next »

[harry]

I've recently submitted an article to a major law review. I'm not a legal scholar myself, though this journal was the best place for this particular offer.

I've received an acknowledgement of submission which included the interesting phrase along the lines of "we expect to reach a decision around X date, but feel free to contact us for an expedited review should you face an 'exploding offer of publication' from another journal."

While I get that "exploding" essentially means a competing offer, I'm curious--is that term used for a firm offer, or just an expression of real interest? If it's the former, does that mean that dual submission of mss. is ok in the world of law reviews?

It's definitely not in mine, so my curiosity was spurred just a bit.

[shrek]

from what I understand from colleagues in law, yes, you simultaneously submit and you go with the top tier journal that is interested
totally different from my field too!

[drifter]

It is a commonly accepted practice to simultaneously submit manuscripts to numerous law reviews.  Also, you usually receive an answer within a couple weeks. 

Good luck! 

[trabb]

While I get that "exploding" essentially means a competing offer, I'm curious--is that term used for a firm offer, or just an expression of real interest?

I can only picture a howler (from Harry Potter), but I would think that would be more appropriate for a rejection.

[dismal_sci]

I think "exploding offer" means an offer to publish accompanied by a firm date by which the author's decision needs to be made.

I first heard this phrase at our major conference when a job candidate inquired about the time line for our decision because he had an "exploding offer" from another university. 

[svenc]

It is a commonly accepted practice to simultaneously submit manuscripts to numerous law reviews.  Also, you usually receive an answer within a couple weeks. 

Good luck! 

I want to be a law professor!

Honestly, this sounds wonderful from the researcher's point of view, and horrible for the editors.  Is there a downside for the authors that I'm missing?  Or is this all feasible because of the hordes of competitive, eager law students who are jumping over themselves to staff each school's law review?

In any case, I am fascinated.  I sometimes read articles in law reviews for my research, but was completely ignorant of how different the submission process was from (insert name of my august field here).

[bookishone]

Hmm, maybe we should have grad students edit our major journals, too.

Actually (thinking of naive self in grad school), maybe not!

[untenured]

The journal (let's call it Journal A) is saying this:

Your submission is under review for Journal A.  During this time Journal B offers you publication in three days.  Journal A wants you to let them know if you got an offer from Journal B.  Journal A will then review your piece a whole lot quicker, especially if Journal B is a strong journal.

There's a whole expedited review process but that's a different story.

I want to be a law professor!

Honestly, this sounds wonderful from the researcher's point of view, and horrible for the editors.  Is there a downside for the authors that I'm missing?  Or is this all feasible because of the hordes of competitive, eager law students who are jumping over themselves to staff each school's law review?

In any case, I am fascinated.  I sometimes read articles in law reviews for my research, but was completely ignorant of how different the submission process was from (insert name of my august field here).

*smile*

The law submission process is a mixed bag.

Yes, you can simultaneously submit.  Yes, you can submit to oodles of journals all at once.  All is not happy in law-submission-land, however.

Reviews are *not* double blind.  They know who you are and where you are from.  Submitting from a mediocre school?  Reject.  Not the top scholar they were looking for?  Reject.  Journal editors often don't like to publish the same topic too often.  Submitted a great manuscript on X but Journal A just publsihed on the general topic last year?  Reject.  Have you not published in top journals in the past?  Then your manuscript must not be good enough now. Reject.

Worst of all, there's no second chance.  No revise and resubmit.  No give and take with the reviewers.  Submissions are "up" or "down."  They don't like your piece?  Tough titty said the kitty.  You ain't revisin' nothin.  You ain't gettin' no second chance.

To top it all off, law review acceptance rates are absurdly low.  Below 5% is not uncommon.  One journal I am aware of has an acceptance rate less than one half of one percent.

Typical articles can be fifty to sixty *single-spaced* pages with over 500 footnotes.

Untenured

[svenc]

Typical articles can be fifty to sixty *single-spaced* pages with over 500 footnotes.

Yes, the article length and quantity of footnotes is something that I have long noticed about the law articles I read.  In my field, excessive parenthetical footnoting (i.e., not simple citation) is taken as evidence an inability to write or think clearly.  I have always puzzled at how it is standard in law!  It certainly makes the articles tougher to read when half of the narrative is in the bottom margin in a different font size, often with page breaks that differ from the flow of the main text.

Thanks for the insights, untenured!

[harry]

Indeed, thanks for the insight untenured. Given the process that you describe, I could easily see that the presence of another offer might actually put one's piece in a different track, regardless of the merits of the case.

I've seen this pattern in all sorts of arenas--job searches, for example. When someone has a job offer/publication offer/date to the prom, suddenly that person becomes curiously more interesting, solely on the basis of "well, someone likes them. maybe we should too."