How to make sense of a 2019 paper published in 2016 journal issue?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
I submitted a paper to a social sciences journal and it has been accepted. However, the publisher tells me it is going to be printed in the next weeks in the 2016 issue. How to make sense of this? Apparently the issue has been delayed a few years. However it will not mention the year 2019 and it is officially a 2016 paper issue. No digital copy since the journal doesn't have a webpage. Can I still put 2019 in my CV? and if I want to present it in an upcoming conference?
It is an old journal in French that might had issues with their timeframe, collecting papers, printing, and moreover getting the editing work done on ambitious projects. Is it really an issue when the work was done? If this is part of PhD research, want difference does it make if it is possible to indicate in bibliography that the work was submitted and printed in 2019?
publications
edited Jan 30 at 3:17
aeismail♦
161k31375700
asked Jan 29 at 19:01
SimonSimon
8115
add a comment |
I submitted a paper to a social sciences journal and it has been accepted. However, the publisher tells me it is going to be printed in the next weeks in the 2016 issue. How to make sense of this? Apparently the issue has been delayed a few years. However it will not mention the year 2019 and it is officially a 2016 paper issue. No digital copy since the journal doesn't have a webpage. Can I still put 2019 in my CV? and if I want to present it in an upcoming conference?
It is an old journal in French that might had issues with their timeframe, collecting papers, printing, and moreover getting the editing work done on ambitious projects. Is it really an issue when the work was done? If this is part of PhD research, want difference does it make if it is possible to indicate in bibliography that the work was submitted and printed in 2019?
publications
edited Jan 30 at 3:17
aeismail♦
161k31375700
asked Jan 29 at 19:01
SimonSimon
8115
27
If any journal editor is reading this...please don't do this ever. Why, why, why.
– Bryan Krause
Jan 29 at 19:34
10
Are you sure that's not just a typo, and the editor didn't mean 2019 after all?
– corey979
Jan 29 at 19:53
11
In these days academics get evaluated on bibliometrics more and more aggressively. At least where I work,"you must have N papers published in the past M years" is a common requirement for various funds / promotions. With this in mind, having a 2019 paper published with a 2016 date is an even worse deal than it looks. Maybe it doesn't matter to you now, but it may matter 3-4 years from now.
– Federico Poloni
Jan 29 at 20:28
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– eykanal♦
Jan 30 at 21:18
add a comment |
I submitted a paper to a social sciences journal and it has been accepted. However, the publisher tells me it is going to be printed in the next weeks in the 2016 issue. How to make sense of this? Apparently the issue has been delayed a few years. However it will not mention the year 2019 and it is officially a 2016 paper issue. No digital copy since the journal doesn't have a webpage. Can I still put 2019 in my CV? and if I want to present it in an upcoming conference?
It is an old journal in French that might had issues with their timeframe, collecting papers, printing, and moreover getting the editing work done on ambitious projects. Is it really an issue when the work was done? If this is part of PhD research, want difference does it make if it is possible to indicate in bibliography that the work was submitted and printed in 2019?
publications
edited Jan 30 at 3:17
aeismail♦
161k31375700
asked Jan 29 at 19:01
SimonSimon
8115
I submitted a paper to a social sciences journal and it has been accepted. However, the publisher tells me it is going to be printed in the next weeks in the 2016 issue. How to make sense of this? Apparently the issue has been delayed a few years. However it will not mention the year 2019 and it is officially a 2016 paper issue. No digital copy since the journal doesn't have a webpage. Can I still put 2019 in my CV? and if I want to present it in an upcoming conference?
