description of papers that have not been submitted to a venue? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InHow “submitted”, “to appear”, “accepted” papers are evaluated in a CV?What percentage of papers submitted to a conference or journal have been previously rejected in the same or another venue?How to automatically extract submitted/accepted dates of many journal papers?Is it okay/common/good to mention the submitted papers in my phd thesis?How to describe a paper for which you have not yet submitted revisions in CV?JCR publication required to enrol in PhD program - is it common?How can you argue that your leading publication venue is important?Unable to decide whether to submit the work to conference or journal. Possible mood switches before deadline and how to deal with it?How To List Other Academics' Conference Papers Discussing My Artwork?Self-plagiarism of thesis for public report
What is the accessibility of a package's `Private` context variables?
Reference request: Oldest number theory books with (unsolved) exercises?
When should I buy a clipper card after flying to OAK?
Origin of "cooter" meaning "vagina"
FPGA - DIY Programming
Multiply Two Integer Polynomials
Have you ever entered Singapore using a different passport or name?
Why do we hear so much about the Trump administration deciding to impose and then remove tariffs?
Can a rogue use sneak attack with weapons that have the thrown property even if they are not thrown?
Why isn't airport relocation done gradually?
Return to UK after having been refused entry years ago
Landlord wants to switch my lease to a "Land contract" to "get back at the city"
How technical should a Scrum Master be to effectively remove impediments?
Looking for Correct Greek Translation for Heraclitus
Apparent duplicates between Haynes service instructions and MOT
Can a flute soloist sit?
Why is the Constellation's nose gear so long?
Who coined the term "madman theory"?
Geography at the pixel level
Can one be advised by a professor who is very far away?
How to check whether the reindex working or not in Magento?
Protecting Dualbooting Windows from dangerous code (like rm -rf)
How to notate time signature switching consistently every measure
Why was M87 targetted for the Event Horizon Telescope instead of Sagittarius A*?
description of papers that have not been submitted to a venue?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InHow “submitted”, “to appear”, “accepted” papers are evaluated in a CV?What percentage of papers submitted to a conference or journal have been previously rejected in the same or another venue?How to automatically extract submitted/accepted dates of many journal papers?Is it okay/common/good to mention the submitted papers in my phd thesis?How to describe a paper for which you have not yet submitted revisions in CV?JCR publication required to enrol in PhD program - is it common?How can you argue that your leading publication venue is important?Unable to decide whether to submit the work to conference or journal. Possible mood switches before deadline and how to deal with it?How To List Other Academics' Conference Papers Discussing My Artwork?Self-plagiarism of thesis for public report
I have some published papers and in my CV, I mention them under the heading of "Publications".
However, I have some papers that I have not yet submitted to a venue (conference or journal). I think that I cannot mention these papers as "Publications".
What is the best and more appropriate description for the papers that have not been submitted yet? e.g. "Research Papers"? Or "Research Manuscripts"? Or something else?
publications terminology titles
edited yesterday
David Richerby
30.4k662126
asked yesterday
QuestionerQuestioner
1734
add a comment |
I have some published papers and in my CV, I mention them under the heading of "Publications".
However, I have some papers that I have not yet submitted to a venue (conference or journal). I think that I cannot mention these papers as "Publications".
What is the best and more appropriate description for the papers that have not been submitted yet? e.g. "Research Papers"? Or "Research Manuscripts"? Or something else?
publications terminology titles
edited yesterday
David Richerby
30.4k662126
asked yesterday
QuestionerQuestioner
1734
6
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
yesterday
1
"Manuscript in preparation" is standard from what I've seen. But note - while it's OK for a junior researcher with only 4-5 papers to list those in preparation, it doesn't look good for more senior people. If you're new, it's fair to show that you have more potential work, but if you already have even a modest publication record, "in preparation" looks naive and/or like resume-padding
– iayork
yesterday
add a comment |
I have some published papers and in my CV, I mention them under the heading of "Publications".
However, I have some papers that I have not yet submitted to a venue (conference or journal). I think that I cannot mention these papers as "Publications".
What is the best and more appropriate description for the papers that have not been submitted yet? e.g. "Research Papers"? Or "Research Manuscripts"? Or something else?
publications terminology titles
edited yesterday
David Richerby
30.4k662126
asked yesterday
QuestionerQuestioner
1734
I have some published papers and in my CV, I mention them under the heading of "Publications".
