. Killjoy said...

Pace Doug, you are asking for trouble if you list it as forthcoming when it in fact is not forthcoming in any official sense. Presumably, if you need only fix a few typos then you'll need only list it as conditionally accepted for a few weeks at most before you get the official go ahead. While I firmly encourage positive thinking, if your paper is not officially forthcoming, then listing it as such only allows for a host of potentially dangerous situations. It is not unheard of for papers to be conditionally accepted then outright rejected. Fudging a CV is never ever a good idea no matter how minor the fudge.

Anonymous said...

One wonders why a paper with typos is being submitted to journals in the first place...

syd m said...

I would list it as "conditionally accepted." If at some later point it is not accepted, you can remove it from your CV. But how many more CVs are you going to be sending out before next fall, really? And who is going to remember your CV in such detail?

Anonymous said...

A few things:

(i) Unless you are going on the job market or need some reason to have it on your CV -- ASAP, then you should wait until you have PAGE PROOFS or the editor say -- page proofs are coming shortly.

When you get page proofs, you know it is forthcoming.

(ii) If you need it on there ASAP. Then listing (forthcoming or conditionally accepted seems to make the most sense).

Anonymous said...

I don't know, Doug--absolute certainty about a future event seems an awfully high standard. . . .

Clayton said...

Agreed with GC and DP. I've been told that R&R's are fair game as well, provided that they are marked as such. (Maybe that looks desperate? I suppose one risk is that if it gets rejected people could know some specific paper was rejected by some specific journal. I'm insufficiently paranoid to worry about that sort of thing.) I've been told that if you put the journals that you've submitted to but haven't yet been given an R&R, CA, or A, then you look desperate.

Also, congratulations!

Anonymous said...

If you've received page proofs of the article, you can list it as "forthcoming" or "in press"

Outis said...

I asked a former editor of a major journal this question, and he said that it was perfectly appropriate to put "conditionally accepted" on a CV. Gabriele's phrasing might be better, since "minor revisions" makes it clear that the condition is easily met. I'd be a little worried about listing it as 'forthcoming' in that case, but maybe that's because I'm never absolutely certain of anything.

CW said...

What Doug said sounds right to me. If you're willing and able to make the corrections, it's "forthcoming." If you're not sure, for some reason, that you're willing or able, then it's "accepted subject to minor revisions." (I like Gabriele's way of phrasing this latter alternative a bit more than Doug's.)

Anonymous said...

I second Doug Portmore's comments.

CTS said...

I'm with Doug Portmore on this. Almost every paper will need some detailing - notes, a typo, etc. Requests for such emendations are not requests fro revisions and resubmission.

Jamie Dreier said...

I also agree with Doug.
The worst-case scenario (that for some weird reason the paper doesn't actually get published) is not all that awful. You can just explain to whomever (presumably the people who hire you) what happened, and they'll almost certainly understand that you weren't trying to deceive anyone.

Anonymous said...

Anon 12:54 writes: "One wonders why a paper with typos is being submitted to journals in the first place..."

Seriously? One wonders if you've ever had a paper accepted at a journal. Every paper I've published had to be scoured for more typos. It's kind of the point of pages proofs.

Anonymous said...

I just unsubmitted an article because just seeing it with the journal's name brandished across every page, which I looked at after I submitted it for some unknown reason, made the typos jump out at me. I did check the original PDF of course after it was uploaded, but sometimes the smallest visual change makes the typos pop out.

I recently had a paper conditionally accepted, and I am on the job market, and I did put it on my CV as conditionally accepted. Given that very few articles that have this status get rejected, it lets committees know that they can reasonably expect this to soon be forthcoming.

I really don't think you can list a paper as forthcoming that really isn't, even if you have the editor's blessing. It's a lie. The paper is not forthcoming! And I assume we shouldn't lie on our resumes.