March 21, 2009

Journal-relative or Journal-invariant Refereeing?
By S. Matthew Liao

UPDATE: I’ve just added a new poll for this. Do vote away. :)

A few weeks ago, a colleague and I were discussing whether when you are refereeing a paper for a journal, you should take into account the journal’s reputation, editorial policies, etc., when you are giving your verdict regarding the paper. For lack of a better term, should you be a journal-relative referee or a journal-invariant referee? To make the issue more concrete, consider the following cases:

Read the full post here

Posted on March 21, 2009 at 7:39 pm in Ethics Etc Poll, S. Matthew Liao's Posts | 11 Comments

July 25, 2008

The Longest Time You’ve Taken to Review An Article Poll
By S. Matthew Liao

There is a really good discussion taking place at the Leiter’s Report on the timeliness of refereeing of articles. I’ve always thought that a possibly decent solution to this problem is

a) for the journal editors explicitly to ask potential referees if they can give a verdict within 3 months and to send the paper to other people if the potential referees say no;
b) for potential referees to decline reviewing a paper if they forsee that they can’t do so within 3 months;
c) for the journals to begin to send out automatic reminders after a certain period (e.g., after two months) on a regular basis (e.g., on a weekly basis); and possibly,
d) for the journal editors to keep a list of the ‘worst offenders,’ that is, of those referees who don’t deliver on time, and to avoid them in the future.

Read the full post here

Posted on July 25, 2008 at 3:04 am in Ethics Etc Poll, S. Matthew Liao's Posts | 12 Comments

May 8, 2008

Ethicists Write Longer Papers Poll
By S. Matthew Liao

On why ethicists tend to write longer papers, Saul Smilansky has proposed the following hypothesis:

1. Do many people NOT write short papers because they believe that (with the exception of Analysis) the journals insist on longer papers?

Do you have this perception? Do vote and let us know. I’m creating this post so that people are aware that there is a new poll. Please continue the discussion at Saul’s original post. Thanks!

Read the full post here

Posted on May 8, 2008 at 2:04 pm in Ethics Etc Poll, S. Matthew Liao's Posts | 7 Comments

January 3, 2008

Jason Stanley’s Bank Case Poll
By S. Matthew Liao

Professor Jason Stanley (Rutgers University) has recently won the American Philosophical Association Book Prize for his book, Knowledge and Practical Interests. In this book, Stanely also tests and develops his theories and principles by means of intuitive judgments about cases. Here is a case from the book:

[Bank Case 1:] Hannah and her wife Sarah are driving home on a Friday afternoon. They plan to stop at the bank on the way home to deposit their paychecks. Since they have an impending bill coming due, and very little in their account, it is very important that they deposit their paychecks by Saturday. But neither Hannah nor Sarah is aware of the impending bill, nor of the paucity of available funds. Looking at the lines [i.e., at the long queue at the bank], Hannah says to Sarah, ‘I know the bank will be open tomorrow, since I was there just two weeks ago on Saturday morning. So we can deposit our paychecks tomorrow morning.’ (p. 5)

Read the full post here

Posted on January 3, 2008 at 7:01 am in Epistemology, Ethics Etc Poll, Philosophical Methods, S. Matthew Liao's Posts | 4 Comments