The Philosophers' Cocoon

A safe and supportive forum for philosophers.

Owned & Moderated by Marcus Arvan (University of Tampa)

Contact: marvan@ut.edu

Blog mission & moderation policy

IMPORTANT NOTE on how to ensure anonymity in commenting
Job-Market Reporting Thread (2025-26)
Job-Market Discussion Thread (2025-26)

recent posts

about

Analysis paper as writing sample?

In our newest “how can we help you?” thread, a reader asks:

I really like one of my analysis papers, but it is obviously short. I have other papers that can serve as writing sample, but in less either in “prestigious” venues (whatever that may mean) or co-authored. So would an analysis paper put me into some disadvantages?

Good question, though I’m not sure one can judge without looking at the paper itself. On the one hand, Analysis is a highly-regarded journal. Short papers can also obviously be rigorous, inventive, and make important contributions to the field (Ed Gettier’s famous 3-page Analysis paper against the JTB theory of knowledge being the most obvious example). On the other hand, short papers tend to be less ambitious than longer papers, and depending on the paper I could imagine search committee members potentially wanting something more substantial. Finally, though, if one has published other things, there’s nothing preventing from looking up and reading your other work. All in all, I guess I’m inclined to think using the Analysis piece is fine, and probably advantageous, given that it’s an excellent venue and probably excellent work. But this is also just a guess, I guess. 😉

What do other readers think?

Posted in

6 responses to “Analysis paper as writing sample?”

  1. analyse this

    Having just gone through two job searches, I don’t think which writing sample you submit makes all that much difference. If I like the look of your file, I’ll check out your other papers too. So If you think it’s the best example of your work, then I’d submit that as your official sample, but making clear in your cover letter that you have other papers and they can be accessed via your website.

    Reply
  2. Who knows

    I think job candidates consistently don’t realize: the writing sample is, I believe, its own genre for most of us. It needs to talk to a lot of people, quickly, but also show your AOS – to people who are not in your AOS. If your Analysis paper does that, fine; but that it’s been presented in Analysis already will impress some people and turn off others (justifiably or not).

    Depends also on the job. Say R1; they might say, well, maybe “analysis” is the ceiling for this candidate. Another candidate who sends unpublished work, it’s easier to “imagine” a higher ceiling for that candidate. It’s not rational, but this can happen.

    Reply
  3. Charles Pigden

    First congratulations to the OP for getting a paper in Analysis. Secondly OF COURSE you should use it!!! That this was published in Analysis gives it a gold star to begin with, but by virtue of appearing in Analysis it is almost certain to be short and punchy, and when it comes to writing samples short punchy papers are at a premium. Search committee members have a lot of writing samples to plough through and lengthy samples tend to make the eyes glaze & the attention wander. The thought is likely to be ‘Why does this so-and-so insist on trying to bore me rigid’. If were on a search committee an already-published paper in Analysis would propel you to near the top of the short list.

    Reply
  4. hmm

    I don’t entirely disagree with “Who knows” but also think that the two points made are kind of silly (no offense). I don’t hear searching committees talk that way, typically. The ceiling talk makes sense only if OP’s research profile looks weak overall, and that the paper does not show promise (which I guess not given OP’s fondness). And even then, it is unclear whether switching to different samples helps. I agree with others that Analysis is probably fine.

    Reply
  5. Bill V.

    Your writing sample should probably be in the AOS required by the ad. If you get close consideration, it is likely at least some members of the search committee will look up your already published work (so make sure pdfs are easily available on your website or PhilPapers, with links in the cv you upload). Other than that, make your writing sample your best or most representative work, keeping in mind that most or all of the search committee will not be in AOS of the ad (unless it is a large department at an R1 with coverage in that area already). That means most committees will likely be judging the writing sample on how they perceive the quality of the arguments, the philosophical interest of the topic, the use of literature, the clarity of the writing, and related factors that are probably different than how experts in the AOS would judge it. (This means that sending an extremely technical piece as a writing sample can hurt a candidate because most committees will have no way of judging its quality.) As always, YMMV since different committees at different kinds of schools will do these things differently. Oh, and plan to use a different paper for the job talk than the one you send as a writing sample.

    Reply
  6. The Real SLAC Prof

    I think, as this thread brings out, people approach the writing sample in the assessment of the candidate in quite different ways. From my experience, serving/chairing searches at least 15 times at both a SLAC and an R1, here’s my advice: you obviously want your writing sample to be excellent, clearly written, and ideally published or forthcoming in a decent to excellent journal, and Analysis would likely count as a fine journal for these purposes. But that’s just coving the basics.

    More specifically, you want your writing sample to cohere with your overall research trajectory and serve as a jumping off point for a wider discussion of your research. We don’t know the details of your Analysis paper, but given the constraints on papers published in that journal, I’m somewhat doubtful that it would serve you well in that regard. You want to offer your interviewers multiple “ins” both to the specific paper you submit, but also to related ideas you are working on. A paper that is wider in scope will offer you more of those opportunities. As has been discussed on this blog before, please do not use a co-authored paper; instead, use one of the more in-depth papers published in a less prestigious venue.

    I have never had the time to look at candidates’ other writings before the first-round interviews, and many times I have not even had the chance to carefully read the full writing sample. And I don’t think I’m especially bad or lazy in this regard–I don’t recall any of my colleagues ever asking about the candidates’ other research in a first-round interview, beyond what could be gleaned from the research statement. So I would caution against simply assuming that your interviewers will read your other work before the first-round interview. Good luck!

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Charles PigdenCancel reply

Discover more from The Philosophers' Cocoon

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading