Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. J.P. Loo's avatar
  2. Sebastian Sunday Grève's avatar
  3. Giovanni Molteni Tagliabue's avatar
  4. Fabien Muller's avatar
  7. Saul Smilansky's avatar

Another journal horror story

Brian Leiter

A junior philosopher writes:

I know that you posted about issues with PPQ a while back (although I wish I had seen your post before submitting a paper there). I am a pre-tenure professor, and I’ll be submitting my tenure package this spring. I submitted a paper to PPQ and had the worst experience I’ve ever had with a journal.

I submitted my paper in March of 2023. Like the other people who contacted you, I was told that the initial review would take up to 10 weeks. I had not heard anything by July, so I reached out to the editorial assistant. I was told that they would check with the editors and get back to me.

I did not hear back. I waited until December and I wrote to them again to ask for an update. I was horrified to learn that the paper still had not been sent out for review. The editors had done nothing with it. This week (in January of 2024), I received a desk rejection with no comments. The editorial assistant apologized on behalf of the editors and told me that I could request comments if I wanted them. I asked for them and received a single page of fairly minimal comments from the editor.

This was truly the worst experience I have had with any journal. I thought I would share it with you. I would be happy to forward the emails if you would like proof of the timeline.

Thanks for everything you do in terms of sharing this kind of information with others in the field. I wish I had seen your post sooner. Luckily, my tenure package is fairly secure (I have a book coming out in a month or two). But this is an awful thing for a journal to do to anyone, regardless of their tenure status.

I hope others have had good experiences with PPQ (comments to that effect, or comments from the editors, are welcome).  How common are experiences like this at PPQ or other journals?  Please use a real email if you are going to praise or criticize, by name, a particular journal.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

16 responses to “Another journal horror story”

  1. Assc prof

    I had a bad experience with PPQ a few years back. The problem seemed to be a then-managing editor who was neither doing their job nor responding to requests for information (whether from me or from the publisher). I eventually reached out to an editorial board member, who quickly got things on track (much to my appreciation). Prior experiences with PPQ, before that, were perfectly fine.

    Reply
  2. junior non-tt

    I can say that all of my experiences with PPQ have been positive (and more timely and communicative than my experiences with several other journals)

    BL COMMENT: This comment was submitted without a real email address. I hope the report is accurate, nonetheless.

    Reply
  3. asst prf

    I had a bad experience with PPQ. Submitted a paper in early March 2023. I was told initial review would take 10 weeks. I write back after 13 weeks, since I hadn't heard anything. Get no reply. Write back two weeks later, where all I am told by the editorial assistant is that they've written to the editors to ask what's up. Now we're into early July. I email again and I am told that the paper still had not gone out. I ended up withdrawing the paper sometime around early August (as I recall). I would prefer a harsher description, but I'll settle for saying that PPQ is inept. When I see people who have papers accepted there these days, I can only assume they know the editors or the editors know of them, hence their work was reviewed faster (in PPQ speak, 'faster' means 'at all').

    Reply
  4. Publishing Veteran

    It may be that the recent problems are related to the difficulties that PPQ's publisher, Wiley, has been having over the past couple of years. Generally speaking, the top scholarly journal publishers have been more interested in Open Access journals in the sciences with high article fees than subscription-based journals owned by third parties and focused on the social sciences and humanities. In Wiley's specific case, the company has suffered from the results of a major acquisition of another publisher that has experienced significant quality concerns. This in turn precipitated falls in the share price, revenue declines, and layoffs. Their CEO left in October. Here are a couple of links that provide further background:

    https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/people/article/93360-brian-napack-out-as-wiley-ceo.html

    https://retractionwatch.com/2023/03/09/wiley-paused-hindawi-special-issues-amid-quality-problems-lost-9-million-in-revenue/

    Reply
  5. David R.

    I don't know how PPQ operate, but from my own experience (I just stepped down after 10 years as EIC at a logic journal) if a paper hasn't gone out for review in 3-4 weeks it means that the editor hasn't found reviewers willing to review the paper, and it probably *will* be desk-rejected.

    Junior Philosopher will like as not have many publishing experiences over their career that are far worse than this one.

    Reply
  6. PPQed

    I had the same experience with PPQ as OP, and on a similar timeline. Submitted a paper last spring, checked in a few months later and was told by the person handling submissions that they would check with the editors. Didn't hear back. Checked in monthly, then, three months later, was told that the paper had not been submitted anywhere and had not been screened by the editors. They offered to review it and give me comments if it was desk rejected. But I withdrew since I didn't trust even this much to happen. I've experienced business as usual with other Wiley journals.

    Reply
  7. DS

    I had the exact same experience as Assc Prof a few years back. Haven't bothered submitting to PPQ since then.

    Reply
  8. Richard Galvin

    My co-author and I are both tenured full professors, so this wasn't as much of a gut punch as it would have been were either of us on the tenure clock. Paper submitted 2nd of December 2021, no response. Sent follow up email March '22, they respond that they are "still looking for external referees". I responded that I could name two people who would be happy to referee it! Sent next inquiry July '22, response is that one referee report is in the other not back in yet, but hoping to get it by the end of the month. Next inquiry sent Sept. '22, asking if there was any news to report. Reply: "second referee has asked for an extension due to illness". So we wait until 21st of November, when I send yet another inquiry. On the 22nd they respond that the reports are in and they are awaiting the editors' verdict. Next day we get the word that it has been rejected. One referee submitted a single paragraph comment, the other a bit lengthier, but still brief. And each had suggested R&R, which the editors obviously didn't go for.
    Had a similar experience with PPQ over a decade ago, swore them off, and decided to give them another chance. Not this time.

    sign me as "Not My First Rodeo"

    Reply
  9. Michel

    For my anecdatum, I sent PPQ a paper in October 2023 and it was desk-rejected within a week for considerations of fit. FWIW, I have no connection whatsoever to any of the editors or the editorial board (indeed, I don't work in any of their areas), and so have no reason to think I was treated more kindly than others. (Then again, maybe that's what 'fit' meant [i.e. that my subject is not in any of the editorial team's AOSes], in which case the journal's scope is somewhat narrower than advertised.)

    Hearing these anecdotes is making me reconsider submitting again in the near-to-medium future. But… it sounds like a common pattern in these stories is that the submission was made in March 2023. Perhaps something happened to somebody at that time which made it particularly difficult to discharge their duties?

    Reply
  10. Anon non-tt

    My experience with PPQ was fine. I submitted in February 2022 and got my peer-review reports in July 2022.

    Reply
  11. jobseeker

    Wow! Where to begin. Well, here's my horror story.

    I submitted my paper to PPQ very early in February, 2023. The same day they acknowledged the receipt of my submission. By mid-July, over 5 months after the submission, I asked them to update me on the status of my paper. Almost a month later, in mid-August, a handling editor responded back saying that they’d send an inquiry about it to the editors and get back to me. Over a month later, in late September, since no one got back to me, I emailed them again. A few days later a different handling editor responded back apologizing and saying that they’ll send an inquiry to the editors and get back to me. Almost one month after that, in mid October, since no one got back to me, I contacted their editor in chief (EIC). [We're 9 months into the horror story, mind you!] The next day, I was told by the IEC that they'd get back to me in a few days. Ten days after that, I emailed the EIC again because they didn't get back to me. One week after that, since I again heard nothing back, I emailed them again: to the publisher, handling editor, and the EIC. I also said that that I’d have to withdraw my paper if I don’t hear back within one week. The EIC responded back apologizing and saying they'll make a decision on my paper early that week. Over three weeks after that, by the end of November, since no one got back to me, I contacted them again: to the publisher, handling editor, and the EIC. [We're over 10.5 months into the horror story so far.] I told them I'd have to withdraw my paper if I don't hear from them by a certain date within the first half of December. Until that specific date, they didn't even respond back to acknowledge the receipt of my email. Once the date arrived, I emailed them and told them that I'm withdrawing my paper. Couple hours later, they sent back a hasty email saying that they acknowledge that my paper is withdrawn and that they're sorry.

    They completely wasted over 11 months of my time invested in that paper, not to mention the utter disrespect with which I was treated, and the frustration I had to deal with over the months.

    I'm an early career philosopher, a job-seeker on a limited postdoc position for whom publication is particularly important. I mentioned this to PPQ. Especially as this year's job season approached, or in the middle of the season, I repeatedly implored them for any update on the status of my paper, reminded them that it would be helpful for my job applications.

    I've created a timeline of events with exact dates and relevant details. I'm also keeping record of all the relevant communication. For obvious reasons, I cannot share them here. But I'm more than happy to provide all the necessary documents if a proof of the accuracy of my PPQ horror story is needed.

    Reply
  12. Ted Nannicelli

    jobseeker's comment makes me wonder how long people in the discipline think it's reasonable to wait (as well as how long people actually tend to wait) before pulling the plug and withdrawing from a drawn out review process…

    Reply
  13. Anon tt

    Had a very bad experience with PPQ. They took five months to desk-reject my paper after several rounds of inquiries.

    Reply
  14. Grad student

    Had some bad experiences with PPQ as well for 2 of my submissions.
    1 manuscript took 8 months, another manuscript took 1 year. For these cases, my experiences are similar to the other 'horror' stories. Several round of inquiries and I'm either told that the editors have not yet looked at it, or they have not chosen reviewers. Both ended up being desk rejected.

    On the other hand, I've had 3 other desk rejects from PPQ which were under a month. So perhaps those times were abnormalities (or so I hope)?

    Reply
  15. angry referee

    Grad student
    You have sent 5 papers to PPQ and you are still a grad student – this is why the journal system is backed up. Given that all five were rejected, it suggests that you are sending your work our prematurely. Most often, grad students should wait to send a paper out until a faculty member has suggested that their paper is publishable.

    Reply
  16. Mark Glouberman

    Aside from the pleasure one derives from reading the horror stories (I could add many of my own), what's the point of this? Marriage is supposed to be a solid, productive, relationship. Nevertheless, many unions disintegrate, damaging all involved. 'But submitting a paper is not the same as saying "I do,"' you say. Well, choose your own analogon. Journals are complex institutions: publishers, editors, referees, etc. How many of you, when asked, have politely declined to referee papers? I know that I feel a shiver of apprehension when a request appears in my in-box. Vetting is something that few leap to with alacrity.

    I don't envy the editors and managers of journals who have to deal with referees. Overall, fings, as they say in parts of England, tend to work out. Which is not to say that that nitwit who trashed my recent submission …

    —–
    KEYWORDS:
    Primary Blog

    Reply

Designed with WordPress