I am a young scholar and would definitely appreciate some feedback on which journals to publish in. I’m in the Old Testament and Hebrew field and was glad to see that at least JSOT received an “A.” I do agree that JBL should have received an “A” as well.

Anyone have other suggestions?

Prestige is only one consideration. At least as important (if not, perhaps, more important) is paying attention to what kind of articles a journal publishes. Here’s a ridiculous example that nonetheless makes the point: If you send a top-notch article on the archaeology of the Shephelah in the 10th century to Interpretation, they’re quite likely to reject it. Same if you send your brilliant new feminist reading of Ruth to BASOR. One ought to know the subtleties of what a journal publishes, which can easily be found out by perusing the tables of contents of issues over the last 5 years or so.

Also, a better way to gauge the prestige of a journal than a list like the one you mention is simply to pay close attention to the footnotes in what you read. Journals that are frequently cited are the ones widely read in the discipline. This is where your work is likely to get the most readership, and these are probably the ones considered most important.

There’s also the matter of whether or not a journal is peer reviewed, which is an important factor to pay attention to if it’s part of one’s tenure requirements.

Great question,

I think a good strategy is to aim for one publication in each of the top journals at the start of a career. So if you have done a JBL one, then look towards VT or Biblica or JHS. If one wanted to sell themselves more as ANE/HB, JAOS or similar journals would be a good start. Basically, I think at the start of ones career it is best to get as much different feedback as possible, so exposure to various different editorial boards is helpful. This will just help your writing and increase your “brand”. After a while you will have a good idea which journals you work best with and which editorial boards are the most helpful in challenging you to be a better writer and scholar.

Two problems I see, one is getting comfortable with one journal and continually publishing just there (in my mind like doing ones degrees all at one school), the second is realizing it is easier to publish in second tier journals, so pumping out volume in second tier versus quality in first tier journals. 1 good article is better than 4 okay ones. It seems better to meet a future employer at a conference and have them say “I saw your article in JBL/JSOT, etc” versus you having to say to them “(answer to questions:) I published in ….. yes it is peer reviewed….no, I don’t know who is one the editorial board either,” etc.

The Australian system – at least the draft I saw last year – has four tiers – A*, A, B and C. JBL was in the A* listing. It seems highly likely that this is going to be important for funding university departments in the future, because publications in A* journals will be weighted more heavily than those in A journals and so on. We are already being encouraged to think about this when submitting journal articles.

Since comment was invited from scholars within the various disciplines about which journals belonged where, there is every reason to hope that by and large the A* journals will be those that fit Angela’s criterion of most frequently cited/read. It might prove to be a very useful resource not just for Australians. Or not.

Thanks, Judy, that is very helpful. I think the Australian study will be very helpful. I also agree with you that these rankings will be very influential in funding, hiring, and promotion issues.

Something none of you has said: before choosing what journal to submit a piece to, you need to think about how long an article, if it is accepted, will sit on the editor’s desk before getting published. I got something accepted in a leading journal in 2007. I was told it would be published in Jan 2009. Still not published! The P & T committee at my university has made it clear that an accepted article is not the same as a published one. “Accepted” is good and all, but they want to see what you have “in print.” So guess what? When I hit the 5 year mark, I’m not sending stuff to journals that have a reputation for taking 18 months or 2 years to publish stuff. This is why I like JHS. They are quick and can publish your piece as soon as it’s ready. And they are always publishing.

Very wise words, Alan. I think I have an article caught up in purgatory right now also…

Geez, how many articles do you have in the works, Charles?