Do academic hiring committees consider book reviews?
I enjoy doing book reviews because I get free books, small publications, and it allows me to stay up to date on recent scholarship in my field. While I do not put all my publishing eggs in the book review basket, I generally always have at least one book review in progress on the backburner.
However, is it worth it for me as a PhD candidate to do book reviews if I want to apply for assistant professor positions? Are book reviews worthless in hiring decisions, even if they are in reputable journals in my fields of interest? One of my book reviews was peer-reviewed, does that make a difference? If I keep reviewing academic books, will it benefit my academic career?
I have heard mixed perspectives from academics. Some encourage students to publish book reviews since it's better than no publications at all and is perhaps a stepping stone to larger publications down the road, and others have said to just focus on publishing a few articles in top-tier journals.
Book reviews can be helpful in demonstrating your engagement with the field and staying up-to-date with recent scholarship. However, academic hiring committees may not necessarily view them as equivalent to peer-reviewed articles or book chapters, which are typically seen as more substantial publications. That being said, having book reviews as part of your publication record can still be helpful if you don't have any other publications or if you are still early in your academic career. It's good to note that book reviews may carry more weight in some fields than in others. For example, in the humanities, book reviews may be more commonly published and may be more highly valued, whereas in the natural sciences, they may be less common and less significant. Additionally, if a book review you wrote was peer-reviewed, that can demonstrate that it underwent a similar level of scrutiny as a research article or book chapter. Book reviews can be helpful for PhD candidates and early career scholars looking to build their publication record, but they should not be the sole focus of your publishing efforts. It's important to also work on achieving peer-reviewed publications in respected journals or publishing book chapters, as these are often considered more significant accomplishments in academic hiring decisions.
I agree with the thoughts of Ajit Singh . Those who only think about their career usually don't write book reviews. But science is much more than one's own career. For potential buyers and readers of books, reviews are often very helpful. I have also learned a lot myself from reviewed books, particularly from those that I would not have read without the requested review. - Here are a few related discussions:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_take_book_reviews_that_scientific_journals_publish_seriously_Voce_leva_a_serio_a_publicacao_de_resenhas_de_livros_nos_periodicos_cientificos
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_worth_of_a_book_review_published_in_a_journal_of_repute
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_a_book_review_considered_a_publication
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Your_opinion_about_book_review
If you think of the value of book reviews in terms of the value that others assign them, then I believe it makes a difference where your are in your career. In particular, because you are a PhD candidate, being assigned books to review indicates that you already (at least to some degree) considered to be an expert in your field. Consequently, these reviews may well have value now. However, that value will decrease if you get a tenure-track job, when the overwhelming criteria will be peer-reviewed research.
Thanks everyone, this helps put the book reviews into perspective. I have 13 book reviews published so far and will likely continue to do them on occasion, but my focus now is on peer-reviewed articles and my dissertation.
Justin Patrick
Obviously, reviews are a good thing, but in international practice in some cases they are taken into account, in others not.
I would do book reviews if they are in your area of specialization. You learn a lot from the information, you get to know the experts in the field and, if they're good, book reviews do get cited. They're also good practice in writing succinctly and engagingly. And it's an honour to be asked. You learn even more if they're not in your area, but then they're harder to do well.
In academic settings, review books are given lower points than the article. However, in my opinion, book reviews are very valuable and also have a social contribution too. In addition, it is a type of writing in which the author not only scores, but also shows his scientific interest by critically examining the publications in his field. I congratulate you. Justin Patrick
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medicine
- Epi
- Age Groups
- Children