It is an old journal in French that might had issues with their timeframe, collecting papers, printing, and moreover getting the editing work done on ambitious projects. Is it really an issue when the work was done? If this is part of PhD research, want difference does it make if it is possible to indicate in bibliography that the work was submitted and printed in 2019?
publications
publications
edited Jan 30 at 3:17
aeismail♦
161k31375700
asked Jan 29 at 19:01
SimonSimon
8115
edited Jan 30 at 3:17
aeismail♦
161k31375700
asked Jan 29 at 19:01
SimonSimon
8115
edited Jan 30 at 3:17
aeismail♦
161k31375700
edited Jan 30 at 3:17
aeismail♦
161k31375700
edited Jan 30 at 3:17
aeismail♦
161k31375700
161k31375700
asked Jan 29 at 19:01
SimonSimon
8115
asked Jan 29 at 19:01
SimonSimon
8115
asked Jan 29 at 19:01
SimonSimon
8115
8115
27
If any journal editor is reading this...please don't do this ever. Why, why, why.
– Bryan Krause
Jan 29 at 19:34
10
Are you sure that's not just a typo, and the editor didn't mean 2019 after all?
– corey979
Jan 29 at 19:53
11
In these days academics get evaluated on bibliometrics more and more aggressively. At least where I work,"you must have N papers published in the past M years" is a common requirement for various funds / promotions. With this in mind, having a 2019 paper published with a 2016 date is an even worse deal than it looks. Maybe it doesn't matter to you now, but it may matter 3-4 years from now.
– Federico Poloni
Jan 29 at 20:28
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– eykanal♦
Jan 30 at 21:18
add a comment |
27
If any journal editor is reading this...please don't do this ever. Why, why, why.
– Bryan Krause
Jan 29 at 19:34
10
Are you sure that's not just a typo, and the editor didn't mean 2019 after all?
– corey979
Jan 29 at 19:53
11
In these days academics get evaluated on bibliometrics more and more aggressively. At least where I work,"you must have N papers published in the past M years" is a common requirement for various funds / promotions. With this in mind, having a 2019 paper published with a 2016 date is an even worse deal than it looks. Maybe it doesn't matter to you now, but it may matter 3-4 years from now.
– Federico Poloni
Jan 29 at 20:28
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– eykanal♦
Jan 30 at 21:18
27
27
If any journal editor is reading this...please don't do this ever. Why, why, why.
– Bryan Krause
Jan 29 at 19:34
If any journal editor is reading this...please don't do this ever. Why, why, why.
– Bryan Krause
Jan 29 at 19:34
10
10
Are you sure that's not just a typo, and the editor didn't mean 2019 after all?
– corey979
Jan 29 at 19:53
Are you sure that's not just a typo, and the editor didn't mean 2019 after all?
– corey979
Jan 29 at 19:53
11
11
In these days academics get evaluated on bibliometrics more and more aggressively. At least where I work,"you must have N papers published in the past M years" is a common requirement for various funds / promotions. With this in mind, having a 2019 paper published with a 2016 date is an even worse deal than it looks. Maybe it doesn't matter to you now, but it may matter 3-4 years from now.
– Federico Poloni
Jan 29 at 20:28
In these days academics get evaluated on bibliometrics more and more aggressively. At least where I work,"you must have N papers published in the past M years" is a common requirement for various funds / promotions. With this in mind, having a 2019 paper published with a 2016 date is an even worse deal than it looks. Maybe it doesn't matter to you now, but it may matter 3-4 years from now.
– Federico Poloni
Jan 29 at 20:28
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– eykanal♦
Jan 30 at 21:18
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– eykanal♦
Jan 30 at 21:18
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
I would pull the paper. I would be worried that the issue is never going to be published and that the paper is going to sit in limbo for years. The fact that the journal has no web page, even in the social sciences, is concerning to me. Are you sure that libraries are going to get this newest issue when it comes out for it to be archived?
If I were to keep the paper in the pipeline for the journal, I would want some reassurances. I would look at the journal editorial board and review process. If the review process was exceptionally speedy and the initial decision was accept as is (or very minor revisions), I would worry the journal is desperate. A high rate of turn over in editors or reviewers (i.e., different people on every iteration) would also concern me. I would put a time contingency on the copyright transfer so that it expires if the issue is not published in the next few weeks.
