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

Is the readership consideration still relevant when choosing which generalist journal to submit to?

I know that in the past it used to be worthwhile to publish in journals that had more subscribers because you could expect more people to find your article when flipping through the pages of physical copies of the journal. Nowadays, from what I gather, most people only “browse” the specialist journals that are relevant to them, and no one opens up generalist journal websites casually looking for new stuff to read. Instead, people find stuff on depositories like PhilPapers with helpful search engines, and there isn’t really much a difference between journals aside from the prestige. Is this true?

I’m not sure–though I suspect as with most things there may be considerable variance in terms of people’s journal-reading practices.

Do any readers have helpful insights to share?

Posted in

3 responses to “Is “readership” relevant when choosing which generalist journals to submit to?”

  1. Anonymous

    I think you should take account of readership when your submit papers. I don’t just browse PhilPapers. I have signed up for Table of Contents alerts for a number of journals (not surprisingly, ones I publish in). Further, I still subscribe to 5 journals – four of which I receive in hardcopy. I get them because I belong to a Society: PSA, BSPS, HOPOS, ESPS. But you really should take care to reach the readership you want. This is especially true when you publish on topics on the edge – they need to find the right home if they are to have an impact on scholarship. Do not assume the internet makes it equally probable that any two papers in general philosophy journals on a given topic are likely to be found by a researcher interested in the topic.

  2. Anonymous

    I think it likely depends on where you are in your career. If you are looking for a job or tenure, I cannot imagine caring about much of anything besides try to get it into the most prestigious journal you can in the a reasonable amount of time.

    I’m a fifth-year PhD student on the market right now. And I don’t want to be overly pessimistic, but 98% of my consideration for where to send my paper has to do with what those reading my CV will think. It has been a few years since I’ve dreamt of people reading and engaging with my work. Instead, I dream of people reading my CV and giving me a job. I don’t think it will be like that forever, but I also don’t think my attitude is an unreasonable one at this stage. FWIW, I have never once thought about the number of article views that a journal lists in its metrics when decided where to send a paper.

    As for my own personal reading habits, I subscribe to three journals (one generalist, one in moral philosophy, one specialist) that I will flip through and read interesting articles. Everything else I just hear about through the grapevine or through citations.

  3. Anonymous

    I’m at an R1, and our library has been steadily ending its subscriptions to Wiley, etc., due to rising costs. My sense is that this is happening elsewhere as well. We can still easily access old articles in the relevant journals, but for new articles we need to use Interlibrary Loan, which is a bit cumbersome (and, as this option depends on there being some university library elsewhere still paying Wiley, etc., for access, this does not seem a long-term solution).

    So, when I’m thinking of where to submit, I’m thinking increasingly of open-access journals. People can only read your article if they can access it, and (I imagine) the easier it is to access, the more likely they are to read it. And there are many excellent open-access journals.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from The Philosophers' Cocoon

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

Continue reading