What are the most cited Anthropology journals?

[villina]

What are the most cited Anthropology journals? Can anyone suggest?

[Allouette]

http://archive.sciencewatch.com/dr/sci/11/jun12-11_1D/

Hope that helps!

[villina]

http://archive.scien...11/jun12-11_1D/

Hope that helps!

,

Definitely. Thanks! I checked "Cultural Anthropology," and "Public Culture" so far, as they seem to fit my topic. At least, Physical Anthropology is not my field. How fast will they replay, does anyone know? Have anyone published a paper there?

[Eigen]

Are you trying to submit a paper to these journals?

If so, I'd really suggest that you talk to a professor in your field that you know and trust, and get some in-person tips. Academic publishing is a long, drawn out, and fairly confusing process.

That said, publications are usually a long turnaround, and even longer in the social sciences than my field. I'd expect to hear back from an editor within about a month to know whether they were sending my paper out for review or not. Then I'd expect 6-9 weeks for reviews, then there's the revision process.

But this is all submitting to journals with my PI who knows the editor at said journals, or with invited articles. Not sure how much things would change with a "cold" submission.

[jacib]

I assume you`re more socio-cultural or linguistic, rather than physical. Physical dominates that listing because it`s based on citations. Top journals for socio-cultural are probably something like: Current Anthropology, Cultural Anthropology, American Ethnologist, American Anthropologist, and I guess Public Culture (though it`s slightly different in terms of the articles it`s looking for). Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (formerly Man) used to be important, as well, though I don`t know how it`s recieved today. Annual Review of Anthropology is also obviously important, but different. There may be a couple of others, too, that are equally respected.

[villina]

I'm actually preparing to start big, long-term process of reading these journals, but of course with a thought about dealing with them as an author. I am, too, not sure how can they be approached "outside," since currently I don't have a professor with whom I can explore the topic. Maybe I should wait until (if) I'm admitted to the program. Otherwise, those professors with whom I tried to establish contacts so far were not extremely cooperative, however nice. I think that's not because they won't like to be, but because they are busy.

I think one of the options is to send a paper to the journal, and see how it works.

First, I should probably go to the library, and check the journals, how do they differ one from another. I appreciate your answers.

[villina]

I'd expect to hear back from an editor within about a month to know whether they were sending my paper out for review or not. Then I'd expect 6-9 weeks for reviews, then there's the revision process.

I had an impression that if you submit a paper, they will give you review no matter what? I never expected that editor should make a decision about whether he sends it for review or not.

[Eigen]

At least in my field, there are two portions of review- the editor, and the reviewers.

You send your paper to the editor, and they determine fit, and whether it's even worth sending out to reviewers. If it passes that stage, it goes out to the reviewers that they select. The editor also does the basic checking- making sure it's not plagiarized, that all the authors on the paper are legitimate, etc. Also a huge name recognition barrier at the first step- it's best if the editor at least knows the name of the lead author.

Rejections at the early stage are sometimes referred to as "desk rejections", and are of the form "This article isn't something the journal is interested in publishing". If it's something the editor is interested in publishing, they send it out for reviews.

From what I understand about other fields, the process is similar, but I'm not familiar enough with it to speak to the exact details.

Just to be clear, you're trying to submit this paper without having completed (or started?) your PhD and not affiliated with an institution or a senior researcher? If so, at least in my field, that would be a complete non-starter. It might not be so impossible in the social sciences or humanties, though. Someone else might be able to comment more in depth.

[villina]

At least in my field, there are two portions of review- the editor, and the reviewers.

You send your paper to the editor, and they determine fit, and whether it's even worth sending out to reviewers. If it passes that stage, it goes out to the reviewers that they select. The editor also does the basic checking- making sure it's not plagiarized, that all the authors on the paper are legitimate, etc. Also a huge name recognition barrier at the first step- it's best if the editor at least knows the name of the lead author.

Rejections at the early stage are sometimes referred to as "desk rejections", and are of the form "This article isn't something the journal is interested in publishing". If it's something the editor is interested in publishing, they send it out for reviews.

From what I understand about other fields, the process is similar, but I'm not familiar enough with it to speak to the exact details.

Just to be clear, you're trying to submit this paper without having completed (or started?) your PhD and not affiliated with an institution or a senior researcher? If so, at least in my field, that would be a complete non-starter. It might not be so impossible in the social sciences or humanties, though. Someone else might be able to comment more in depth.

Good to know, Eigen. I'm not submitting anything just yet. I'm collecting information at the moment.

What is the rate of submitted/published papers of professors? Anyone shares this type of information?

I understand all the difficulties connected with my current position. I discussed the ideas and the result with some scholars. They are not anthropologists, though.

It's quite a bewitched circle - papers could help you to get into gradschool, but you couldn't have papers unless you are in gradschool)

[Eigen]

10-20%? Somewhere around there. At least if we're talking first submission. Most papers, you can probably eventually get published "somewhere". At least in my field.

Papers that you're using to help you get into grad school should come from work done with undergrad professors, usually.