Then you have all the issues with playing with the timeline. How are people (e.g., tenure committees or search committees) going to know when you did the work. Even saying that it was published in 2019, isn't the issue, committees want to know when you did the work. I can only imagine the headaches that it could cause with funders when trying to explain why work funded in 2018 is in a 2016 issue, regardless of when it came out. Screwing with the timeline is also probably going to mess up a lot of bibliometrics (e.g., 5 year impact factor would only go for citations through 2021 or really a 2 year window).
answered Jan 29 at 20:14
StrongBad♦StrongBad
84.1k23214416
Publisher says it will be published in the next weeks. Without that assurance, I'd probably agree about pulling it. I think it is worth a chuckle, not a panic, actually.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:16
6
@Buffy yup, and I bet they keep saying that to the poor sap who submitted a paper in 2015.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:17
3
Your "bet" is just a guess, of course. And pulling the paper keeps it unpublished for at least a while longer. Fine if you already have a good pub record and stuff in the pipeline otherwise. Less fine if not. Reacting with irritation to a journal, even when justified, does little to advance your own career. I can't say whether withdrawing is best, but I doubt you can either.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:21
@Buffy I added some more suggestions about pulling the paper.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:28
There might be an issue with pulling the paper if the author already signed over the copyright/agreement to publish forms.
– Kimball
Jan 29 at 20:42
|
show 4 more comments
In your CV, I think it would be proper to put the official date (2016), but also acceptable to note that it was (will be) "published 2019". For presentation at the conference, I assume you need to submit it first. You can send a note to the program chair explaining the situation.
It will always be a bit anomalous, but it is what it is. Even in a formal citation you can list both dates - 2016 issue, published 2019.
answered Jan 29 at 19:36
BuffyBuffy
47.5k13154240
add a comment |
Chances are, the journal is having trouble filling its issues. It doesn't have enough papers, so issues promised to subscribers were never delivered - the journal now "owes" its subscribers the missing issues and your paper was put into one of these issues.
C'est la vie.
answered Jan 29 at 19:55
AllureAllure
31.2k1997147
There might be a lot of reasons for not being able to produce issues in a timely manner. If the journal were dedicated to an especially arcane field, that would be pretty common, I think. But other, valid and invalid, reasons might come to mind.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:45
If it's a new journal, my guess would be that the editorial board were overly optimistic about how well the community will react to it (e.g. by starting at 4 issues/year instead of 2 issues/year). If it's an old journal, then I'd guess either the field is becoming less popular, or the journal overestimated future submissions and decided to increase its issue count prematurely.
– Allure
Jan 29 at 23:22
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f123980%2fhow-to-make-sense-of-a-2019-paper-published-in-2016-journal-issue%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I would pull the paper. I would be worried that the issue is never going to be published and that the paper is going to sit in limbo for years. The fact that the journal has no web page, even in the social sciences, is concerning to me. Are you sure that libraries are going to get this newest issue when it comes out for it to be archived?
If I were to keep the paper in the pipeline for the journal, I would want some reassurances. I would look at the journal editorial board and review process. If the review process was exceptionally speedy and the initial decision was accept as is (or very minor revisions), I would worry the journal is desperate. A high rate of turn over in editors or reviewers (i.e., different people on every iteration) would also concern me. I would put a time contingency on the copyright transfer so that it expires if the issue is not published in the next few weeks.
Then you have all the issues with playing with the timeline. How are people (e.g., tenure committees or search committees) going to know when you did the work. Even saying that it was published in 2019, isn't the issue, committees want to know when you did the work. I can only imagine the headaches that it could cause with funders when trying to explain why work funded in 2018 is in a 2016 issue, regardless of when it came out. Screwing with the timeline is also probably going to mess up a lot of bibliometrics (e.g., 5 year impact factor would only go for citations through 2021 or really a 2 year window).
answered Jan 29 at 20:14
StrongBad♦StrongBad
84.1k23214416
Publisher says it will be published in the next weeks. Without that assurance, I'd probably agree about pulling it. I think it is worth a chuckle, not a panic, actually.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:16
6
@Buffy yup, and I bet they keep saying that to the poor sap who submitted a paper in 2015.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:17
3
Your "bet" is just a guess, of course. And pulling the paper keeps it unpublished for at least a while longer. Fine if you already have a good pub record and stuff in the pipeline otherwise. Less fine if not. Reacting with irritation to a journal, even when justified, does little to advance your own career. I can't say whether withdrawing is best, but I doubt you can either.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:21
@Buffy I added some more suggestions about pulling the paper.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:28
There might be an issue with pulling the paper if the author already signed over the copyright/agreement to publish forms.