However, I have some papers that I have not yet submitted to a venue (conference or journal). I think that I cannot mention these papers as "Publications".
What is the best and more appropriate description for the papers that have not been submitted yet? e.g. "Research Papers"? Or "Research Manuscripts"? Or something else?
publications terminology titles
publications terminology titles
edited yesterday
David Richerby
30.4k662126
asked yesterday
QuestionerQuestioner
1734
edited yesterday
David Richerby
30.4k662126
asked yesterday
QuestionerQuestioner
1734
edited yesterday
David Richerby
30.4k662126
edited yesterday
David Richerby
30.4k662126
edited yesterday
David Richerby
30.4k662126
30.4k662126
asked yesterday
QuestionerQuestioner
1734
asked yesterday
QuestionerQuestioner
1734
asked yesterday
QuestionerQuestioner
1734
1734
6
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
yesterday
1
"Manuscript in preparation" is standard from what I've seen. But note - while it's OK for a junior researcher with only 4-5 papers to list those in preparation, it doesn't look good for more senior people. If you're new, it's fair to show that you have more potential work, but if you already have even a modest publication record, "in preparation" looks naive and/or like resume-padding
– iayork
yesterday
add a comment |
6
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
yesterday
1
"Manuscript in preparation" is standard from what I've seen. But note - while it's OK for a junior researcher with only 4-5 papers to list those in preparation, it doesn't look good for more senior people. If you're new, it's fair to show that you have more potential work, but if you already have even a modest publication record, "in preparation" looks naive and/or like resume-padding
– iayork
yesterday
6
6
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
yesterday
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
yesterday
1
1
"Manuscript in preparation" is standard from what I've seen. But note - while it's OK for a junior researcher with only 4-5 papers to list those in preparation, it doesn't look good for more senior people. If you're new, it's fair to show that you have more potential work, but if you already have even a modest publication record, "in preparation" looks naive and/or like resume-padding
– iayork
yesterday
"Manuscript in preparation" is standard from what I've seen. But note - while it's OK for a junior researcher with only 4-5 papers to list those in preparation, it doesn't look good for more senior people. If you're new, it's fair to show that you have more potential work, but if you already have even a modest publication record, "in preparation" looks naive and/or like resume-padding
– iayork
yesterday
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Work in Progress might be good as it implies that there may still be some work to do in the writing - and even some uncertainty about the final title. In addition it also subtly says that you are still active and not resting on your old achievements.
You could, in addition, mark each paper according to its readiness, or at least those that are ready for submission.
I think that Research Papers carries a connotation that they are internal and may not be published.
answered yesterday
BuffyBuffy
57.1k17180275
1
To me, "work in progress" suggests that the paper is not yet complete and quite likely that even the research leading to it has not yet been finished. In other words, it isn't a paper yet. Since the question asks about actual papers, I think the work is more advanced than "work in progress".
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
@DavidRicherby, as, I said, mark it appropriately. But it is a bit better to be conservative in such things than overly optimistic.
– Buffy
yesterday
add a comment |
I want to second the idea that your "Publications" or "Scholarship" section of your CV should have subsections. Typically, there would be separate subsections something along these lines: books and book chapters; peer-reviewed journal articles; peer-reviewed conference proceedings; non-peer-reviewed publications; unpublished manuscripts; manuscripts in preparation.
I also recommend highly that any piece of scholarship that you list on your CV in this section should be publicly available, if only by request. This is of course the case for published materials. For unpublished materials and papers in preparation, I think the best practice is that you should make them available upon request. Thus, it is best not to list something until it is in state where you are ready to share it.
answered yesterday
alereraalerera
3363
New contributor
alerera is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I suggest using subdivisions in your list of publications, for instance:
- Peer-reviewed journal articles
- Peer-reviewed conference articles
- Non-peer reviewed publications
- [edited] Future submissions
answered yesterday
ErwanErwan
3,5011017
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
yesterday
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
yesterday
add a comment |
I recommend to take a positive attitude and just list them in sequence (i.e. reverse chronological, right up front, along with the rest) and say "in preparation for J. Appl. Phys." or whatever journal is planned. Use your common sense. But if you publish all the time in J. Appl. Phys. and know the paper meets the subject and quality hurdles, fine, list that. If you seriously think it is a Science/Nature/Phys Rev paper, than list that. I'm going to assume you are an accomplished paper writer and getting publisheder. Or well on your way to being there. So this should not be rocket science to know where you plan to submit. And you should be submitting to places you plan to get accepted at (not chasing rainbows or submitting junk).
