Can writing sample be published/under review?

[placeinspace]

Hi everyone,

I'm submitting a couple papers I've been working on to a journal and conference, including the paper I plan to use as a writing sample for my PhD apps. If, by some miracle, it does get published, can I still use it as my writing sample? I'm the sole author, so there's no issues there, just not sure if there's an unwritten rule about that somewhere. 

Edited August 5, 2018 by kgras13

[historygeek]

I'm not sure what your field is, but in history, you can submit a published work. Often, they just request that you mention the publication. 

[BabyScientist]

Probably best to consult the schools about this. If it's published and it's yours, no reason why not I'd imagine. It's still a sample of your writing. 

[Warelin]

3 hours ago, BabyScientist said:

Probably best to consult the schools about this. If it's published and it's yours, no reason why not I'd imagine. It's still a sample of your writing. 

Small note here: Some publications might have certain usage rights to your work and there can be some sort of clause that says you cannot submit to somewhere else for a certain period of time or might require you to obtain permission prior to submitting your work elsewhere.

The main issue with published material is that there are often edits made by someone that isn't you. Often, these materials are heavily edited prior to publication and therefore may not accurately represent your writing ability. In this case, I'd send an earlier draft that is exclusively your writing.

[BabyScientist]

44 minutes ago, Warelin said:

Small note here: Some publications might have certain usage rights to your work and there can be some sort of clause that says you cannot submit to somewhere else for a certain period of time or might require you to obtain permission prior to submitting your work elsewhere.

The main issue with published material is that there are often edits made by someone that isn't you. Often, these materials are heavily edited prior to publication and therefore may not accurately represent your writing ability. In this case, I'd send an earlier draft that is exclusively your writing.

Just to clarify so I know for my own reference: I understand not publishing/submitting work that's in publication, but is submitting as a writing sample for a grad school app not different? It's not being shared with the public as dissemination of information, just being shared with an adcom as proof of writing capacity.

I do agree with published work being largely edited, though. You could submit an earlier draft and note to the adcom that it is such and an edited draft is available in publication. 

[Warelin]

11 minutes ago, BabyScientist said:

Just to clarify so I know for my own reference: I understand not publishing/submitting work that's in publication, but is submitting as a writing sample for a grad school app not different? It's not being shared with the public as dissemination of information, just being shared with an adcom as proof of writing capacity.

 

I think it's an extremely valuable skill to vet places that you are interested in submitting a piece for publication. There's a lot of talk about the importance of professionalization and the dangers of early professionalization because the work has the potential to follow you around. Different journals have different ways of determining who owns the copyright or a right to reproduce at any one point. There are a lot of really honest and fair journals but I imagine that there are are fair amount of less-than-honest journals as well. I'm not exactly sure of how they would find out or whether their case would stand, but I'd be cautious in this case.

When Google Chrome launched, they mentioned the following under their old TOS:
""By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services."

Google received a huge backlash for it and has modified their terms since then which allows them to use you as an endorsement. 

Ideally, there are not many journals similar to that of Google's old TOS. I imagine there are a fair amount of sketchy journals that do employ similar tactics though.
 

[BabyScientist]

9 minutes ago, Warelin said:

I think it's an extremely valuable skill to vet places that you are interested in submitting a piece for publication. There's a lot of talk about the importance of professionalization and the dangers of early professionalization because the work has the potential to follow you around. Different journals have different ways of determining who owns the copyright or a right to reproduce at any one point. There are a lot of really honest and fair journals but I imagine that there are are fair amount of less-than-honest journals as well. I'm not exactly sure of how they would find out or whether their case would stand, but I'd be cautious in this case.

When Google Chrome launched, they mentioned the following under their old TOS:
""By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services."

Google received a huge backlash for it and has modified their terms since then which allows them to use you as an endorsement. 

Ideally, there are not many journals similar to that of Google's old TOS. I imagine there are a fair amount of sketchy journals that do employ similar tactics though.
 

But say whatever piece of writing you wrote is already published. What right does a journal have to tell you you can't point it out to an adcom as something you wrote? The adcom isn't then publishing it as their own thing. It's like writing a book that's out there in print and sending a group of people a copy and saying "hey here's a copy of a book I wrote". It's already public. Why couldn't you share it with an adcom? 

[Warelin]

14 minutes ago, BabyScientist said:

But say whatever piece of writing you wrote is already published. What right does a journal have to tell you you can't point it out to an adcom as something you wrote? The adcom isn't then publishing it as their own thing. It's like writing a book that's out there in print and sending a group of people a copy and saying "hey here's a copy of a book I wrote". It's already public. Why couldn't you share it with an adcom? 

Some journals have very specific rules. Whether or not they can or choose to reinforce those rules are questionable. I, myself, wouldn't want to be caught violating any of those rules. The publishing industry is also tiny so violations could also ruin trust in your name for other journals. Likewise, submitting an article under review might violate a clause that restricts you from submitting elsewhere while the journal is reviewing it. Most journals limit the clause by saying that you can't submit it to other journals simultaneously. Some journals don't want you to submit elsewhere because it means they have one less download. A lot of research is also not public research so there's a potential loss of revenue as well.

Submitting an already published piece also comes with the original disclaimer that a version of this first appeared in x in y edition. This risks a question of how many edits a piece has gone through and how much of the writing is your own. The journal's credibility and reputation might also be considered. 

Authorship, copyright law and usage rights is a very odd and complex thing.

[BabyScientist]

3 hours ago, Warelin said:

Some journals have very specific rules. Whether or not they can or choose to reinforce those rules are questionable. I, myself, wouldn't want to be caught violating any of those rules. The publishing industry is also tiny so violations could also ruin trust in your name for other journals. Likewise, submitting an article under review might violate a clause that restricts you from submitting elsewhere while the journal is reviewing it. Most journals limit the clause by saying that you can't submit it to other journals simultaneously. Some journals don't want you to submit elsewhere because it means they have one less download. A lot of research is also not public research so there's a potential loss of revenue as well.

Submitting an already published piece also comes with the original disclaimer that a version of this first appeared in x in y edition. This risks a question of how many edits a piece has gone through and how much of the writing is your own. The journal's credibility and reputation might also be considered. 

Authorship, copyright law and usage rights is a very odd and complex thing.

Interesting. I didn't realize it could be so strict. Thanks!