– Kimball
Jan 29 at 20:42
|
show 4 more comments
I would pull the paper. I would be worried that the issue is never going to be published and that the paper is going to sit in limbo for years. The fact that the journal has no web page, even in the social sciences, is concerning to me. Are you sure that libraries are going to get this newest issue when it comes out for it to be archived?
If I were to keep the paper in the pipeline for the journal, I would want some reassurances. I would look at the journal editorial board and review process. If the review process was exceptionally speedy and the initial decision was accept as is (or very minor revisions), I would worry the journal is desperate. A high rate of turn over in editors or reviewers (i.e., different people on every iteration) would also concern me. I would put a time contingency on the copyright transfer so that it expires if the issue is not published in the next few weeks.
Then you have all the issues with playing with the timeline. How are people (e.g., tenure committees or search committees) going to know when you did the work. Even saying that it was published in 2019, isn't the issue, committees want to know when you did the work. I can only imagine the headaches that it could cause with funders when trying to explain why work funded in 2018 is in a 2016 issue, regardless of when it came out. Screwing with the timeline is also probably going to mess up a lot of bibliometrics (e.g., 5 year impact factor would only go for citations through 2021 or really a 2 year window).
answered Jan 29 at 20:14
StrongBad♦StrongBad
84.1k23214416
Publisher says it will be published in the next weeks. Without that assurance, I'd probably agree about pulling it. I think it is worth a chuckle, not a panic, actually.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:16
6
@Buffy yup, and I bet they keep saying that to the poor sap who submitted a paper in 2015.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:17
3
Your "bet" is just a guess, of course. And pulling the paper keeps it unpublished for at least a while longer. Fine if you already have a good pub record and stuff in the pipeline otherwise. Less fine if not. Reacting with irritation to a journal, even when justified, does little to advance your own career. I can't say whether withdrawing is best, but I doubt you can either.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:21
@Buffy I added some more suggestions about pulling the paper.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:28
There might be an issue with pulling the paper if the author already signed over the copyright/agreement to publish forms.
– Kimball
Jan 29 at 20:42
|
show 4 more comments
I would pull the paper. I would be worried that the issue is never going to be published and that the paper is going to sit in limbo for years. The fact that the journal has no web page, even in the social sciences, is concerning to me. Are you sure that libraries are going to get this newest issue when it comes out for it to be archived?
If I were to keep the paper in the pipeline for the journal, I would want some reassurances. I would look at the journal editorial board and review process. If the review process was exceptionally speedy and the initial decision was accept as is (or very minor revisions), I would worry the journal is desperate. A high rate of turn over in editors or reviewers (i.e., different people on every iteration) would also concern me. I would put a time contingency on the copyright transfer so that it expires if the issue is not published in the next few weeks.
Then you have all the issues with playing with the timeline. How are people (e.g., tenure committees or search committees) going to know when you did the work. Even saying that it was published in 2019, isn't the issue, committees want to know when you did the work. I can only imagine the headaches that it could cause with funders when trying to explain why work funded in 2018 is in a 2016 issue, regardless of when it came out. Screwing with the timeline is also probably going to mess up a lot of bibliometrics (e.g., 5 year impact factor would only go for citations through 2021 or really a 2 year window).
answered Jan 29 at 20:14
StrongBad♦StrongBad
84.1k23214416
I would pull the paper. I would be worried that the issue is never going to be published and that the paper is going to sit in limbo for years. The fact that the journal has no web page, even in the social sciences, is concerning to me. Are you sure that libraries are going to get this newest issue when it comes out for it to be archived?
