This afternoon, a student who I suggested should submit her paper to the Duke Journal of Politics informed me that she was ineligible to do so as a member of the editorial board. (A real shame, too, since it was a darn good paper, particularly for a first-year undergraduate.)
It was always my impression that the entire point of getting on the editorial board of a journal was to grease the skids for your own work to appear in print. Perhaps the logrolling potential is lacking in the case of this particular journal—it probably is more effective in the grown-up academic realm, where “put my stuff in The Journal of Spurious Correlations and I’ll put yours in Perspectives on Optional Statistical Controls” may be more rampant. Then again, most editorial board members in the “real journals” seem to be beyond the need for pubs at all, except as a tool for placing grad students through co-authorship.
4 comments:
> It was always my impression that the entire point of getting on the editorial board of a journal was to grease the skids for your own work to appear in print.
Now we have the glory of blogs: Google and Webarchive are preserving your thoughts forever.
Indeed, although half the battle is finding my thoughts among the 3400-odd posts I’ve made. Security through obscurity, baby!
Submitting work to a journal you’re on the board of is a bit too far over the edge; if you can scratch your own back, the whole edifice collapses.
The purpose of getting papers in conferences is to get a free vacation; the purpose of getting papers in journals is to get tenure. By the time most papers appears in print, everyone who cares about the contents will have read it on SSRN or citeseer months earlier.
And isn’t the reason for getting on editorial boards to get chicks?
Chicks dig the APSR?