Given that you say "in preparation" or "submitted" or whatever qualifier, it's OBVIOUS that the paper may never get finished (or might evolve, split, merge, etc.) Even "in press" still has some wiggle room in that there is a remote possibility it shifts venue or the like (I mean it's not in the archived literature yet). So what. Not a big deal. Note, I see many CVs on the web that have this exact structure. The simple caveat is plenty. You don't need to obsess about different sections or the like.
The other, not insignificant, benefit is that it concentrates your mind. And makes you more likely to finish, submit, get published. Because you have identified the target.
answered yesterday
guestguest
111
New contributor
guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
yesterday
1
There's no real wiggle room in "in press". It means that publication has been agreed with the journal and you're just waiting for the article to be physically printed. Unless something very unusual happens, the paper will appear in the stated venue.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Dave/Matt: of course. The words give their own import: in prep, submitted, in review, in press, etc.
– guest
yesterday
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%2f127814%2fdescription-of-papers-that-have-not-been-submitted-to-a-venue%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Work in Progress might be good as it implies that there may still be some work to do in the writing - and even some uncertainty about the final title. In addition it also subtly says that you are still active and not resting on your old achievements.
You could, in addition, mark each paper according to its readiness, or at least those that are ready for submission.
I think that Research Papers carries a connotation that they are internal and may not be published.
answered yesterday
BuffyBuffy
57.1k17180275
1
To me, "work in progress" suggests that the paper is not yet complete and quite likely that even the research leading to it has not yet been finished. In other words, it isn't a paper yet. Since the question asks about actual papers, I think the work is more advanced than "work in progress".
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
@DavidRicherby, as, I said, mark it appropriately. But it is a bit better to be conservative in such things than overly optimistic.
– Buffy
yesterday
add a comment |
Work in Progress might be good as it implies that there may still be some work to do in the writing - and even some uncertainty about the final title. In addition it also subtly says that you are still active and not resting on your old achievements.
You could, in addition, mark each paper according to its readiness, or at least those that are ready for submission.
I think that Research Papers carries a connotation that they are internal and may not be published.
answered yesterday
BuffyBuffy
57.1k17180275
1
To me, "work in progress" suggests that the paper is not yet complete and quite likely that even the research leading to it has not yet been finished. In other words, it isn't a paper yet. Since the question asks about actual papers, I think the work is more advanced than "work in progress".
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
@DavidRicherby, as, I said, mark it appropriately. But it is a bit better to be conservative in such things than overly optimistic.
– Buffy
yesterday
add a comment |
Work in Progress might be good as it implies that there may still be some work to do in the writing - and even some uncertainty about the final title. In addition it also subtly says that you are still active and not resting on your old achievements.
You could, in addition, mark each paper according to its readiness, or at least those that are ready for submission.
I think that Research Papers carries a connotation that they are internal and may not be published.
answered yesterday
BuffyBuffy
57.1k17180275
Work in Progress might be good as it implies that there may still be some work to do in the writing - and even some uncertainty about the final title. In addition it also subtly says that you are still active and not resting on your old achievements.
You could, in addition, mark each paper according to its readiness, or at least those that are ready for submission.
I think that Research Papers carries a connotation that they are internal and may not be published.
answered yesterday
BuffyBuffy
57.1k17180275
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
BuffyBuffy
57.1k17180275
answered yesterday
BuffyBuffy
57.1k17180275
answered yesterday
BuffyBuffy
57.1k17180275
57.1k17180275
1
To me, "work in progress" suggests that the paper is not yet complete and quite likely that even the research leading to it has not yet been finished. In other words, it isn't a paper yet. Since the question asks about actual papers, I think the work is more advanced than "work in progress".
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
@DavidRicherby, as, I said, mark it appropriately. But it is a bit better to be conservative in such things than overly optimistic.
– Buffy
yesterday
add a comment |
1
To me, "work in progress" suggests that the paper is not yet complete and quite likely that even the research leading to it has not yet been finished. In other words, it isn't a paper yet. Since the question asks about actual papers, I think the work is more advanced than "work in progress".
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
@DavidRicherby, as, I said, mark it appropriately. But it is a bit better to be conservative in such things than overly optimistic.
