Read on Twitter
Some Approaches to Publishing Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles (for Biblical Studies PhD Students and ECRs)
In light of the recent kerfuffle about peer-reviewed journal articles, I thought that I might share some thoughts about writing and publishing articles.+
In light of the recent kerfuffle about peer-reviewed journal articles, I thought that I might share some thoughts about writing and publishing articles.+
This advice incorporates things that more experienced researchers have told me, as well as some things I’ve learned on my own. This is not exhaustive, and it WILL NOT guarantee that your article gets published. If you have other tips, feel free to post them below.+
1. Generating the Idea
Ideas for articles can come from your current dissertation work. Perhaps it’s something that didn’t make it into your thesis, or an extra long footnote that your supervisor axed from the final draft.+
Ideas for articles can come from your current dissertation work. Perhaps it’s something that didn’t make it into your thesis, or an extra long footnote that your supervisor axed from the final draft.+
They can also come by diving deeper into the methods, data, or arguments in a particular area of research. Does this method obscure something in the data? Do we now have more data about something than previous interpreters?+
What does this particular argument assume that might be problematic?+
Once you think you’ve found a possible idea, you can then generate a hypothesis. Before I start fully writing something, I have to demonstrate to myself “proof of concept,” which is I have to demonstrate that this hypothesis is viable.+
This means going on a fact-finding mission gathering more data from the ancient sources and reading key secondary literature (e.g. commentaries, latest journals, etc.) on the topic. If you feel like your hypothesis is viable, then you might start writing the article+
2. Writing the Article
I like to start with a good title. This usually makes me excited about a project, and is a good way of clearly distilling my hypothesis (or research question).+
I like to start with a good title. This usually makes me excited about a project, and is a good way of clearly distilling my hypothesis (or research question).+
From here I usually try to make an outline for the article working my way backward from what I’m trying to prove, the hypothesis. This allows me to think through what arguments I need to make to demonstrate the viability of the hypothesis.+
It’s also a good way of working out where you need to focus your research and where you might encounter some problems. I’ve often abandoned a project at this stage because I’ve realised that there are just too many holes to fill.+
When it comes to writing, the best advice I can give is write the part that you want to write. Sometimes it’s mid argument, sometimes it’s the introduction, sometimes it’s a footnote. Whatever is going to be fun at first to get the momentum going+
I like to set ridiculously attainable goals, like 10 words a day. Some days I write more, some days I write less (or mostly nothing at all). If I’ve had a good day of dissertation writing, then I’ll spend 20-30 minutes writing something for fun, like an article.+
Think about how your bibliography is representative of a field you’d like to see. Are you citing women scholars? Scholars of colour? Your article is an opportunity to lift up the work of others. Take that opportunity and use it wisely.+
3. Getting Feedback on the Article
Getting feedback on your article is obviously an important part of the process. I love seeing acknowledgements that show all the people who have contributed in some way to a piece. Articles are collaborative endeavours.+
Getting feedback on your article is obviously an important part of the process. I love seeing acknowledgements that show all the people who have contributed in some way to a piece. Articles are collaborative endeavours.+
Some people use conferences to get feedback, although this can sometimes be limited. Having a writing group of your peers can be helpful, also your supervisors or other committee members if they are willing.+
In my opinion, critical feedback before a journal article goes out for review is important. You don’t want readers who will only praise your work. You want people who will challenge and disagree with you. You can use their disagreements and critique to make your piece stronger+
If you have people read your work, for the Love of God, please acknowledge them in your piece? I am alarmed when I see journal articles that have no acknowledgements whatsoever (especially if I know that a piece has had feedback from colleagues).+
4. Choosing a Journal
When I first started submitting articles, I must admit that I just started sending them out without a thought to whether it was a right fit for what they had published in the past.+
When I first started submitting articles, I must admit that I just started sending them out without a thought to whether it was a right fit for what they had published in the past.+
Sometimes in academia you’re just focused on getting published in a “prestigious” journal; but not all prestigious journals may publish the type of article you’ve written.+
You should look for journals that may have published on your very topic before (although be careful for saturation). Look at your own bibliography—if there are a number of pieces from a particular journal, chances are it may be a good fit.+
Also take a moment to actually read what some journals are after. Recent journals sometimes have editorials which explain the kinds of pieces they’re looking for. READ THEM. You’ll save yourself a lot of time.+
You should also be taking a look at who is on the editorial board. Are there people on it who have written on your topic? Consider interacting with their work (especially if they take an opposing position on something you’re writing).+
5. Dealing with Rejection
Rejection with journal articles is very very common, and I know few people who get articles accepted first try on a regular basis. Usually 2-3 journals before something gets accepted is the norm.+
Rejection with journal articles is very very common, and I know few people who get articles accepted first try on a regular basis. Usually 2-3 journals before something gets accepted is the norm.+
My first article rejection hit me very hard. I’m pretty sure I sat on a bench outside and cried to myself. But the more I got rejected the more I realised that me getting rejected from a journal wasn’t a statement of my personal or academic worth.+
When I’m planning my journal articles I usually make a list of articles that I would send the piece to if it was rejected. I expect my work to be rejected, not because it’s bad, but because I know that there are probably tons of ways that it can be improved.+
There’s one journal that I have been repeatedly rejected from (*cough* NTS). But I have received a lot of great critique and comments from reviewers. Use those comments to make your piece better. You don’t always have to take the advice, but you should consider it.+
When dealing with reviewer comments, sometimes they’ll be help and other times they will be counter productive. If you’re having trouble processing them, ask someone you trust, especially if you can a more experienced scholar.+
Depending on the extent of the work needed to improve your piece you have a couple of choices. You can choose to reject the feedback and immediately send it off to another journal. You can revise based on the feedback and submit elsewhere. Or you can put it on the backburner.+
What are some of your best tips on writing and submitting articles? I’d love to hear your advice and learn from you!