If I were to keep the paper in the pipeline for the journal, I would want some reassurances. I would look at the journal editorial board and review process. If the review process was exceptionally speedy and the initial decision was accept as is (or very minor revisions), I would worry the journal is desperate. A high rate of turn over in editors or reviewers (i.e., different people on every iteration) would also concern me. I would put a time contingency on the copyright transfer so that it expires if the issue is not published in the next few weeks.
Then you have all the issues with playing with the timeline. How are people (e.g., tenure committees or search committees) going to know when you did the work. Even saying that it was published in 2019, isn't the issue, committees want to know when you did the work. I can only imagine the headaches that it could cause with funders when trying to explain why work funded in 2018 is in a 2016 issue, regardless of when it came out. Screwing with the timeline is also probably going to mess up a lot of bibliometrics (e.g., 5 year impact factor would only go for citations through 2021 or really a 2 year window).
answered Jan 29 at 20:14
StrongBad♦StrongBad
84.1k23214416
edited Jan 30 at 11:51
answered Jan 29 at 20:14
StrongBad♦StrongBad
84.1k23214416
answered Jan 29 at 20:14
StrongBad♦StrongBad
84.1k23214416
answered Jan 29 at 20:14
StrongBad♦StrongBad
84.1k23214416
84.1k23214416
Publisher says it will be published in the next weeks. Without that assurance, I'd probably agree about pulling it. I think it is worth a chuckle, not a panic, actually.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:16
6
@Buffy yup, and I bet they keep saying that to the poor sap who submitted a paper in 2015.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:17
3
Your "bet" is just a guess, of course. And pulling the paper keeps it unpublished for at least a while longer. Fine if you already have a good pub record and stuff in the pipeline otherwise. Less fine if not. Reacting with irritation to a journal, even when justified, does little to advance your own career. I can't say whether withdrawing is best, but I doubt you can either.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:21
@Buffy I added some more suggestions about pulling the paper.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:28
There might be an issue with pulling the paper if the author already signed over the copyright/agreement to publish forms.
– Kimball
Jan 29 at 20:42
|
show 4 more comments
Publisher says it will be published in the next weeks. Without that assurance, I'd probably agree about pulling it. I think it is worth a chuckle, not a panic, actually.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:16
6
@Buffy yup, and I bet they keep saying that to the poor sap who submitted a paper in 2015.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:17
3
Your "bet" is just a guess, of course. And pulling the paper keeps it unpublished for at least a while longer. Fine if you already have a good pub record and stuff in the pipeline otherwise. Less fine if not. Reacting with irritation to a journal, even when justified, does little to advance your own career. I can't say whether withdrawing is best, but I doubt you can either.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:21
@Buffy I added some more suggestions about pulling the paper.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:28
There might be an issue with pulling the paper if the author already signed over the copyright/agreement to publish forms.
– Kimball
Jan 29 at 20:42
Publisher says it will be published in the next weeks. Without that assurance, I'd probably agree about pulling it. I think it is worth a chuckle, not a panic, actually.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:16
Publisher says it will be published in the next weeks. Without that assurance, I'd probably agree about pulling it. I think it is worth a chuckle, not a panic, actually.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:16
6
6
@Buffy yup, and I bet they keep saying that to the poor sap who submitted a paper in 2015.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:17
@Buffy yup, and I bet they keep saying that to the poor sap who submitted a paper in 2015.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:17
3
3
Your "bet" is just a guess, of course. And pulling the paper keeps it unpublished for at least a while longer. Fine if you already have a good pub record and stuff in the pipeline otherwise. Less fine if not. Reacting with irritation to a journal, even when justified, does little to advance your own career. I can't say whether withdrawing is best, but I doubt you can either.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:21
Your "bet" is just a guess, of course. And pulling the paper keeps it unpublished for at least a while longer. Fine if you already have a good pub record and stuff in the pipeline otherwise. Less fine if not. Reacting with irritation to a journal, even when justified, does little to advance your own career. I can't say whether withdrawing is best, but I doubt you can either.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:21
@Buffy I added some more suggestions about pulling the paper.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:28
@Buffy I added some more suggestions about pulling the paper.