– Buffy
yesterday
1
1
To me, "work in progress" suggests that the paper is not yet complete and quite likely that even the research leading to it has not yet been finished. In other words, it isn't a paper yet. Since the question asks about actual papers, I think the work is more advanced than "work in progress".
– David Richerby
yesterday
To me, "work in progress" suggests that the paper is not yet complete and quite likely that even the research leading to it has not yet been finished. In other words, it isn't a paper yet. Since the question asks about actual papers, I think the work is more advanced than "work in progress".
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
1
@DavidRicherby, as, I said, mark it appropriately. But it is a bit better to be conservative in such things than overly optimistic.
– Buffy
yesterday
@DavidRicherby, as, I said, mark it appropriately. But it is a bit better to be conservative in such things than overly optimistic.
– Buffy
yesterday
add a comment |
I want to second the idea that your "Publications" or "Scholarship" section of your CV should have subsections. Typically, there would be separate subsections something along these lines: books and book chapters; peer-reviewed journal articles; peer-reviewed conference proceedings; non-peer-reviewed publications; unpublished manuscripts; manuscripts in preparation.
I also recommend highly that any piece of scholarship that you list on your CV in this section should be publicly available, if only by request. This is of course the case for published materials. For unpublished materials and papers in preparation, I think the best practice is that you should make them available upon request. Thus, it is best not to list something until it is in state where you are ready to share it.
answered yesterday
alereraalerera
3363
New contributor
alerera is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I want to second the idea that your "Publications" or "Scholarship" section of your CV should have subsections. Typically, there would be separate subsections something along these lines: books and book chapters; peer-reviewed journal articles; peer-reviewed conference proceedings; non-peer-reviewed publications; unpublished manuscripts; manuscripts in preparation.
I also recommend highly that any piece of scholarship that you list on your CV in this section should be publicly available, if only by request. This is of course the case for published materials. For unpublished materials and papers in preparation, I think the best practice is that you should make them available upon request. Thus, it is best not to list something until it is in state where you are ready to share it.
answered yesterday
alereraalerera
3363
New contributor
alerera is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I want to second the idea that your "Publications" or "Scholarship" section of your CV should have subsections. Typically, there would be separate subsections something along these lines: books and book chapters; peer-reviewed journal articles; peer-reviewed conference proceedings; non-peer-reviewed publications; unpublished manuscripts; manuscripts in preparation.
I also recommend highly that any piece of scholarship that you list on your CV in this section should be publicly available, if only by request. This is of course the case for published materials. For unpublished materials and papers in preparation, I think the best practice is that you should make them available upon request. Thus, it is best not to list something until it is in state where you are ready to share it.
answered yesterday
alereraalerera
3363
New contributor
alerera is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I want to second the idea that your "Publications" or "Scholarship" section of your CV should have subsections. Typically, there would be separate subsections something along these lines: books and book chapters; peer-reviewed journal articles; peer-reviewed conference proceedings; non-peer-reviewed publications; unpublished manuscripts; manuscripts in preparation.
I also recommend highly that any piece of scholarship that you list on your CV in this section should be publicly available, if only by request. This is of course the case for published materials. For unpublished materials and papers in preparation, I think the best practice is that you should make them available upon request. Thus, it is best not to list something until it is in state where you are ready to share it.
answered yesterday
alereraalerera
3363
New contributor
alerera is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered yesterday
alereraalerera
3363
New contributor
alerera is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered yesterday
alereraalerera
3363
answered yesterday
alereraalerera
3363
3363
New contributor
alerera is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
alerera is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
alerera is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
I suggest using subdivisions in your list of publications, for instance:
- Peer-reviewed journal articles
- Peer-reviewed conference articles
- Non-peer reviewed publications
- [edited] Future submissions
answered yesterday
ErwanErwan
3,5011017
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
yesterday
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
yesterday
add a comment |
I suggest using subdivisions in your list of publications, for instance:
- Peer-reviewed journal articles
- Peer-reviewed conference articles
- Non-peer reviewed publications
- [edited] Future submissions
answered yesterday
ErwanErwan
3,5011017
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
yesterday
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
yesterday
add a comment |
I suggest using subdivisions in your list of publications, for instance:
- Peer-reviewed journal articles
- Peer-reviewed conference articles
- Non-peer reviewed publications
- [edited] Future submissions
answered yesterday
ErwanErwan
3,5011017
I suggest using subdivisions in your list of publications, for instance:
- Peer-reviewed journal articles
- Peer-reviewed conference articles
- Non-peer reviewed publications
- [edited] Future submissions
answered yesterday
ErwanErwan
3,5011017
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
ErwanErwan
3,5011017
answered yesterday
ErwanErwan
3,5011017
answered yesterday
ErwanErwan
3,5011017
3,5011017
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
yesterday
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
yesterday
add a comment |
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
yesterday
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
yesterday
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
yesterday
@Buffy you're right, I didn't think this through. edited.
