In our March "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
When submitting papers for publication, is it bad to cite papers that are in R&R as (forthcoming)? Or is that not appropriate? What is the norm for citing papers that friends or advisors have shared that may not be published yet, but you want to give them credit for the idea?
Good questions. Citing an R&R as forthcoming is definitely inappropriate, as nothing is forthcoming unless and until it is formally accepted. When it comes to citing papers that friends or advisors have shared, I think the best practice here is not only to ask them whether you can cite their unpublished work, but whether you can even use an idea they've shared privately with you. More generally, with matters like these I think the best general policy is to err on the side of caution. If the unpublished work is publicly available online (e.g., on PhilPapers/PhilArchive), then citing it is fair game. But you don't want to upset someone by using an unpublished idea that they may have thought they were sharing with you privately/confidentially. Just ask, and if they say they'd prefer you not to use their ideas, then don't use them.
Or so it seems to me. What do you all think?
Leave a Reply