– StrongBad♦
Jan 29 at 20:28
There might be an issue with pulling the paper if the author already signed over the copyright/agreement to publish forms.
– Kimball
Jan 29 at 20:42
There might be an issue with pulling the paper if the author already signed over the copyright/agreement to publish forms.
– Kimball
Jan 29 at 20:42
|
show 4 more comments
In your CV, I think it would be proper to put the official date (2016), but also acceptable to note that it was (will be) "published 2019". For presentation at the conference, I assume you need to submit it first. You can send a note to the program chair explaining the situation.
It will always be a bit anomalous, but it is what it is. Even in a formal citation you can list both dates - 2016 issue, published 2019.
answered Jan 29 at 19:36
BuffyBuffy
47.5k13154240
add a comment |
In your CV, I think it would be proper to put the official date (2016), but also acceptable to note that it was (will be) "published 2019". For presentation at the conference, I assume you need to submit it first. You can send a note to the program chair explaining the situation.
It will always be a bit anomalous, but it is what it is. Even in a formal citation you can list both dates - 2016 issue, published 2019.
answered Jan 29 at 19:36
BuffyBuffy
47.5k13154240
add a comment |
In your CV, I think it would be proper to put the official date (2016), but also acceptable to note that it was (will be) "published 2019". For presentation at the conference, I assume you need to submit it first. You can send a note to the program chair explaining the situation.
It will always be a bit anomalous, but it is what it is. Even in a formal citation you can list both dates - 2016 issue, published 2019.
answered Jan 29 at 19:36
BuffyBuffy
47.5k13154240
In your CV, I think it would be proper to put the official date (2016), but also acceptable to note that it was (will be) "published 2019". For presentation at the conference, I assume you need to submit it first. You can send a note to the program chair explaining the situation.
It will always be a bit anomalous, but it is what it is. Even in a formal citation you can list both dates - 2016 issue, published 2019.
answered Jan 29 at 19:36
BuffyBuffy
47.5k13154240
answered Jan 29 at 19:36
BuffyBuffy
47.5k13154240
answered Jan 29 at 19:36
BuffyBuffy
47.5k13154240
answered Jan 29 at 19:36
BuffyBuffy
47.5k13154240
47.5k13154240
add a comment |
add a comment |
Chances are, the journal is having trouble filling its issues. It doesn't have enough papers, so issues promised to subscribers were never delivered - the journal now "owes" its subscribers the missing issues and your paper was put into one of these issues.
C'est la vie.
answered Jan 29 at 19:55
AllureAllure
31.2k1997147
There might be a lot of reasons for not being able to produce issues in a timely manner. If the journal were dedicated to an especially arcane field, that would be pretty common, I think. But other, valid and invalid, reasons might come to mind.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:45
If it's a new journal, my guess would be that the editorial board were overly optimistic about how well the community will react to it (e.g. by starting at 4 issues/year instead of 2 issues/year). If it's an old journal, then I'd guess either the field is becoming less popular, or the journal overestimated future submissions and decided to increase its issue count prematurely.
– Allure
Jan 29 at 23:22
add a comment |
Chances are, the journal is having trouble filling its issues. It doesn't have enough papers, so issues promised to subscribers were never delivered - the journal now "owes" its subscribers the missing issues and your paper was put into one of these issues.
C'est la vie.
answered Jan 29 at 19:55
AllureAllure
31.2k1997147
There might be a lot of reasons for not being able to produce issues in a timely manner. If the journal were dedicated to an especially arcane field, that would be pretty common, I think. But other, valid and invalid, reasons might come to mind.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:45
If it's a new journal, my guess would be that the editorial board were overly optimistic about how well the community will react to it (e.g. by starting at 4 issues/year instead of 2 issues/year). If it's an old journal, then I'd guess either the field is becoming less popular, or the journal overestimated future submissions and decided to increase its issue count prematurely.