– Erwan
yesterday
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
yesterday
Good, but note to the OP that something like "pending publications" is misleading if the work hasn't been submitted. If you are questioned on it you will be embarrassed (at best).
– Buffy
yesterday
add a comment |
I recommend to take a positive attitude and just list them in sequence (i.e. reverse chronological, right up front, along with the rest) and say "in preparation for J. Appl. Phys." or whatever journal is planned. Use your common sense. But if you publish all the time in J. Appl. Phys. and know the paper meets the subject and quality hurdles, fine, list that. If you seriously think it is a Science/Nature/Phys Rev paper, than list that. I'm going to assume you are an accomplished paper writer and getting publisheder. Or well on your way to being there. So this should not be rocket science to know where you plan to submit. And you should be submitting to places you plan to get accepted at (not chasing rainbows or submitting junk).
Given that you say "in preparation" or "submitted" or whatever qualifier, it's OBVIOUS that the paper may never get finished (or might evolve, split, merge, etc.) Even "in press" still has some wiggle room in that there is a remote possibility it shifts venue or the like (I mean it's not in the archived literature yet). So what. Not a big deal. Note, I see many CVs on the web that have this exact structure. The simple caveat is plenty. You don't need to obsess about different sections or the like.
The other, not insignificant, benefit is that it concentrates your mind. And makes you more likely to finish, submit, get published. Because you have identified the target.
answered yesterday
guestguest
111
New contributor
guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
yesterday
1
There's no real wiggle room in "in press". It means that publication has been agreed with the journal and you're just waiting for the article to be physically printed. Unless something very unusual happens, the paper will appear in the stated venue.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Dave/Matt: of course. The words give their own import: in prep, submitted, in review, in press, etc.
– guest
yesterday
add a comment |
I recommend to take a positive attitude and just list them in sequence (i.e. reverse chronological, right up front, along with the rest) and say "in preparation for J. Appl. Phys." or whatever journal is planned. Use your common sense. But if you publish all the time in J. Appl. Phys. and know the paper meets the subject and quality hurdles, fine, list that. If you seriously think it is a Science/Nature/Phys Rev paper, than list that. I'm going to assume you are an accomplished paper writer and getting publisheder. Or well on your way to being there. So this should not be rocket science to know where you plan to submit. And you should be submitting to places you plan to get accepted at (not chasing rainbows or submitting junk).
Given that you say "in preparation" or "submitted" or whatever qualifier, it's OBVIOUS that the paper may never get finished (or might evolve, split, merge, etc.) Even "in press" still has some wiggle room in that there is a remote possibility it shifts venue or the like (I mean it's not in the archived literature yet). So what. Not a big deal. Note, I see many CVs on the web that have this exact structure. The simple caveat is plenty. You don't need to obsess about different sections or the like.
The other, not insignificant, benefit is that it concentrates your mind. And makes you more likely to finish, submit, get published. Because you have identified the target.
answered yesterday
guestguest
111
New contributor
guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
yesterday
1
There's no real wiggle room in "in press". It means that publication has been agreed with the journal and you're just waiting for the article to be physically printed. Unless something very unusual happens, the paper will appear in the stated venue.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Dave/Matt: of course. The words give their own import: in prep, submitted, in review, in press, etc.
– guest
yesterday
add a comment |
I recommend to take a positive attitude and just list them in sequence (i.e. reverse chronological, right up front, along with the rest) and say "in preparation for J. Appl. Phys." or whatever journal is planned. Use your common sense. But if you publish all the time in J. Appl. Phys. and know the paper meets the subject and quality hurdles, fine, list that. If you seriously think it is a Science/Nature/Phys Rev paper, than list that. I'm going to assume you are an accomplished paper writer and getting publisheder. Or well on your way to being there. So this should not be rocket science to know where you plan to submit. And you should be submitting to places you plan to get accepted at (not chasing rainbows or submitting junk).
