So far, I’ve posted some preliminary comparative data on some of the top general philosophy journals. We’ve seen comparisons based on average review times and comparisons based on percentages of submissions that received comments.

Now let’s look at the likelihood that a journal will give you a second chance. I’ve taken the same general journals from the previous comparisons and ranked them according to their revise and resubmit rate. The number to the to right of each journal reflects the percentage of submissions that received a revise and resubmit verdict.

Some ObservationsAJP’s high number
49% seemed really high to me, and I thought maybe there was some anomaly in the Phil Wiki Import. However, the data for AJP is based on 45 surveys. 21 of those surveys are importd from the Philosophy Journal Wiki, and 24 are fresh from surveys on this site within the last two months. The revise and resubmit rate for the most recent 24 surveys is about 45%. It looks like Australasian is just a bit more willing to let you have a second go.

A More Useful Number
I’m starting to think that a more useful number might be the sum of two numbers: the percentage of submissions that receive an initial R&R verdict + the percentage of submissions that receive an initial verdict of acceptance. I didn’t think to do that until just now. I’ll check it out and if it significantly affects the results, I’ll post it.

Correlation Between Review Time and Second Chances?
Analysis and Phil Quarterly at near the top of the pack in terms of average review time. Notice that they are pretty low down on the list in terms of the likelihood that they’ll give you a revise and resubmit. Mind and Australasian both were lower down on the list for review times, but they’re at the top in terms of dolling out revise and resubmits. This suggests some correlation between review times and revise and resubmit rates. I’d like to know if there’s more to this. If it’s true, I’d like to know why. (Note: J Phil is an anamoly here that would need to be explained. They take the longest and they have the lowest R&R rate. )

Using the Data To Mitigate Some Criticism
The data is starting to reveal some interesting facts that would be useful not just for individual philosophers, but for editors at philosophy journals. For example, Australasian Journal of Philosophy has an average review time of 4 months. Some might think that this is rather high. However, the data also reveals that authors submitting to AJP receive referee comments nearly 100% of the time and that they are more likely to get a revise and resubmit verdict than at any of the other journals above. This makes a 4 month review time seem less bad. The editor of AJP can say, “Yeah we take an average of four months, but this is explained and outweighed by some of the other facts that are being revealed in this survey.”

One Response to “Revise and Resubmit Rates at Top Philosophy Journals”

1. 

   Chris Tucker

   September 29, 2009 at 10:44 pm

   You note a positive correlation between review time and second chances. My quick glance suggests that there is a stronger positive correlation between referee reports and revise and resubmits.

   Reply