– Allure
Jan 29 at 23:22
add a comment |
Chances are, the journal is having trouble filling its issues. It doesn't have enough papers, so issues promised to subscribers were never delivered - the journal now "owes" its subscribers the missing issues and your paper was put into one of these issues.
C'est la vie.
answered Jan 29 at 19:55
AllureAllure
31.2k1997147
Chances are, the journal is having trouble filling its issues. It doesn't have enough papers, so issues promised to subscribers were never delivered - the journal now "owes" its subscribers the missing issues and your paper was put into one of these issues.
C'est la vie.
answered Jan 29 at 19:55
AllureAllure
31.2k1997147
answered Jan 29 at 19:55
AllureAllure
31.2k1997147
answered Jan 29 at 19:55
AllureAllure
31.2k1997147
answered Jan 29 at 19:55
AllureAllure
31.2k1997147
31.2k1997147
There might be a lot of reasons for not being able to produce issues in a timely manner. If the journal were dedicated to an especially arcane field, that would be pretty common, I think. But other, valid and invalid, reasons might come to mind.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:45
If it's a new journal, my guess would be that the editorial board were overly optimistic about how well the community will react to it (e.g. by starting at 4 issues/year instead of 2 issues/year). If it's an old journal, then I'd guess either the field is becoming less popular, or the journal overestimated future submissions and decided to increase its issue count prematurely.
– Allure
Jan 29 at 23:22
add a comment |
There might be a lot of reasons for not being able to produce issues in a timely manner. If the journal were dedicated to an especially arcane field, that would be pretty common, I think. But other, valid and invalid, reasons might come to mind.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:45
If it's a new journal, my guess would be that the editorial board were overly optimistic about how well the community will react to it (e.g. by starting at 4 issues/year instead of 2 issues/year). If it's an old journal, then I'd guess either the field is becoming less popular, or the journal overestimated future submissions and decided to increase its issue count prematurely.
– Allure
Jan 29 at 23:22
There might be a lot of reasons for not being able to produce issues in a timely manner. If the journal were dedicated to an especially arcane field, that would be pretty common, I think. But other, valid and invalid, reasons might come to mind.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:45
There might be a lot of reasons for not being able to produce issues in a timely manner. If the journal were dedicated to an especially arcane field, that would be pretty common, I think. But other, valid and invalid, reasons might come to mind.
– Buffy
Jan 29 at 20:45
If it's a new journal, my guess would be that the editorial board were overly optimistic about how well the community will react to it (e.g. by starting at 4 issues/year instead of 2 issues/year). If it's an old journal, then I'd guess either the field is becoming less popular, or the journal overestimated future submissions and decided to increase its issue count prematurely.
– Allure
Jan 29 at 23:22
If it's a new journal, my guess would be that the editorial board were overly optimistic about how well the community will react to it (e.g. by starting at 4 issues/year instead of 2 issues/year). If it's an old journal, then I'd guess either the field is becoming less popular, or the journal overestimated future submissions and decided to increase its issue count prematurely.
– Allure
Jan 29 at 23:22
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f123980%2fhow-to-make-sense-of-a-2019-paper-published-in-2016-journal-issue%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
27
If any journal editor is reading this...please don't do this ever. Why, why, why.
– Bryan Krause
Jan 29 at 19:34
10
Are you sure that's not just a typo, and the editor didn't mean 2019 after all?
– corey979
Jan 29 at 19:53
11
In these days academics get evaluated on bibliometrics more and more aggressively. At least where I work,"you must have N papers published in the past M years" is a common requirement for various funds / promotions. With this in mind, having a 2019 paper published with a 2016 date is an even worse deal than it looks. Maybe it doesn't matter to you now, but it may matter 3-4 years from now.
– Federico Poloni
Jan 29 at 20:28
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– eykanal♦
Jan 30 at 21:18