After extensive searching on the Internet, I failed to find a venue for Hispanists to share with colleagues their myriad of experiences with publishing, particularly the handling of the review and publication processes by refereed journals. My motive is not to encourage irrational venting sessions for rejected authors, but to prompt an intelligent and useful exchange that might assist scholars with choosing prospective journals that exemplify professionalim and integrity; journals that conduct the entire review process expeditiously and provide authors with useful feedback for improving their manuscripts. Many true horror stories have been shared at academic conferences and within language and literature departments across the country, and these should indeed be shared here to help each other avoid potential pitfalls. Besides assisting our fellow scholars, if this blog also succeeds at ultimately improving the management of certain refereed journals, then many in the profession will benefit.
Speedy return, with a few helpful commentaries. However, the reviewer entirely missed the point and was a tad pedantic and paternalistic. The paper was not reviewed by two persons as the journal claims, but since the editor said she mostly "agreed" with the reviewer, I presume that counts for two.
The journal veers towards philology, literary history, and "commentaire du texte". My bad for not having researched better its approach. Other than some structuralism and semiotics in its earlier formulations, the journal is weak in theory. I'd advise against sending anything heavy with theory, cultural criticism, or interdisciplinary approaches.
Accepts long papers, which is good for papers with heavy research / documentation.
I had the exact same experience you describe in your first lines. I did have to request that they send me the reviewers' comments, and they did so after two weeks. My article was on the theory side--not fully though.
My experience with this journal has been quite strange. They have contacted me twice inviting me to review books. In both instances I have declined politely, explaining the book was too bad or I was too busy. They didn't even reply to thank me. The first time this happened I thought they would never contacted me again, but they do a second time. I think when the journal started in the late 1990s it was very promising. However, with 8 (or more?) issues per year, many articles are very bad. I wouldn't send anything there.
Very positive experience with this journal. The initial decision took about 4 months. They accepted my essay with some revisions, and the requested revisions were clearly expressed to me. The editing process was smooth, much of it conducted online. Time between acceptance and publication was about one year. I received 50 offprints (copies) of my article, which seems quite generous, as well as a copy of the volume in which the piece was published. I would submit here again quite happily.
Great question. Bulletin of Hispanic Studies and Bulletin of Spanish Studies are two separate journals BUT they have a connected past. See http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/cbsshistory.asp for the explanation.
I had a two-month turn around, and some very helpful comments (along with an acceptance). My article was not heavy in theory, so I cannot confirm or deny the other comments about their dislike of overly theoretical manuscripts.
BHS or BSS? Bulletin of Hispanic Studies (Liverpool) is the original journal. BSS was created by a former editor of BSS who decided she wanted to "keep" the journal and take it to Glasgow. BHS still remains, outside the UK, the ONLY Bulletin, and BSS is very much unknown.
I agree with the above commentary. The Bulletin was created by E.A. Peers in the 1920's. The editors in the 1990's were Prof Severin (the top Hispanist in the UK) and someone else. This someone else moved to Glasgow and decided that she would "take" the Bulletin to Glasgow. For a few years there were two Bulletins, with the same title and the same cover. THe case went to court and the judge ruled that the Glasgow Bulletin would be called the Bulletin of Spanish Studies (the original title of the journal) and the Liverpool journal would continue to be called Bulletin of Hispanic Studies. If you grab a copy of BSS you will read they claim to be the original journal. THe truth is hardly anyone outside the UK knows about the BSS. Liverpool has retained the reputation of high quality. But I don't think BSS is all that bad.
En 2012 tuve una experiencia negativa con esta revista y, como no creo que haya mejorado mucho en estos meses, la desaconsejo plenamente. El email que recibí rechazando mi artículo fue enviado poco después de mandar yo mi propuesta. Por este motivo y por el contenido del correo electrónico veo claro que ni se han molestado en leer mi contribución, lo cual me parece una falta de respeto y de profesionalidad. En primer lugar, solamente se habla de un revisor (cualquier revista mínimamente decente tiene dos) y, en segundo, no se me ha enviado ningún feedback. Lo único que se decía en el cuerpo del email era que las conclusiones no estaban lo suficientemente demostradas de acuerdo con la persona que teóricamente leyó el artículo. Sin duda, es mejor y más serio el BHS (solo la página web ya dice bastante).
Just like the previous commenter, I got the distinct impression that rather than an editorial board, only the General Editor read my article. Why even have an editorial board if you're not passing the article on to be read & evaluated?
Many of these comments are unfounded. The Bulletin of Spanish Studies has been going from strength to strength. It's one of the few journals that has a following, and contributions from, Spanish, British and North American academics. It really is one of the top international journals.
To the July 10 commenter: most, if not all, journals subject every submission to a pre-review reading to see if it is suitable enough to send out to the blind reviewers on their board. It is not possible to send out every submission. One is fortunate if the pre-review has been done by the General Editor. Often it is a graduate student assistant to the journal who does this first reading!
