There will be a long delay between your paper appearing online and your proofs being ready for you to check.1There has been a substantial increase in the number of submissions we have received in recent years. At the same time, our acceptance rate has remained fairly stable. The result is that there are many more papers that need to be carefully guided through the production process. There are two ways to deal with this increase. We could impose a substantial pause on accepting new papers. This option would particularly harm early-career philosophers of science, who have a limited number of suitable venues for their work and can’t afford to wait as long as more established people. Alternatively, we could substantially increase the cost of the journal to cover the labour costs involved in publishing more pages per year. This option would particularly harm low-income readers and institutions. Our online-first approach means authors have a DOI and clear evidence of publication, which is usually sufficient to satisfy employers and funding bodies. Thus, since the delay in typeset proofs is closer to an inconvenience than a harm, we’ve chosen this path.
Proofs will usually be received in the several months prior to the print publication date of your paper. You can see how many papers are ahead of yours in the queue here.
Unfortunately, we do not have the capacity to correct errors or update details that appeared in the final files you sent us.
We will correct errors introduced by us when preparing your paper to appear online. However, before contacting us about this, please ensure the issue in question is an error and not a matter of BJPS house style.
Your question not answered here? Let us know.
Notes
- 1There has been a substantial increase in the number of submissions we have received in recent years. At the same time, our acceptance rate has remained fairly stable. The result is that there are many more papers that need to be carefully guided through the production process. There are two ways to deal with this increase. We could impose a substantial pause on accepting new papers. This option would particularly harm early-career philosophers of science, who have a limited number of suitable venues for their work and can’t afford to wait as long as more established people. Alternatively, we could substantially increase the cost of the journal to cover the labour costs involved in publishing more pages per year. This option would particularly harm low-income readers and institutions. Our online-first approach means authors have a DOI and clear evidence of publication, which is usually sufficient to satisfy employers and funding bodies. Thus, since the delay in typeset proofs is closer to an inconvenience than a harm, we’ve chosen this path.