|
Post by Same on Oct 31, 2014 9:00:06 GMT -5
I also published three articles from my book and later another article based on the same research. Also, I published with a "top tier" press and I think that from my own experiences and information I've gathered from others, "don't even get your hopes up about marketing" could apply to most presses. You really have to do a lot of the hustle on your own.
|
|
|
Post by postdoc on Nov 11, 2014 14:56:08 GMT -5
From what I understand, it all depends on getting the permissions from journals. I heard that some people include 4 journal articles into a 6 chapter length book. Then the question is: how easy it is to obtain permissions? I heard that some publishers are easy and some are difficult (e.g. Taylor & Francis). Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by not correct on Nov 12, 2014 8:53:12 GMT -5
It's your own work. you don't need permissions from journals. The only thing they own is the format of the journal--this is why people are free to post word Doc's of papers on their website but can [technically anyway] get in trouble if they post the PDF of the article on their website.
I published several articles before my book and I certainly did not need to get permissions from the journals. The words are mine. And believe me, the lawyers at the press would have jumped on this if it was an issue because they got up my ass about permissions for photographs and some other things.
|
|
|
Post by sockpuppet on Nov 12, 2014 10:13:30 GMT -5
You'll need permissions.
Most journals subscribe to a permissions clearing house (like RightsLink) which makes it easier.
|
|
|
Post by yup, permissions on Nov 12, 2014 14:47:13 GMT -5
In my experience, to re-publish anything already published in a journal, you have to secure the journal's permission. The book publisher I've been working with requires it, and it can take a while (months). I assume it's the same the other way around, book material republished as an article.
|
|
articles before book
Guest
|
Post by articles before book on Feb 22, 2015 21:18:02 GMT -5
I know a couple of people said that they've published 3-4 articles before the book, but I've heard people (in other disciplines, in places like the Chronicle of Higher Ed) say this might be too much. Has anyone experience this as a problem in sociology? I have checked several books that come from dissertations (first-time book authors) and in most cases I've seen one or two, and I think I've never or almost never seen 4 or more. Why would people not publish more articles before the book if it's not a problem? Are there some presses that are more permissive than others (assuming you have the journals' permission)? In which presses have people published 3 or 4 articles? Or is the measure perhaps something like not more than half of the substantive chapters? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. If people can name first books with several chapters published before, maybe that could help. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by pluto on May 12, 2015 22:53:56 GMT -5
Any thoughts about Pluto Press? How reputable is it? If you have to choose between University of Minnesota Press, Pluto, Routledge and Ashgate which one would you go for?
|
|
|
Post by sockpuppet on May 13, 2015 10:45:11 GMT -5
I've never heard of Pluto Press. That doesn't make it bad. But, as a rule, if you have to google a press's name to figure out if it is reputable....
I would rank minnesota, ashgate, routledge, in that order.
|
|
|
Post by Books on May 14, 2015 2:57:57 GMT -5
I think Pluto are highly reputable. Perhaps more so in anthro and media and comms than in sociology. But they are progressive, like Zed, so not for everyone.
Rankings are ruining everything, but if someone had a gun to my head I would rate pluto over ashgate and routledge. There is some really good, innovative work by pluto and the books are affordable so you can buy a copy for your mum.
|
|
data about book reviews at AJS
Guest
|
Post by data about book reviews at AJS on Sept 1, 2015 10:49:49 GMT -5
I wanted to know which presses get attention through book reviews, so I did a little database and I thought I'd share it here. It is a admittedly limited, since it's only the books reviewed in 2015 (N=83), excluding about 4 books from people whom I knew were senior professors. The reason is that famous professors can get their books reviewed regardless of the press. But I didn't bother to check for all the authors. I also excluded books reviewed by Abbott under a pseudonym he uses, which are not new sociology books. Also, it would be better to have the proportion of their books that get reviewed, since some presses publish a lot more in sociology. If you have that data, maybe you can share that here.
It surprised me that some presses like Columbia did not get any review, whereas several for-profit publishers did, sometimes twice. Also, NYU and Rutgers, which I thought would get less, got more books than Cambridge, Princeton, and California. Since I believe Cambridge and California publish a lot, that is surprising.
Oxford 13 NYU 10 Chicago 9 Duke 7 Rutgers 6 Stanford 6 Cambridge 4 Palgrave 4 Cornell 3 Princeton 3 California 2 Minnesota 2 Temple 2 Polity 2 First Forum 2 Harvard 1 MIT 1 Texas 1 Lexington 1 Russel Sage 1 Routledge 1 LFB Scholarly 1 Transaction 1
|
|