"Often it is a graduate student assistant to the journal who does this first reading"? How often? Please DO tell us more about your process Anonymous on November 19, 1:16 pm?
Speedy return, with a few helpful commentaries. However, the reviewer entirely missed the point and was a tad pedantic and paternalistic. The paper was not reviewed by two persons as the journal claims, but since the editor said she mostly "agreed" with the reviewer, I presume that counts for two.
ReplyDeleteThe journal veers towards philology, literary history, and "commentaire du texte". My bad for not having researched better its approach. Other than some structuralism and semiotics in its earlier formulations, the journal is weak in theory. I'd advise against sending anything heavy with theory, cultural criticism, or interdisciplinary approaches.
Accepts long papers, which is good for papers with heavy research / documentation.
I had the exact same experience you describe in your first lines. I did have to request that they send me the reviewers' comments, and they did so after two weeks. My article was on the theory side--not fully though.
ReplyDeleteMy experience with this journal has been quite strange. They have contacted me twice inviting me to review books. In both instances I have declined politely, explaining the book was too bad or I was too busy. They didn't even reply to thank me. The first time this happened I thought they would never contacted me again, but they do a second time.
ReplyDeleteI think when the journal started in the late 1990s it was very promising. However, with 8 (or more?) issues per year, many articles are very bad.
I wouldn't send anything there.
Very positive experience with this journal. The initial decision took about 4 months. They accepted my essay with some revisions, and the requested revisions were clearly expressed to me. The editing process was smooth, much of it conducted online. Time between acceptance and publication was about one year. I received 50 offprints (copies) of my article, which seems quite generous, as well as a copy of the volume in which the piece was published. I would submit here again quite happily.
ReplyDeletei'm confused about whether this journal and the Bulletin of Hispanic Studies are related or the same. Anybody knows something about it, please?
ReplyDeleteGreat question. Bulletin of Hispanic Studies and Bulletin of Spanish Studies are two separate journals BUT they have a connected past. See http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/cbsshistory.asp for the explanation.
ReplyDeletethanks for replying! i will check the link you posted.
ReplyDeleteI had a two-month turn around, and some very helpful comments (along with an acceptance). My article was not heavy in theory, so I cannot confirm or deny the other comments about their dislike of overly theoretical manuscripts.
ReplyDeleteBHS or BSS? Bulletin of Hispanic Studies (Liverpool) is the original journal. BSS was created by a former editor of BSS who decided she wanted to "keep" the journal and take it to Glasgow. BHS still remains, outside the UK, the ONLY Bulletin, and BSS is very much unknown.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the above commentary. The Bulletin was created by E.A. Peers in the 1920's. The editors in the 1990's were Prof Severin (the top Hispanist in the UK) and someone else. This someone else moved to Glasgow and decided that she would "take" the Bulletin to Glasgow. For a few years there were two Bulletins, with the same title and the same cover. THe case went to court and the judge ruled that the Glasgow Bulletin would be called the Bulletin of Spanish Studies (the original title of the journal) and the Liverpool journal would continue to be called Bulletin of Hispanic Studies. If you grab a copy of BSS you will read they claim to be the original journal. THe truth is hardly anyone outside the UK knows about the BSS. Liverpool has retained the reputation of high quality. But I don't think BSS is all that bad.
ReplyDeleteResponse time is very slow: one year and counting. I sent an inquiry email and received no response.
ReplyDeleteEn 2012 tuve una experiencia negativa con esta revista y, como no creo que haya mejorado mucho en estos meses, la desaconsejo plenamente.
ReplyDeleteEl email que recibí rechazando mi artículo fue enviado poco después de mandar yo mi propuesta. Por este motivo y por el contenido del correo electrónico veo claro que ni se han molestado en leer mi contribución, lo cual me parece una falta de respeto y de profesionalidad.
En primer lugar, solamente se habla de un revisor (cualquier revista mínimamente decente tiene dos) y, en segundo, no se me ha enviado ningún feedback. Lo único que se decía en el cuerpo del email era que las conclusiones no estaban lo suficientemente demostradas de acuerdo con la persona que teóricamente leyó el artículo.
Sin duda, es mejor y más serio el BHS (solo la página web ya dice bastante).
Just like the previous commenter, I got the distinct impression that rather than an editorial board, only the General Editor read my article. Why even have an editorial board if you're not passing the article on to be read & evaluated?
ReplyDeleteMany of these comments are unfounded. The Bulletin of Spanish Studies has been going from strength to strength.
ReplyDeleteIt's one of the few journals that has a following, and contributions from, Spanish, British and North American academics. It really is one of the top international journals.
To the July 10 commenter: most, if not all, journals subject every submission to a pre-review reading to see if it is suitable enough to send out to the blind reviewers on their board. It is not possible to send out every submission. One is fortunate if the pre-review has been done by the General Editor. Often it is a graduate student assistant to the journal who does this first reading!
ReplyDelete"Often it is a graduate student assistant to the journal who does this first reading"? How often? Please DO tell us more about your process Anonymous on November 19, 1:16 pm?
ReplyDelete