Given that you say "in preparation" or "submitted" or whatever qualifier, it's OBVIOUS that the paper may never get finished (or might evolve, split, merge, etc.) Even "in press" still has some wiggle room in that there is a remote possibility it shifts venue or the like (I mean it's not in the archived literature yet). So what. Not a big deal. Note, I see many CVs on the web that have this exact structure. The simple caveat is plenty. You don't need to obsess about different sections or the like.
The other, not insignificant, benefit is that it concentrates your mind. And makes you more likely to finish, submit, get published. Because you have identified the target.
answered yesterday
guestguest
111
New contributor
guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I recommend to take a positive attitude and just list them in sequence (i.e. reverse chronological, right up front, along with the rest) and say "in preparation for J. Appl. Phys." or whatever journal is planned. Use your common sense. But if you publish all the time in J. Appl. Phys. and know the paper meets the subject and quality hurdles, fine, list that. If you seriously think it is a Science/Nature/Phys Rev paper, than list that. I'm going to assume you are an accomplished paper writer and getting publisheder. Or well on your way to being there. So this should not be rocket science to know where you plan to submit. And you should be submitting to places you plan to get accepted at (not chasing rainbows or submitting junk).
Given that you say "in preparation" or "submitted" or whatever qualifier, it's OBVIOUS that the paper may never get finished (or might evolve, split, merge, etc.) Even "in press" still has some wiggle room in that there is a remote possibility it shifts venue or the like (I mean it's not in the archived literature yet). So what. Not a big deal. Note, I see many CVs on the web that have this exact structure. The simple caveat is plenty. You don't need to obsess about different sections or the like.
The other, not insignificant, benefit is that it concentrates your mind. And makes you more likely to finish, submit, get published. Because you have identified the target.
answered yesterday
guestguest
111
New contributor
guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered yesterday
guestguest
111
New contributor
guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered yesterday
guestguest
111
answered yesterday
guestguest
111
111
New contributor
guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
yesterday
1
There's no real wiggle room in "in press". It means that publication has been agreed with the journal and you're just waiting for the article to be physically printed. Unless something very unusual happens, the paper will appear in the stated venue.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Dave/Matt: of course. The words give their own import: in prep, submitted, in review, in press, etc.
– guest
yesterday
add a comment |
1
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
yesterday
1
There's no real wiggle room in "in press". It means that publication has been agreed with the journal and you're just waiting for the article to be physically printed. Unless something very unusual happens, the paper will appear in the stated venue.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Dave/Matt: of course. The words give their own import: in prep, submitted, in review, in press, etc.
– guest
yesterday
1
1
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
yesterday
To my mind, "in press at X" is much more impressive (sorry) than "in preparation for X." The in press paper has been reviewed and accepted, so the journal name carries some weight. For things that are in preparation or submitted, the title may be informative, but the journal choice is...aspirational: reformatting a paper for a high profile journal isn't usually the hard part of publishing there. "Under Review" is in the middle, since your paper has usually been evaluated, at least by an editor, but perhaps not completely.
– Matt
yesterday
1
1
There's no real wiggle room in "in press". It means that publication has been agreed with the journal and you're just waiting for the article to be physically printed. Unless something very unusual happens, the paper will appear in the stated venue.
– David Richerby
yesterday
There's no real wiggle room in "in press". It means that publication has been agreed with the journal and you're just waiting for the article to be physically printed. Unless something very unusual happens, the paper will appear in the stated venue.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Dave/Matt: of course. The words give their own import: in prep, submitted, in review, in press, etc.
– guest
yesterday
Dave/Matt: of course. The words give their own import: in prep, submitted, in review, in press, etc.
– guest
yesterday
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%2f127814%2fdescription-of-papers-that-have-not-been-submitted-to-a-venue%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
6
"Manuscripts in preparation" is pretty much the standard way AFAIK.
– 299792458
yesterday
1
"Manuscript in preparation" is standard from what I've seen. But note - while it's OK for a junior researcher with only 4-5 papers to list those in preparation, it doesn't look good for more senior people. If you're new, it's fair to show that you have more potential work, but if you already have even a modest publication record, "in preparation" looks naive and/or like resume-padding
– iayork
yesterday