Monday, August 29, 2011

Ranking philosophy journals

I will be off tomorrow to Cardiff University for a workshop on theories of punishment (where I'll be presenting my "The Unified Theory of Punishment" a view I've been working on for several years), but when I come back I believe it is time to re-consider the rankings of philosophy journals. Expect to see a new post from me on rankings -- a topic that has seemed to go quiet for a while now, but very likely to become more lively as faculties look at diverse ways of simplifying how they assess the quality of colleagues' work. While I do not endorse any rankings, I have several thoughts on how they might be done better and what such lists might look like. So expect more soon.....

2 comments:

Ben said...

Journal rankings are certainly interesting and even quite useful, but I'm not sure they're a good way to measure the quality of an individual's work (except as a very rough approximation). The correlation between journal quality and quality of a particular paper isn't perfect.

I suppose this is much less of a problem with more established figures though, at which point chance evens out (a string of publications in Ethics, PPA, PPE, etc is unlikely to be fluke).

The Brooks Blog said...

I agree that journal rankings are at best an approximation for quite a few reasons I'll discuss in a post soon, although I believe they should be seen with a variety of so-called "health warnings".