Book Review as Publication?

[hungrybear]

PhD and Master's apps are asking if I have any publications. I have no research articles published. I do, however, have a published book review in an academic journal. I was an intern for this journal in undergrad, and, as part of the internship, I was allowed to publish a book review. Should I include it in the app? 

[fuzzylogician]

It's a publication. Not the most impactful one, but a publication nonetheless. Just make sure it's clear that this isn't a peer-reviewed research article, but a book review. 

[Tigla]

In your CV, you should make a section with publications and a subheader with groups (book reviews, academic articles, book chapters, etc). As fuzzylogician said, make it clear, but give yourself credit.

[AP]

1 hour ago, Tigla said:

In your CV, you should make a section with publications and a subheader with groups (book reviews, academic articles, book chapters, etc). As fuzzylogician said, make it clear, but give yourself credit.

Actually, I think the subheadings will come in due time, especially if, as the OP said, they have very few publications. @miami421 you should clarify it is a review and you'll be fine. 

[JKL]

Of course. A publication is a publication. Don't feel "less than" for doing it either. You have a leg up on most other applicants, because most other applicants have a blank CV coming out of their undergrad program.

[AP]

Yes!!!! 

And personally, I think it is a great place to start as a publication. 

[dr. t]

1 hour ago, AP said:

I think it is a great place to start as a publication

 

This is a somewhat controversial opinion, but I have now had several advisers who discourage book reviews until, at minimum, you're in a TT job. The basic gist of the argument is that if you're given a bad book to review, you can either take it to task and make some enemies, or you can foul it off and have people think you're an idiot and a coward - a no-win situation.

I'm not sure this scenario is actually something that's common enough to merit an absolute prohibition, but it is something to keep in mind.

[pudewen]

1 hour ago, telkanuru said:

 

This is a somewhat controversial opinion, but I have now had several advisers who discourage book reviews until, at minimum, you're in a TT job. The basic gist of the argument is that if you're given a bad book to review, you can either take it to task and make some enemies, or you can foul it off and have people think you're an idiot and a coward - a no-win situation.

I'm not sure this scenario is actually something that's common enough to merit an absolute prohibition, but it is something to keep in mind.

That's more an argument against reviewing bad books, isn't it? I mean, it's not that uncommon (as I understand it) for scholars to back out of a review after reading the book and seeing that it's trash.

[dr. t]

6 minutes ago, pudewen said:

That's more an argument against reviewing bad books, isn't it? I mean, it's not that uncommon (as I understand it) for scholars to back out of a review after reading the book and seeing that it's trash.

Ah, but what if you think the book is OK but [senior scholar] thinks its absolute garbage? What if you're in a field with clearly drawn battle lines? There are lots of ways a review can go bad, and the benefit to your own career is minimal at best.

[fuzzylogician]

This may vary by field, but I would personally not recommend book reviews as something students should do. Two main reasons: (a) as a reader, I don't really care what [random student I never heard of] thinks about [book]. I care what senior and influential scholars in the field think. So, it's not exactly an impactful statement to be making, nor something that's likely to get cited often, so therefore not necessarily a good use of one's time at this career stage. (b) Perhaps more importantly, going into a review unaware of political forces in the field could cause one to make some serious mistakes, in aligning oneself with certain forces without even being aware of it. You could be alienating parts of your field or suggesting that you are a certain type of scholar and not another, merely by having this not terribly important publication on your CV. I'd be very careful about potential implications, but mostly I just wouldn't do it, because as a junior scholar you might not even know what questions to ask. 

[AP]

On 9/24/2017 at 2:14 PM, telkanuru said:

 

This is a somewhat controversial opinion, but I have now had several advisers who discourage book reviews until, at minimum, you're in a TT job. The basic gist of the argument is that if you're given a bad book to review, you can either take it to task and make some enemies, or you can foul it off and have people think you're an idiot and a coward - a no-win situation.

I'm not sure this scenario is actually something that's common enough to merit an absolute prohibition, but it is something to keep in mind.

That is, assuming you write a book review that really puts you out there.

First book reviews are not usually for major journals. My first three were exactly what you said: horrible books for small organizations newsletters. I had to make the very decision you described: take it to heart or play it safe. I wrote reviews I would have found useful (I hope). I am not exaggerating, these were books that I would never recommend to anyone except if you want an example of what not to do. They were not published by academic presses, which kinda tells you something. At his point when I have three of them, I feel it is ok to decline other reviews. My two cents is: what ever you do, be strategic. 

I took it to heart to write a review as an exercise useful to me. Reading critically and writing coherently is an excellent place to start an publication. We need both skills for any aspect of grad school (seminar discussions, prospectuses, grant applications, interviews, dissertation). Again, this was my strategic decision for one year (summer after my comps) so I had the time to do it, and it was a good moment to do it as well and not jump right into 'real' publications.

PS: I never asked advisors about what they thought, I just told them that I wrote a review for X newsletter. Also, I only began writing reviews after my comps, because somehow after comps I felt super smart. I wonder where that person went...